Freedom Reborn

Community Forums => Film, Television, Video and Music Discussion => Topic started by: JeyNyce on October 28, 2014, 06:48:28 PM

Title: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on October 28, 2014, 06:48:28 PM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/10/28/marvel-confirms-movies-for-black-panther-captain-marvel-more?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook

Quote
Marvel boss Kevin Feige is holding court at a big announcement event right now in Los Angeles, where he has already unveiled the dates and titles for a bunch of upcoming Marvel films. And they are amazing.

New titles to be confirmed include Black Panther, Captain Marvel (the Carol Danvers version), The Inhumans, and Avengers: Infinity War, Part 1 and Part 2.

Additionally, Cap 3 and Thor 3 both have new titles in Captain America: Civil War and Thor: Ragnarok, as well as confirmed release dates along with Doctor Strange and Guardians of the Galaxy 2. Check it out:

November 3, 2017...Black Panther.

July 6, 2018... Captain Marvel.

November 2, 2018... The Inhumans.

Avengers: Infinity War, Part 1: May 4, 2018

Avengers: Infinity War, Part 2: May 3, 2019

Captain America 3 is now Captain America: Civil War and arrives on May 6, 2016.

Doctor Strange is now confirmed and has a date at November 4, 2016.

Guardians of the Galaxy 2 will hit on May 5, 2017.

Thor 3 is now called Thor: Ragnarok and is scheduled for July 28, 2017.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on October 28, 2014, 06:55:40 PM
Black Panther and Captain Marvel!  Excellent, particularly that she's going to be Captain, rather than Miss!  Infinity War 2 parter! A lot of recent rumours were on the money.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on October 28, 2014, 07:35:37 PM
Damn Jey.  You beat me to it.  But you forgot to add something.  I'll add it in the appropriate thread though.

BTW, I do have to say I am more partial to "Miss" and and do miss the days of either other Marvel's Captain Marvels, but to each her own.  It's neither here, nor there.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Figure Fan on October 28, 2014, 08:48:43 PM
I just can't even. I couldn't be more excited to go to the movies.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on October 29, 2014, 02:42:06 AM
Woot!  Teaser to Infinity War!
http://collider.com/thanos-infinity-war-video-avengers/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: bat1987 on October 29, 2014, 12:04:30 PM
Good stuff! Looking forward to pretty much everything announced but really curious on how they pull off Civil War.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Podmark on October 30, 2014, 04:37:52 AM
This is pretty exciting. Civil War and Infinity War are the highlights for me. I can't imagine a world where I don't see those in theatres.

Black Panther, Captain Marvel, Doc Strange, and Inhumans are the question marks for me. I'm not huge on any of those characters so it will really depend how they handle the movies if I go to see them at the cinema. Still great to see Marvel expanding their universe.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on October 31, 2014, 02:25:08 AM
This is a very, very interesting list.  Some of this we've heard before, though now we have it confirmed.  I'm particularly curious about how the Inhumans movie might take shape.  Doctor Strange and Black Panther both have the potential to be really awesome.  I think the only one of these that doesn't really interest me is the Captain Marvel movie, if it really is Carol Danvers.  I've just never known or cared too much about her, and I rather wish it was the classic Captain Marvel, as I really like that character.  His story is one that would work particularly well as a movie, methinks.  Still, the fact that the worst thing I can say about this is that one of the movies announced doesn't completely thrill me is just absolutely incredible! 

I'm super excited about Infinity War!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on October 31, 2014, 04:54:47 AM
I was a kid of the 80's and Marvel movies then were...well * rubs elbow back and forth on desk *. Needless to say this era of superhero live-action is mind blowing.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on November 05, 2014, 12:54:08 AM
Urg.  This is the kind of thing I keep talking about:
http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/4-reasons-last-weeks-marvel-announcement-might-destroy-them/
I wonder if the morons at Cracked ever get tired of being proven wrong about the imminent collapse of the superhero "bubble."

Every new piece of news leads them to pontificate about how such and such is totally going to destroy the superhero movie genre.  Bah.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on November 05, 2014, 02:35:15 AM
I know what you mean, Benton.  Not only that, but I wouldn't even categorize all of Marvel's films as 'superhero' movies at this point.  Take Guardians of the Galaxy - what does it have in common with most superhero movies?  Almost nothing.  It's space opera, and it's awesome.  Diversity of genre (or subgenre) and quality are sure roads to staying popular.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: lugaru on November 05, 2014, 11:32:59 AM
Well everyone knows that having comics come out on a regular basis, and having lots of them to choose from, are what killed comics. People hate having lots of fun escapist entertainment that they can rely on coming out regularly.  :doh:

I think that would be the sarcasm emote...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: XStream on November 05, 2014, 08:41:24 PM
Meanwhile each superhero movie that comes out only grows in popularity... I don't believe these critics know what they are talking about.

This news is very exciting. The larger story is very intriguing. I can not wait for each and every one of these to come out.

I believe I am most excited about Captain Marvel. I know many would like to see Katee Sackhoff, but my preference is Yvonne Strahovski. Both would be an excellent Carol Danvers.

I am least excited about Inhumans, but Marvel has plenty of time to change my mind... They did with Guardians.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 10, 2015, 06:35:19 AM
There are a lott of rumors,but still nothing official about Thunderbolts?I mean come on,everything else gott a movie...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on February 10, 2015, 06:45:25 AM
In order to justify Thunderbolts, they have to have established the villains-turned-heroes as antagonists in other films, otherwise you lose a lot of what made thunderbolts interesting in the first place. Plus, part of the origins of the Thunderbolts are that they happened at a time where all the other heroes weren't around... meaning the world latched onto them in place of the missing heroes. Even if thunderbolts is in the cards (and I hope it is, because I love the original series) it'll be waaaaay down the line.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Podmark on February 10, 2015, 06:49:37 AM
I actually believe Marvel is prepping a Tbolts film for Phase 4. There are signs. Zemo is rumoured to be in Civil War. Crossbones has a multi-film deal. Andy Serkis is likely playing Klaw who does have a connection to Songbird. I wouldn't be shocked if Moonstone was the villain of Captain Marvel. Hawkeye could use a bigger role in a film. I think Thunderbolts is a very real possibility down the line.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 10, 2015, 06:57:19 AM
James Gunn did say he would like to do T-bolts movie,and Marvel did say they are going to consider it if GotG does good. And all heroes missing requirement isnt that hard to acomplish,possibly after Avengers 3?
P.S There is a lott of fan-casting around the internet,so here is the one I liked but is almost impossible now.
http://ifanboy.com/articles/comic-book-casting-the-thunderbolts-movie/ (http://ifanboy.com/articles/comic-book-casting-the-thunderbolts-movie/)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 15, 2015, 06:21:39 AM
You probably know this by now,but Daniel Bruhl will be Baron Zemo.Nice...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 20, 2015, 05:15:01 AM
I was browsing IMBD the other day,and I noticed 2 projects set for  next year,namely X-force and Punisher.So is that real?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 20, 2015, 05:55:41 AM
X-force is for sure, but I hadn't heard about a new Punisher film. But then, I don't like the Punisher in general, so I'm not exactly the most reliable source of information.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on March 20, 2015, 02:39:38 PM
I don't know if the Punisher can translate well into a movie and still have it's "thing".  A Punisher movie would be a basic shoot'em up type move.  I think it may be better as a series like DD on Netflix.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on March 20, 2015, 06:39:55 PM
A listing on IMDB is in no way an accurate source of news.  Now, these may turn out to be accurate, but just because it's on IMDB doesn't make it true.  They'll create entries entirely based on rumours.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 20, 2015, 06:45:44 PM
^Thats kinda why Im sceptical about it.Probably not true.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: bat1987 on March 29, 2015, 10:47:26 AM
Ryan Reynolds' official Deadpool costume reveal
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Best comic based movie costume? I think so. Also heard that they're gonna use CGI for his eyes so they could mimic what he does in the comics. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on March 29, 2015, 02:48:33 PM
A Deadpool movie will have a lot of violence in it so what do you think it's going to be rated?  R? PG-13?  Also if they are going to use CGI for the eyes, then I'm expecting it's going to have humor in it too.  I hope he breaks the 4th wall in the movie too.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: GhostMachine on March 30, 2015, 02:39:16 AM
If the Captain Marvel movie is anyone other than Mar-Vell or Carol Danvers, I'll be giving it a pass. And personally, I don't care for Carol's costume as Captain Marvel, so hopefully it will translate better to film....or be completely different.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Podmark on March 30, 2015, 03:24:30 AM
The Deadpool costume is perfect. I'm actually suspicious that Deadpool might end up being the most accurate Marvel movie.

GhostMachine, Captain Marvel will star Carol Danvers.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 31, 2015, 05:04:56 PM
So... I came across something in my constant toy searches that's... interesting. New images just hit the net of Tamashi Nation's SH Figuarts Avengers figures, along with a listing for the Iron Man "Mark 45." I initially dismissed this as being a typo (Most of the images are of the Mark 43, the main armor we've been seeing in the film) but there's one image in there... a comparison shot of the Mark 43 alongside another Iron Man armor I haven't seen before. If it's a comic based one that I just happened to overlooked that's fine, but the whole "Mark 45" thing makes me a bit suspicious.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on March 31, 2015, 09:41:32 PM
I didn't know Figuarts did Western superheros.  Their models are gorgeous--I may have to check that out.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 31, 2015, 11:00:04 PM
They've been doing figures for the marvel films for awhile... They've just stuck to Iron Man armors for the most part
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: bat1987 on April 01, 2015, 08:56:39 AM
Ya, they did some Injustice stuff as well.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on April 01, 2015, 03:38:29 PM
ok guys, back to MARVEL MOVIES!!!   :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 01, 2015, 05:51:50 PM
Well, back to my original point, is that armor something from the comics (the last armor I saw him in was back post-AvX, which was the black/gold thing) or could it be the MCU's Mark 45 like the listing indicates? We saw Tony upgrade during Avengers 1, and it wouldn't be that great a stretch that the Mark 43 gets compromised somehow during the film and has to be replaced. If you figure Mark 44 is Hulkbuster, the 45 would logically be the next armor in line.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 01, 2015, 05:56:46 PM
Any news on the X-force?Anything?
Oh,yeah Morena Baccarin will play Copycat in Deadpool.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 02, 2015, 05:35:46 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUEkqZxLyrg

Ryan Reynolds addresses "PG13" rating for Deadpool.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on April 02, 2015, 06:42:44 PM
Now this whole Deadpool movie got me thinking.....

Do we really need Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool.  He mostly wears a mask, so you're not going to see his face.  It could be anybody in a Deadpool suit.  When DP takes off his mask, his face is fubar, so you STILL won't be able to tell it's Reynolds, so why was it so important that he plays Deadpool??

Don't get me wrong, I like the actor and I liked him as DP in the Wolverine movie, but fanboys made it seems that they couldn't have a DP movie without Ryan Reynolds.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on April 02, 2015, 08:32:25 PM
Now this whole Deadpool movie got me thinking.....

Do we really need Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool.  He mostly wears a mask, so you're not going to see his face.  It could be anybody in a Deadpool suit.  When DP takes off his mask, his face is fubar, so you STILL won't be able to tell it's Reynolds, so why was it so important that he plays Deadpool??

Don't get me wrong, I like the actor and I liked him as DP in the Wolverine movie, but fanboys made it seems that they couldn't have a DP movie without Ryan Reynolds.

Let me put it this way.. FOX wouldn't be doing a Deadpool without Ryan Reynolds rallying for the version fans wanted. FOX executives didn't care which actor played him or if it was the comic version or Barakapool (swords in the arms??!?!?!?!?!? SWORDS?!?!?) they just wanted the profits. After X-Men The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine fell on their faces without a leader behind their Marvel movies they were very done with the franchise. It took Matthew Vaugh, Bryan Singer, and Ryan Reynolds as a group to return to the FOX offices after most of the former executives were fired to try to reboot the franchise.

The Wolverine failed only because the ending of the movie didn't make sense and much of it was due to the ending being rewritten and the R rating it had being toned down to a PG-13 by the studio. Singer needed to find a way to clean the slate for future movies and prove that X-Men could work while bringing back old and new fans. Days Of Future Past was a success and now allowed Singer to push ahead with Apocalypse but it also opened the door for Ryan Reynolds to bring the fan created CGI concept to the studio (yes, the leaked one from Comic-Con) and show them just how out of the box his character would have been if done right.

Reynolds was a fan of Deadpool and he knew he spoke for the fans of the character because they got cheated out of it by studio executives who didn't understand the character at all (there was a studio note found that said "Reynolds isn't that funny, why don't you find a way to tape his mouth shut." which they actually did by letting Reynolds go and then filming the final battle with a stunt double. Barakapool was designed with no mouth so he couldn't talk so they could get away with not using Reynolds. They only got busted after a workprint was leaked which showed the horrible ending and FOX was forced to scrambled to do reshoots as damage control and even ask Reynolds to come back just to film the after credit scene to open the door for Deadpool still being alive). FOX couldn't really argue with comic accuracy after looking at Guardians Of The Galaxy (a raccoon and a tree as heroes) so they gave Reynolds the chance.

By the way Ryan Reynolds is a producer AND actor for this new Deadpool. Yup, He is the one who sat with the writers to do the script.. worked with the costume designers to make sure the costume was the comic version.. and even convinced the studio to make Deadpool the first R rated comic movie since BLADE and THE PUNISHER. Without Ryan behind it.. well, we would probably just only have Barakapool because FOX would have been very happy just letting X-Men Origins: Wolverine being his resting place forever.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on April 02, 2015, 10:22:27 PM
I thank you kindly for that good sir!  Now that I know this, I hope the movie makes Spider-man money!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 02, 2015, 11:39:58 PM
Yeah, I give mad props to Ryan for sticking to his guns on this whole thing... it feels like he's been campaigning for this film for longer than Edgar Wright was attached to Antman. To give it to someone else would be a huge disservice to the dedication that man has to the character.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 08, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Avengers 2 apparently wont have a stinger at the end.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 09, 2015, 12:30:21 AM
Avengers 2 apparently wont have a stinger at the end.

That's the word, though it will still have a mid-credits scene.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on April 09, 2015, 07:33:53 PM
So correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the end of phase 2, right?  The rest of the Marvel movies (Black Panther, Inhumans, Cap3, etc) will all be part of phase 3 until the next Avengers movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 09, 2015, 10:50:38 PM
So correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the end of phase 2, right?  The rest of the Marvel movies (Black Panther, Inhumans, Cap3, etc) will all be part of phase 3 until the next Avengers movie.

Ant-man is technically the end of phase 2, I believe, but given the relative stakes of Avengers 2 vs. Ant-man, I think it's safe to think of it as more of an epilogue or coda.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on April 13, 2015, 02:57:09 PM
New Ant-man trailer is out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdKf3MneyI

I think this is going to be pretty good, I least I hope it will be good.  It seems like they are going the route of Guardians and making it an action/ comedy type movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Outcast on April 13, 2015, 03:48:35 PM
Ant-man looks good to me. But then again, i don't think i'm all that picky when it comes to superhero movies.

There are a few inconsistencies that i seem to notice. Like did i hear it right? He gains super strength when he shrinks? I thought that kinda sounds like the Atom to me. Can't recall if Ant-man had super strength before.

And his enemy Darren Cross doesn't seem to be faithful to how he was in the comics. Here, he seems to be fighting Ant-man as Yellow Jacket.

And of course Hank Pym being portrayed as a very old man....

Well, then again it's the movies/hollywood. They don't always follow the comics. :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 13, 2015, 03:56:48 PM
So much better than the last one. I can actually defend it again now.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on April 13, 2015, 04:09:07 PM
I believe it was when Ant-man shrinks that he keeps his same strength, speed, etc.  So if he could lift 100lbs when he's normal, he could lift 100lbs when he ant size.  Strength and speed proportion as a spid.....uh, ant 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Podmark on April 14, 2015, 12:54:31 AM
Much better trailer this time. I see potential...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: thalaw2 on April 14, 2015, 06:22:40 AM
The Conan trailer was hilarious!  :thumbup:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 21, 2015, 05:19:19 AM
Spider-mans MCU movie will not be an origin story,since well, everyone knows the story already.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on April 21, 2015, 05:27:53 AM
Spider-mans MCU movie will not be an origin story,since well, everyone knows the story already.

Wait, Spider-Man? Who's that?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 21, 2015, 06:29:10 AM
Spider-mans MCU movie will not be an origin story,since well, everyone knows the story already.

Wait, Spider-Man? Who's that?

Said no one ever!  :thumbup:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: XStream on April 30, 2015, 12:19:46 AM
Spider-mans MCU movie will not be an origin story,since well, everyone knows the story already.

Wait, Spider-Man? Who's that?

You made me blow a booger on my macbook screen...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 04, 2015, 10:33:20 AM
www.independent.co.uk/img/rO0ABXQAYGZ7aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5jby51ay9pbmNvbWluZy9hcnRpY2xlMTAyMjIwNDcuZWNlL2FsdGVybmF0ZXMvdzYyMC9YLU1lbi5qcGd9Zjc3NzdmMzIwdA==.jpg (http://www.independent.co.uk/img/rO0ABXQAYGZ7aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5jby51ay9pbmNvbWluZy9hcnRpY2xlMTAyMjIwNDcuZWNlL2FsdGVybmF0ZXMvdzYyMC9YLU1lbi5qcGd9Zjc3NzdmMzIwdA==.jpg)

First look at Jubilee and Jean.Any thoughts?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 05, 2015, 08:06:46 PM
Haha, how perfectly 80s.  Jubilee looks great.  Jean is obviously not as distinctive in non-costumed appearance, so I don't have much to say about her, though I wonder how old the actress is.  She seems a bit young.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on May 05, 2015, 08:52:00 PM
Haha, how perfectly 80s.  Jubilee looks great.  Jean is obviously not as distinctive in non-costumed appearance, so I don't have much to say about her, though I wonder how old the actress is.  She seems a bit young.

That's Sophie Turner from Game of Thrones, age 19.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 05, 2015, 10:58:10 PM
Hmm, I suppose the X-Men were originally supposed to be teenagers, after all.  I guess I'm just used to thinking of them as a bit older.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 18, 2015, 09:48:19 AM
Apocalypse will show both Havok and Cyclops on screen,together.And they are brothers,since apparently Wolverine: Origins isnt in continuity with the new movies.Havok is older here.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 01, 2015, 10:47:25 PM
Did anyone catch this?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 12, 2015, 05:04:47 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/r8SIMny.jpg)

A bad picture of Storm and Apocalypse.They look okay,IMO.
Magneto: Who the Fu** are you?
Apocalypse: Come and see!
Haha,biblical reference.By Apocalypse,not by Magneto.  :unsure:

Deadpools trailer was...odd?I cant really find a word.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 12, 2015, 08:50:07 PM
Trying not to push myself until the clean versions are up. At first I thought it was weird they didn't just go ahead and leak high def versions themselves but I suppose the whole bootlegged footage thing raises much hype for their product. Still if it were me I'd want a quality version out there by my company first full knowing someone was going to snipe it anyways.

Excited about X-men but I'm minding the Curse Of The Third especially when it comes to comic movies. It might not live up to DOFP as well it's going to be compared to the previous films when it comes to critique which means the film REALLY is going to have to work for it. I also watched Olivia Munn's swordplay demonstration. I mean this with no sarcasm and maybe I'm alone here but I am really proud of Munn for finally breaking in, she has worked hard for it. But honestly all I want to know is if Bingbing is still in and what Blink will be doing then. Because Bingbing >>> Munn, just saying.

Deadpool trailer to me? Lot of curse words for the sake of curse words, lot of headasplodes for the sake of headasplodes. I'm sure the final result will amount to more than that as GOTG did and they're just being crass with the R Band to show they're not pulling any punches. This movie has been so long in the making that it's hard not be excited for it. Or at least the fact that it's not the version from the previous film alone. A little more pumped for Gambit though, that's a childhood dream of a movie right there!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 13, 2015, 10:16:27 AM
Psylockes costume was a hot topic these days.Its apparenty the Jim Lee design and almost impossible to get into.No word on Cable.I guess he really isnt in this movie.
Deadpool trailes seemed a bit juveline.Oh and notice Liefelds cameo.He was also the consultant for the movie.That explains a lott.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on July 14, 2015, 09:36:26 PM
I hope they know what they're doing

http://comicbook.com/2015/07/13/x-men-apocalypses-four-horsemen-revealed/

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 14, 2015, 10:26:37 PM
Well...I don't know about that....those are some interesting and somewhat worrisome choices, if true. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2015, 04:49:57 AM
I can understand the others,but Magneto is weird addition.Seeing he opposed Apocalypse in the story.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on July 15, 2015, 10:15:48 AM
I can understand the others,but Magneto is weird addition.Seeing he opposed Apocalypse in the story.

Magneto had a very different role in Age Of Apocalypse.. they are NOT adapting that story into X-Men: Apocalypse. This is the rise of Apocalypse that occurs a decade after Days Of Future Past just after Xavier officially opened the Xavier School For The Gifted. The teaser trailer shown at SDCC and comments made by Fassbender reveal that Magneto retired after his final conflict with Xavier and witnessing Mystique changing her ways. Apocalypse and his followers eventually find and collect three of the horsemen with Eric being the last and once realizing that his options were very limited.. He joins as a horsemen. In Age Of Apocalypse it was the death of Xavier which forced him to realize he took the wrong path and took on Xavier's dream to honor him. That did not happen in the movies. Eric chooses to step out of his usual role to avoid the future that Wolverine told him about knowing that fate usually forced mutants into an endless cycle of war if the pieces were put on the chess board. Eric joins Apocalypse knowing he must betray him by helping Charles find the weakness in the unstoppable.

They are using the rules of time travel (well, mostly comic book rules and a few movie/tv rules) that changing one key event to avoid a huge disaster usually follows with a ripple effect of an event more disruptive then the last. So by erasing the Sentinel ruled timeline it somehow allows the right conditions for Apocalypse awakening which brings forth a potential event allowing for mutantkind to take over and bring about the future that Trask was trying to avoid.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2015, 10:43:55 AM
Okay,I agree with that.Just that Magneto has different morals and plans from Apocalypse,and its a bit hard to imagine them working together.But its a movie,so some changes are expected.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on July 15, 2015, 07:55:18 PM
Perhaps Magneto is not a willing subject?  Apcoalypse has been known to trick people into service :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 24, 2015, 03:20:49 PM
http://www.comicvine.com/articles/updated-film-versions-of-apocalypse-and-psylocke-r/1100-152921/?ftag=YHR3d385aa (http://www.comicvine.com/articles/updated-film-versions-of-apocalypse-and-psylocke-r/1100-152921/?ftag=YHR3d385aa)

Nobody posted it I think,so here it is.A whole gallery from Apocalypse.Gotta say,other then Magneto,Im not that sold on costumes.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on July 24, 2015, 06:12:23 PM
Like many have said, Psylocke looks great and Apocalypse looks like Ivan Ooze :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on July 25, 2015, 04:05:18 AM
Apocalypse just doesn't look right played by an actual human being.  It hate to say it, but he needs cgi.  May even just a digital head size readjustment would do it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 25, 2015, 04:54:43 AM
Yeah, I been meaning to comment on the look of our cast:

-Psylocke looks surprisingly spot on.
-Magneto's costume looks overdesigned. I liked the ones from the last two movies more (but it's Fassbender so he still wins). I'm not sure why they're going with "armored" looks so much.
-Jean kinda looks like they're trying to replicate the top from Morrison's New X-Men.
-Young Nightcrawler looks pretty good.
-OMG you gais Jubilee looks sooo good! I feel like she doesn't even have to say or do anything, just show up looking like that and she wins.
-Apocalypse is an odd one. I think the classic comic and cartoon look would be hard to make work in live action but this version is kinda baffling. I don't know if they can make it good good in the finished movie. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 05, 2015, 05:27:04 AM
http://mcuexchange.com/thunderbolts-in-the-mcu/ (http://mcuexchange.com/thunderbolts-in-the-mcu/)

More speculation about Thunderbolts movie.Basicly,any incarnation is possible.Maybe after Civil War or Avengers 3.We can only hope.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 07, 2015, 09:28:32 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyKWUTwSYAs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyKWUTwSYAs)

If you missed Deadpool trailer here it is.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 07, 2015, 01:12:43 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyKWUTwSYAs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyKWUTwSYAs)

If you missed Deadpool trailer here it is.

I see this movie being a huge hit.  Marvel would be foolish not to have movie related merchandise for this film.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 07, 2015, 01:19:54 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyKWUTwSYAs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyKWUTwSYAs)

If you missed Deadpool trailer here it is.

I see this movie being a huge hit.  Marvel would be foolish not to have movie related merchandise for this film.

Dont worry,they will.
Oh,and no Liefeld cameo this time.He was a consultant for this movie too.You probably guessed that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: deanjo2000 on August 08, 2015, 07:27:39 PM
I'm looking forward to the xmen, but can't help thinking of Ivan ooze ( power ranger movie ) when I look at apocalypse :doh:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 09, 2015, 04:37:39 AM
Fantastic Four is out,right?
Anyone seen it?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on August 09, 2015, 06:04:15 AM
Fantastic Four is out,right?
Anyone seen it?

Yeah, I have.  It wasn't nearly as bad as about 90% of the reviews make it out to be, but there was still much to be desired. I'd say 6/10.

It's no Days of Future Past, but it's no X-Men Origins: Wolverine, either.

I'd say it's a bit better than the FF movie from 2005 (and definitely better than Rise of the Silver Surfer), but that's about it.

I will say that Doom was really good, though.  Probably the best thing in the movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 10, 2015, 03:08:40 AM
Ohh my gosh, I just read a spoilerific review of the new Fantastic Four movie, and it sounds spectacularly bad, even worse than I had expected. I SO hope this thing crashes and burns and that the rights will go back to Marvel!

Apparently, Dr. Doom is "a surly, grungy cyber-hipster." Urg. Hello next generation, where all of our villains are 20 year old avatars of the worst of our culture, rather than the characters that have endured for half a century.

It's currently sitting at 8% on Rotten Tomatoes.  That's darn impressive.

My favorite review so far:

http://www.vox.com/2015/8/7/9114501/fantastic-four-movie-review

Highlights include: "Fantastic Four is an unmittigated garbage fire" and "watching [it] is like taking a cheese grater to your soul."
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 10, 2015, 03:31:51 AM
Everyone is currently wondering what's going to happen with the Fantastic Four license, giving that it has bombed (for a movie of this budget and ad campaign), opening with just 26 million dollars, and in second to Mission Impossible 5, in its second weekend.

Fox has several options being discussed, none of them particularly good:

- They can let the proposed sequel die, sit on the rights for however many years this gives them and then let them lapse back to Marvel, or try to reboot again at that point.

- They can damn the torpedos, and make a sequel no one wants just to secure the license for years more, basically to prevent Marvel from pulling a Daredevil (where Fox let the rights slip after an attempted reboot failed to come together in time, and Marvel turned it into Netflix gold).

- They could collaborate with Marvel on future movies, a la Sony and the Spider-man situation.  Whether this would entail another reboot, as Spider-man has, well, who knows?  Apparently there is much worse blood between Fox and Marvel than there was between Sony and Marvel though, so a deal could be hard to reach.

- They can cross the Fan 4 over with the X-men, and hope that one franchise could save the other.  I don't know if this is seriously being considered, since crossover talk was nixed in the lead-up to the Fan 4's poor launch this weekend, probably because Fox doesn't want to taint their good superhero series with this one.  I only include this because I've seen it discussed a few places online.

How likely any of these scenarios are I have no idea, but I think that covers everything I've seen discussed.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 10, 2015, 03:57:04 AM
Marvel/Disney has the money to make it worth their while.  We can hope. :mellow:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 10, 2015, 05:20:44 AM
Yes the argument between Fox and Marvel.Cant comment on the quality of the newest FF,but Marvel goes a bit overboard sometimes.Fox BOUGHT the rights.For money.Which saved Marvel at the time.Whatever they are,they arent so bad in this case.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 10, 2015, 06:42:06 AM
I have not actually seen this new F4 movie. A couple weeks ago, after seeing the trailer in Ant-Man, we were kind of excited about seeing it. So, this last Saturday, it was looking like we might be able to get to a mid-afternoon movie. I looked up some showtimes and then went to IMDB to see reviews, just in case. Whoa, Nelly!! This movie was thrashed in the reviews. And, usually (though not always), the opening weekend fan reviews are from people who are excited to see the movie. But, both the fan reviews were largely a mix of "I got tired of trying to explain away the plot holes to my eight-year-old son", "This storyline feels like it was stitched together by four different committees", and "Why? Why? In the name of Stan Lee, WHY?!?!" In case there is any doubt, we did not go see the movie. ;-)

Assuming that these reviews and the reported disappointing box office are an accurate reflection of Fox's fortunes with the F4 franchise, Fox has to be thinking long and hard about whether they really want to make another F4 movie. I have to wonder: Is Fox's best option to simply offer to sell the rights back to Marvel/Disney? Fox has had three tries and none of them has been impressive. Why make another flop in a couple years to preserve the right to make yet another flop even further down the line? Call up Marvel Studios and say, "You have proven you can turn these comics franchises into box office gold. But, you can't do it with F4 until we release the movie rights back to you. So, what is it worth to you?" If they can turn turn the headline from "Fox's Fantastic Flop" to "Fox makes $40M on Marvel's Next F4 Movie", then they will have done quite well. Obviously, it's more complicated than that (and more so because Marvel may be so busy with their own films for the next few years that they wouldn't have time to make an F4 pic until after Fox's do-or-die date for the next feature had already passed anyway), but it may be the best option for Fox.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on August 10, 2015, 06:46:46 AM
Apparently, Dr. Doom is "a surly, grungy cyber-hipster." Urg. Hello next generation, where all of our villains are 20 year old avatars of the worst of our culture, rather than the characters that have endured for half a century.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 10, 2015, 07:58:07 AM
This may not be relevant to the new F4 movie (which I haven't seen), but I really find many of the romances in these movies to be contrived and uninteresting. For instance: A love triangle with Doom, Sue, and Reed? Yawn. At least a triangle with Reed, Sue, and Namor is something I remember from the comics. (That's not to say the one with Doom wasn't in the "normal" universe F4 comics in some version of the group's backstory; it's been a long time since I kept up with those books.)

But, in a movie, it's nearly impossible to develop a compelling romantic subplot between the characters, and develop the villain past being a mustache-twirler, and do justice to a superhero origin story, and still flesh out the present day story arc that (presumably) justifies most of the action. In Man of Steel, it's only about one superhero and they take the Lois and Kal romance pretty slow. And, several of my friends were still asking, "So, what's the attraction between them? Why does he like her?" At least there, in that movie, there is no love triangle (though one could argue that the triangle is Kal-Lois-Clark...). In a team movie, there is even less time available to make a simple romance work, much less a love triangle. That Doom-Sue-Reed triangle was such an uncompelling part of the 2005 F4 movie and it was so ho-hum and full of clichés. Near the end, we find that Sue never really had much interest in Doom; she just wanted Reed to fight for her. What is she, twelve years old?!? And, BTW, since guys like Doom and Richards seem to invent or acquire a device that can end the world every couple months, maybe toying with their emotions to satisfy her need for attention is kind of a bad idea? Yeesh.  :blink:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 10, 2015, 10:44:08 AM
Well 2005 version sucked,but Julian McMahon was actually pretty good as Doom.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 10, 2015, 01:25:48 PM
This is the way I see it:
Fox needs to give Marvel back the right to the FF.  They have tried 3 times to make a decent FF movie and failed.  If they try to do a cross over with X-men, how long you think that will last?  The X-men are getting old and after "Old Man Logan" it will be hard to fill Hugh Jackman shoes as Wolverine.

If I was Marvel and had the rights to the FF, I would hold on to it until the Avengers and phase 3 ended and start phase 4 with the Fantastic Four.  Phase 1,2,3 would be Avengers related, 4,5,6 would be Fantastic Four related and have Spidey in both of them.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on August 10, 2015, 02:07:37 PM
Even if Marvel made a F4 movie, it'd still hold the problem that they're the worst characters, and most people aren't interested in them. I'd rather just never see anyone make another movie, and I definitely don't want their box office poison to affect the MCU.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on August 10, 2015, 02:30:35 PM
Even if Marvel made a F4 movie, it'd still hold the problem that they're the worst characters, and most people aren't interested in them. I'd rather just never see anyone make another movie, and I definitely don't want their box office poison to affect the MCU.

If most people aren't interested in them, it's because there hasn't been a decent movie to make them interested. Did you really think the general public was interested in Ant-Man or Guardians of the Galaxy before Marvel made movies about them? If Marvel  -- and not Fox, but Marvel Studios; people will be drawn to it via Marvel Studios alone -- can make a good Fantastic Four movie, then you've got my guarantee that most people will be interested in them, simply because they'd be the stars of a good Marvel movie.

But aside from that, they're far from 'the worst characters'. They may not always be compelling protagonists, but the original Lee&Kirby comics are classics for a reason, and on top of that, they still work well as supporting characters in the larger MU. They deserve at least one good movie, and I think that if Marvel got the rights back, they could make one. (Though I'd really just want Pixar to take a crack it. The Incredibles is basically the best FF movie ever made, so imagine what they could do with an actual FF movie.)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 10, 2015, 04:01:33 PM
Even if Marvel made a F4 movie, it'd still hold the problem that they're the worst characters, and most people aren't interested in them. I'd rather just never see anyone make another movie, and I definitely don't want their box office poison to affect the MCU.

If most people aren't interested in them, it's because there hasn't been a decent movie to make them interested. Did you really think the general public was interested in Ant-Man or Guardians of the Galaxy before Marvel made movies about them? If Marvel  -- and not Fox, but Marvel Studios; people will be drawn to it via Marvel Studios alone -- can make a good Fantastic Four movie, then you've got my guarantee that most people will be interested in them, simply because they'd be the stars of a good Marvel movie.

But aside from that, they're far from 'the worst characters'. They may not always be compelling protagonists, but the original Lee&Kirby comics are classics for a reason, and on top of that, they still work well as supporting characters in the larger MU. They deserve at least one good movie, and I think that if Marvel got the rights back, they could make one. (Though I'd really just want Pixar to take a crack it. The Incredibles is basically the best FF movie ever made, so imagine what they could do with an actual FF movie.)

Actually,Marvel made those BECAUSE they couldnt make FF,Spider-man or X-men.See how it all goes full circle?
I heard that Marvel is blocking the production of a new X-men animated series...because Marvel.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 10, 2015, 07:55:29 PM
Even if Marvel made a F4 movie, it'd still hold the problem that they're the worst characters, and most people aren't interested in them. I'd rather just never see anyone make another movie, and I definitely don't want their box office poison to affect the MCU.

Not true at all.  There is an excellent Fantastic Four movie that did quite well at the box office and is beloved by fans - it just happens to be called The Incredibles.  Between the power sets, the family dynamic, the humour and tone, that's the movie any makers of a Fantastic Four film should be watching.  It can be done, because Pixar did it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on August 10, 2015, 08:33:26 PM
Not true at all.  There is an excellent Fantastic Four movie that did quite well at the box office and is beloved by fans - it just happens to be called The Incredibles.  Between the power sets, the family dynamic, the humour and tone, that's the movie any makers of a Fantastic Four film should be watching.  It can be done, because Pixar did it.

I LOVE THE INCREDIBLES!! :wub: :thumbup: :wub:

Such a great movie :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on August 10, 2015, 08:56:26 PM
Even if Marvel made a F4 movie, it'd still hold the problem that they're the worst characters, and most people aren't interested in them. I'd rather just never see anyone make another movie, and I definitely don't want their box office poison to affect the MCU.

Not true at all.  There is an excellent Fantastic Four movie that did quite well at the box office and is beloved by fans - it just happens to be called The Incredibles.  Between the power sets, the family dynamic, the humour and tone, that's the movie any makers of a Fantastic Four film should be watching.  It can be done, because Pixar did it.

Lol. 

Anyway, I know this is still a minority opinion, but I didn't much mind the first F4 franchise.  Despite many problems, at least they seemed to put forth a more valiant effort.  It seem more adult.  More fun.  Julian McMahon's arrogance seemed like what Doom would be.  Very calculating.  The relationships of the group seemed more organic and realistic.  They really played out the over-explaining Reed does.  They showed how much the Thing does not like being the Thing.  They showed Johnny's not simply being a hothead but a do first kinda guy.  I don't know how much this new version was able to capture all that.  Yeah, they were far from perfect movies and did a lot of things wrong(especially the sequel), but again, I think their attempt was much better.  I don't even know if these guys were even trying.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on August 10, 2015, 09:30:26 PM
The Incredibles isn't the Fantastic Four, it's a totally different thing. None of the characters are alike. It's a completely different family dynamic. It's mostly different powers. It might be inspired by it, but they very smartly decided to make it completely different.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on August 10, 2015, 10:25:22 PM
The Incredibles isn't the Fantastic Four, it's a totally different thing. None of the characters are alike. It's a completely different family dynamic. It's mostly different powers. It might be inspired by it, but they very smartly decided to make it completely different.

Really? Because from where I'm standing, they're pretty darn similar. Bob has the Thing's strength, Elasti-girl has Reed's stretching powers, Violet has Sue's invisibility and force-fields, and while Dash doesn't have the same abilities as Johnny, he's still an impetuous hothead. On top of that, they're a family who end up having strange adventures, they have a super-powerful baby, and their arch-enemy is a super-genius who is linked rather heavily to the lead hero. Yes, they were inspired by the FF, but they took such a heavy amount of inspiration that it could be considered an FF film in spirit if nothing else.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on August 10, 2015, 10:45:02 PM
Yeah but thankfully they changed enough so that it was actually good is what I'm saying. They didn't have an unlikable completely unbelievable super-genius, they didn't have the unlikable weak damsel in distress trope character, they didn't have the unlikable cocky bully who thinks he's God's gift to the world, and they didn't have a depressed monster who is actually a halfway good character except the fact that he's some kind of stupid-talking jabroni. It looked like they had changed all of that for this new movie which seemed smart, but it seems like they still made it bad. I'll see it in the dollar theater and let everyone know if it's good or bad and if so how much of that is the source material's fault.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on August 10, 2015, 11:00:10 PM
Yeah but thankfully they changed enough so that it was actually good is what I'm saying. They didn't have an unlikable completely unbelievable super-genius, they didn't have the unlikable weak damsel in distress trope character, they didn't have the unlikable cocky bully who thinks he's God's gift to the world, and they didn't have a depressed monster who is actually a halfway good character except the fact that he's some kind of stupid-talking jabroni. It looked like they had changed all of that for this new movie which seemed smart, but it seems like they still made it bad. I'll see it in the dollar theater and let everyone know if it's good or bad and if so how much of that is the source material's fault.

...Huh.

Look, I can see where you're coming from, but while the FF aren't exactly my favorite heroes, I do not think they're the horrible, asinine characters you seem to think they are, and because of that, I still believe they deserve a good movie, and so long as Marvel knows what they're doing, I also believe that they can make one so long as they get the rights.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on August 11, 2015, 12:27:56 AM
The F 4 are actually great characters if they just get done right.  They've been popular for so long for a reason.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on August 11, 2015, 01:12:56 AM
The F 4 are actually great characters if they just get done right.  They've been popular for so long for a reason.

Exactly. Granted, they're still harder characters to make for compelling protagonists than others, but under the pen of someone like John Byrne or maybe Jonathan Hickman, it can be done. And if it can be done on the page, then it should be possible to do it on the screen.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 11, 2015, 01:47:03 AM
Guys... It's bwps. Chill.

In all seriousness, I have no problem with the f4. I liked the last series of films well enough, despite its flaws, and I do think the potential is there... But fox has proven time and again that they cannot be trusted with these franchises, and its only in spite of fox's meddling that we have had as many decent xmen films as we've gotten. And even then, time and again fox has botched that franchise too... Wolverine Origins was a movie no one wanted to do, but fox came down and said they HAD to do an origin story... And also they HAD to set up other movies that ended up being totally different then Origins introduced.

So... Yeah, I can and do blame fox for this, rather than the f4 itself. That's like blaming superman because Returns wasn't good.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2015, 04:12:35 AM
Yeah,Wolverine origins...but also first 2 movies,First class,and DOFP.So Fox did a pretty good job with X-men.And they would be pretty impossible in MCU and nobody wants AvX the Movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on August 11, 2015, 04:38:46 AM
I really like Jey's idea of Phase Four being centered around F4 and Spidey. I'm sure you'd have doctor strange, black panther, and captain marvel sequels too,  they could be the next generation of Avengers. With Falcon, Scarlet Witch and Vision being the vets leading them.

I think the hardest thing about casting the F4 has to be finding someone for sue that has chemistry with reed, and star power for the movie to succeed. In my opinion Jessica Alba was a bit miscast in the first movies, while the rest of the cast was pretty good.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2015, 11:26:16 AM
Captorch Humerica,anyone?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 11, 2015, 05:45:02 PM
 :rolleyes:

Again, my point is that we've got good X-men films IN SPITE of Fox, rather than because of. Fox is also responsible for rushing X3 out the door with a director who didn't know the material and who has openly admitted to only ever watching the X-men cartoon. First Class also faced incredibly tight deadlines, the advertisements were atrocious, and it's only thanks to a good director and talented leads that the movie did well at all. All three of the other films were helmed by Bryan Singer, whose original successes have allowed him to keep Fox off his back.

Contrast that with Marvel Studios. True, there are ugly reports of Studio interference driving away directors there too, but I get the impression it's more along the lines of "This is our master plan for the next ten years, we need you to build up X Y and Z in your movie," rather than "We're going to pennypinch you, give you insane deadlines, and botch all our own movie's advertisements"
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2015, 05:51:37 PM
I liked the first Iron Man movie.They found a washed up hero,got a washed up actor to play him.Have him fight his darker version.Throw in a Stan Lee cameo.And it strangly worked.
THEN THEY DID THAT EXACT THING 10 MORE TIMES!How is that good storytelling?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 11, 2015, 06:04:12 PM
Because they managed to have a larger narrative that stretches across a dozen or more movies, something that has never been done before and is actually pretty amazing? Like... I know you don't care for Marvel movies man, but don't discount their accomplishments just because you don't like them. Are they flawed? Yes, and I think the flaws are beginning to show and Marvel will have to step up their game over the next few years. But I feel like the people in charge are willing to do that for the sake of the characters.

Don't get me wrong, I like the X-men movies, and as long as they stay in competent hands, I'm fine with them being off on their own. But Marvel has churned out success after success since they started, and I can't help but feel like they should have F4 back too.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2015, 06:13:06 PM
About the FF I have to agree,Marvel probably couldnt do worst then Fox.
About MCU,to each his own.Thou,they arent the first who combined separate into whole.DCAU did it before.
Seeing we got Civil war coming up,I wonder will New Warriors show up?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 11, 2015, 06:22:38 PM
The Marvel Universe is huge.  They need to handle it in chunks.  Right now they are doing Avengers on the big screen and Defenders on the small screen.  If they do get the FF back, that should be their next big screen project and either have Blade or Ghost Rider on the small screen or maybe even the New Warriors on the small screen.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 11, 2015, 07:07:25 PM
I liked the first Iron Man movie.They found a washed up hero,got a washed up actor to play him.Have him fight his darker version.Throw in a Stan Lee cameo.And it strangly worked.
THEN THEY DID THAT EXACT THING 10 MORE TIMES!How is that good storytelling?

Not even close to the truth.  But then, I'm fairly certain from dancing this dance before that you have very different ideas about what constitutes good storytelling. 

The Incredibles isn't the Fantastic Four, it's a totally different thing. None of the characters are alike. It's a completely different family dynamic. It's mostly different powers. It might be inspired by it, but they very smartly decided to make it completely different.

At first I thought this was a joke.  3 of the four main characters have exactly the same powers as the Fan 4, and the fourth has a similar personality.  The family dynamic is different, but the idea of it is the same.  And your characterizations of the Fan 4 from the other post are all the worst interpretations of the characters from 50 years of history.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 12, 2015, 01:10:20 AM
About the FF I have to agree,Marvel probably couldnt do worst then Fox.
About MCU,to each his own.Thou,they arent the first who combined separate into whole.DCAU did it before.
Seeing we got Civil war coming up,I wonder will New Warriors show up?

Film and TV are not the same thing. TV shows have crossovers all the time... X-men in Spiderman, TMNT in Power Rangers... hell, Martial Law, Early Edition and Texas Ranger all crossed over with each other at one point (yes, I am old enough to remember that.) but film? The only films to keep continuity across multiple films are either films from a single franchise, or the occasional wink and nod to other franchises. So yes, DCAU did it before Marvel did, but that's like DC comics did the crossover thing 40 years before the DCAU... it's a completely different medium
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 12, 2015, 03:44:26 AM
Yeah, 'Mato is right.  The MCU is the first set of films to do what only comics have done before, create a massive, sprawling universe with shared continuity across multiple titles and by multiple creators.  There's nothing to compare to those types of comics in the history of literature, and there's nothing to compare to the MCU in cinema.  It's a breathtaking accomplishment.

As for similarities in plot, I'd say they're exaggerated, but even more importantly, similar plots are to be expected with comics, a genre where the content is so archetypal.  The Marvel movies succeed, both for fans, and, more importantly, for average folks, through the strength of their characters.  My wife, my mother, my sister, my niece, and a huge range of people who never bothered with action movies and couldn't care less about comics have fallen head over heels in love with the MCU.  They follow movie news, look forward to new editions, and are generally more invested in these than any other film franchise I've ever seen.  They love these movies because they are, on the whole, well written (not too many plot holes, unlike everything WB and the other companies puts out), fun, funny, and with a great and memorable cast of characters. 

Asked to describe why she liked the movies, my wife said, "they're clever, fun, and they bring the characters to life."

In my professional opinion, these movies are, taken all-in-all, a unique work of art.  ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2015, 04:21:16 AM
Ah,yes,the all is connected theory.
Like in Daredevil somebody mentions there is a guy with magic hammer and hell yeah,thats  so connected to the Avengers.Almost essential.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 12, 2015, 04:44:55 AM
Ah,yes,the all is connected theory.
Like in Daredevil somebody mentions there is a guy with magic hammer and hell yeah,thats  so connected to the Avengers.Almost essential.

 :rolleyes: Don't be silly, Spade.  That's the weakest connection in the bunch, but it is hardly indicative of the whole.  There is a shared universe, a shared continuity, and guest-stars, character development, and more have been shared between different franchises.  The Avengers' economy of storytelling was only possible because there was a wealth of character development available to the audience before the first scene ever played.  From minor things, like the appearance of Captain America in Thor's movies, the Falcon in Ant Man, or the like, to bigger things, like universe building moments in each film, they have about as much inter-franchise continuity as the comics themselves.  It isn't every issue that Captain America and Thor cross over, or Iron Man and Hawkeye, but the larger Universe is always there in the background.  The same is true for the films, and that is what makes them unique.

If you don't like their style, that's one thing, but it strikes me as strange to deny the obvious accomplishments of Marvel Studios.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2015, 04:50:10 AM
I dont deny that movies made a TON of money,they did.
Its just that they got a bit too repetative for my taste.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 12, 2015, 06:00:04 AM
And I can't fault you for that... certain issues are starting to irk me about the films as well (Mainly that we need more 3 dimensional villains like Magneto. Ultron was a great disappointment, and while Yellowjacket was fun in an "over the top evil" sort of way, well rounded he was not.) However, even with the problems, there are exceptions to every rule... I would argue Loki is much more nuanced and fleshed out than Thor is, and Alexander Pierce was neither a clone of Cap nor was he a one-note villain, and Mr. Hyde from SHIELD was given more depth than the character ever had in the comics. And Kingpin... ho boy, the Kingpin.

Again, this is stuff Marvel studios needs to work on going forward to keep from going stale... but I'd argue Fox and WB have FAR more issues than Marvel does. I'll take a bit of repetitiveness if the film is good, rather than have a garbage film that tries to pretend it's more than it is.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2015, 09:07:46 AM
Ultron was dissapointing?You havent seen Malekith.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 12, 2015, 02:27:08 PM
Yeah, 'Mato is right.  The MCU is the first set of films to do what only comics have done before, create a massive, sprawling universe with shared continuity across multiple titles and by multiple creators.  There's nothing to compare to those types of comics in the history of literature, and there's nothing to compare to the MCU in cinema.  It's a breathtaking accomplishment.

In a nutshell Marvel is trying to do to their movies what they have been doing to their comics.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2015, 02:54:09 PM
Really screw them up?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 12, 2015, 04:28:27 PM
Really screw them up?

So who is or was making good superhero movies, Spade?  I'm sick of defending the MCU from borderline trolling, and since the burden of proof should be on the person making outrageous claims, I don't feel I should have to.  Who do you think is doing it right?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2015, 04:41:35 PM
Really screw them up?

So who is or was making good superhero movies, Spade?  I'm sick of defending the MCU from borderline trolling, and since the burden of proof should be on the person making outrageous claims, I don't feel I should have to.  Who do you think is doing it right?

You know there isn't really a competition AT THIS moment?We did name a few X-men movies?And there is The Dark Knight trilogy?  ^_^
But a company that didn't make mistakes DOES NOT EXIST!
PS Totally my fault.Forgot to add italic.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 12, 2015, 05:01:55 PM
Yeah... I like the X-men movies, but if we go through all the problems with them (and I mean the good ones like X2 and DoFP) we will be here all day. As for the Dark Knight Trilogy... again, I like the films, but perfect movies they were not. The fight scenes are muddled it's hard to see what's going on, the characters spend hours talking about their own motivations, the world is made to be so "hyper-realistic" that there is no room for over half of Batman's villains without MAJOR changes (Poison Ivy, Killer Croc, Solomon Grundy, Firefly, etc.), and the whole bit with "Oh, my name is Robin *wink*" was just plain mood breaking.

And again, both companies have had as many failures as successes with those franchises. For every Batman Begins, there's a Superman Returns. For every TDK, there's a Green Lantern. For Every X2, there's an X3. To say that they're "Better" as you cherry pick the best films to point to is no better than me saying the MCU has well rounded villains while only bringing up CA2 and the Daredevil show. You were more than happy to pull out Maleketh earlier (I didn't forget his dumbness, but I was going for more recent offerings) and it's a solid point.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2015, 05:07:30 PM
Everyone had good and bad points.And for the 100000 time,I did like some of the MCU movies and elements.
But I cant really stack a different Cinematic Universe against it since THERE IS NONE as of this point.DC has only Man of Steel,which wasnt that great.Valiant universe hasnt even started.And nobody else has similar plans.But being the only one,doesnt really make them perfect.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 12, 2015, 06:51:09 PM
On a side note, Black Panther costume:

http://comicbook.com/2015/08/12/captain-america-civil-war-first-look-at-black-panther-costume/


What do you guys think?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 12, 2015, 11:43:15 PM
But I cant really stack a different Cinematic Universe against it since THERE IS NONE as of this point.
Which is part of what people are saying is an accomplishment in the MCU. Despite some flaws, they actually have a cinematic universe. That's not a trivial thing.

DC/Warner didn't really have a single universe in mind when it put together many of its live-action shows in the past and now they are working to catch up. I am glad they are making the attempt and I like that some of that is visible in the Arrow and Flash TV shows (and possibly elsewhere). Until the SvB movie, we won't know if they have done it on the movie side. And, really, we won't know until there is a DC movie that isn't a direct sequel to Man Of Steel.

But being the only one,doesnt really make them perfect.
I totally agree. Of course, I am not sure where anyone is actually claiming that the MCU is perfect...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 12, 2015, 11:58:47 PM
As for the Dark Knight Trilogy... again, I like the films, but perfect movies they were not. The fight scenes are muddled it's hard to see what's going on, the characters spend hours talking about their own motivations, the world is made to be so "hyper-realistic" that there is no room for over half of Batman's villains without MAJOR changes (Poison Ivy, Killer Croc, Solomon Grundy, Firefly, etc.), and the whole bit with "Oh, my name is Robin *wink*" was just plain mood breaking.

Urg, so very, very true.  They just depress me these days.  The "Robin" thing made me want to slap the director. :P

No one claimed that being the sole shared universe made the MCU perfect, just unique.  My point was that they've accomplished what NO OTHER ART FORM, other than comics, has done, and that is true.  However, comics are pretty far from perfect too.  For every high point, there is a low point.  For every Galactus Saga there was a Mike Murdock.  For every Captain America 2, there was an Iron Man 3.  Sure, the movies have their flaws, but the fact that they managed to make the freaking God of Thunder a successful superhero and put Captain America on screen, tossing his shield around, just like in the comics...do you remember how insurmountable those challenges seemed ten years ago?  I still marvel (forgive the pun!) at what the MCU has managed to do, even as I cringe at some of the missteps.  It's amazing, and the scope and consistency of that, especially in the chaotic world of Hollywood, is worthy of praise. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 13, 2015, 02:36:48 AM
As for the Dark Knight Trilogy... again, I like the films, but perfect movies they were not. The fight scenes are muddled it's hard to see what's going on, the characters spend hours talking about their own motivations, the world is made to be so "hyper-realistic" that there is no room for over half of Batman's villains without MAJOR changes (Poison Ivy, Killer Croc, Solomon Grundy, Firefly, etc.), and the whole bit with "Oh, my name is Robin *wink*" was just plain mood breaking.

Urg, so very, very true.  They just depress me these days.  The "Robin" thing made me want to slap the director. :P

No one claimed that being the sole shared universe made the MCU perfect, just unique.  My point was that they've accomplished what NO OTHER ART FORM, other than comics, has done, and that is true.  However, comics are pretty far from perfect too.  For every high point, there is a low point.  For every Galactus Saga there was a Mike Murdock.  For every Captain America 2, there was an Iron Man 3.  Sure, the movies have their flaws, but the fact that they managed to make the freaking God of Thunder a successful superhero and put Captain America on screen, tossing his shield around, just like in the comics...do you remember how insurmountable those challenges seemed ten years ago?  I still marvel (forgive the pun!) at what the MCU has managed to do, even as I cringe at some of the missteps.  It's amazing, and the scope and consistency of that, especially in the chaotic world of Hollywood, is worthy of praise.

But Benton, Iron Man 3 and Captain America 2 are both great!  :P  I think you must have meant Iron Man 2...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 13, 2015, 03:01:36 AM
(http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00406/126166377_iron-man_406735c.jpg)

 :(
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on August 13, 2015, 03:20:03 AM
(http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00406/126166377_iron-man_406735c.jpg)

 :(

Did you want a racist yellow peril villain as the bad guy in a film viewed by millions of people? I would have liked to see the real Mandarin too, but I can understand why they went the route they did, and I especially understand that they wanted to offend as few people as possible. So I don't really see how that's enough to make Iron Man 3 a bad movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 13, 2015, 03:41:00 AM
Iron Man 3 was a mixed bag. I'm not one of the big proponents of the Mandarin thing (I remember posting very vocally why I was fine with him not being around) but the reason I feel it was problematic is that you see this guy, who is larger than life and is a really cool both visually and narratively, and then he's replaced by a nerd who was ticked off at Tony for being the cool kid. We didn't exactly trade up is what I'm saying.

So while I personally thought the fan trolling was hilarious, I'm glad they left the door open for another "Mandarin" since we've gotten more hints of the ten rings even as recently as Ant-Man.

That said, there were other problems with the movie, relating to him blowing up all the armors only to rebuild them and a drone army in the next film, Pepper STILL not getting to be RESCUE even though Downey was pushing it, etc. It's still far better than 2, but it's very forgettable when compared to GotG, Ant Man, and Cap 2.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 13, 2015, 04:00:37 AM
Kk, as I'm pretty sure I said this back then: Just because a character starts from a bad place doesn't mean they're forever limited to those negative dimensions.  Look at the Falcon.  Early on, he was given a ridiculously offensive origin, but the character still had potential.  Eventually he outgrew those inauspicious beginnings and became something great.  The Mandarin has potential too, and there have been plenty of great stories about him that are a lot more than 'Fu Manchu ripoff number 5.'  Yeah, they would have had to be careful about adapting him (and personally, I think Kingsley himself would have been a nice start, more's the pity), but it definitely could have been done.  They managed to make a WWII flick that wasn't anti-German, and the same types of moves could have worked to secure the Mandarin's position in Asian markets.  The key to the issue is, if you're not going to do a character justice, why use them?  It just shows contempt for the people who support your work and the source material that's providing you with a job.  The Mandarin is one of Iron Man's biggest villains, and that movie certainly didn't do him justice.

'Mato, while I couldn't disagree more with any approval for their 'fan trolling,' as you put it, I certainly agree that Killian, or whatever his name was, was a lousy villain with weak motivation.  The movie was haphazard, uneven, and there were way too many plot holes for a Marvel movie.

In retrospect, Iron Man 2 certainly has problems, but I'll take it over 3 all day long.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2015, 04:29:31 AM
Dear lord,Mandarin again.Look,he WAS a yellow peril villain when he started,but he hasnt been that for years.Now hes more of a Moriarty to Tonys Sherlock.Look at Invincible Iron Man by Matt Fraction to see what I meant.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 13, 2015, 04:54:18 AM
^Well, look at that, I'm agreeing with Spade on this thread. ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 13, 2015, 02:20:39 PM
Just his name is offensive.  And when you have to change everything about a character to make him palatable to modern audiences, well, how is that different than what Iron Man 3 did?  And when you divorce Iron Man 3 from sad feelings about the Mandarin, it's a great movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on August 13, 2015, 02:26:20 PM
I loved Iron Man 2 though I guess I need to rewatch it to figure out what people don't like about it, but to me 3 is the worst MCU movie by far.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 13, 2015, 02:26:32 PM
Just his name is offensive.  And when you have to change everything about a character to make him palatable to modern audiences, well, how is that different than what Iron Man 3 did?  And when you divorce Iron Man 3 from sad feelings about the Mandarin, it's a great movie.

 :rolleyes: Except for all of the movie's many, MANY other problems and plot holes. :P

He's been adapted in more modern stories without changing everything about him, so no, I don't see how drawing from a good Mandarin story and adding a short scene or two showing the Chinese government in a positive light as they resist the villain would be anywhere near what Iron Man 3 did.

I agree, BWPS.  Be warned, Iron Man 2 doesn't hold up as well upon repeated watchings.  It's got some plot holes.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2015, 02:37:15 PM
There wouldnt have to change that much about Mandarin,since he isnt offensive in his newer apperences,like I said.We arent counting Silver age or 90s cartoon.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 13, 2015, 03:52:51 PM
Just his name is offensive.  And when you have to change everything about a character to make him palatable to modern audiences, well, how is that different than what Iron Man 3 did?  And when you divorce Iron Man 3 from sad feelings about the Mandarin, it's a great movie.

 :rolleyes: Except for all of the movie's many, MANY other problems and plot holes. :P

He's been adapted in more modern stories without changing everything about him, so no, I don't see how drawing from a good Mandarin story and adding a short scene or two showing the Chinese government in a positive light as they resist the villain would be anywhere near what Iron Man 3 did.

I agree, BWPS.  Be warned, Iron Man 2 doesn't hold up as well upon repeated watchings.  It's got some plot holes.

Let's divorce this from the Mandarin issue - what are all these plot holes?  I don't think it's any worse plotted than other MCU movies.  Plot summary to follow:

Tony is suffering from some kind of PTSD from the events of Avengers, and copes by building increasingly unlikely or fringe-benefit suits.  AIM has a formula to make super-soldiers, which occasionally makes them explode.  They create a fake terrorist to take credit for these explosions, both explaining them away, and driving up demand for the super-soldier formula they've created.  The head of AIM draws Pepper into his scheme because he's a petty man and hates Tony, leading also to Happy's hospitalization and Tony calling out the fake terrorist.  They blow up his house in retaliation, and he is forced to escape in a prototype suit.  He researches the backstory of these explosions, which starts leading him to AIM.  He takes on some AIM guys without the suit, as the prototype needs to recharge, and discovers the fake terrorist.

Meanwhile, Rhodey is searching for the terrorists, and gets hacked by AIM.  Since they did the overhaul from War Machine to Iron Patriot on his suit, this is easily explained (though never explicitly said - not explicitly spelling something out is not a plot hole).  They had the opportunity to install any kind of software backdoor at that point.  AIM intends to take out the President with their fake terrorist, both driving up demand for government super-soldiers, and putting the VP into place as the president, over whom they have leverage.   They kidnap the President, using the Iron Patriot suit as a Trojan Horse.

The suit now recharged, Tony tries to save the president, but is too late.  He saves the rest of the people still alive on Air Force One however.  He and Rhodey go to save the President, apparently without suits.  Jarvis calls to tell him construction workers have cleared the debris from the doors - the doors to his vault full of armours.  The armours fly in on remote, and take out the AIM super-soldiers, while Rhodey saves the president and Tony tries to save Pepper, who I have forgotten to mention was injected with the super-soldier formula.  He and the AIM head fight, Pepper seemingly dies, only to save Tony by killing AIM guy with the tank-busting forearm missile (as seen in IM1, and earlier in this movie) from a suit of armour.  Tony detonates his remaining armours, figures out a way to cure Pepper, and undergoes experimental heart surgery to remove the shrapnel from his chest - while affirming that he is still Iron Man.  The End.

As far as plots go, I'd say IM3 was actually tightly plotted in regards to most Marvel movies.  Too many have "get the magic rock" as the bulk of their plot (Avengers, Thor 2, Guardians of the Galaxy).  The only thing I would consider a possibility is the prototype armour of Tony's needing to recharge.  He wears a power source that is supposed to power the armours, after all.  I can explain this away by saying it's a prototype, or maybe because it is meant to operate without being on him, it needs its own batteries.  That's hardly a damning plot hole without my No-prize attempts, and nitpicking could probably find as bad or worse in every Marvel movie.

So, what plot holes am I missing?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 13, 2015, 04:08:28 PM
It's funny how people are saying that the Incredibles was a FF movie.  Well according to this, Iron Man ripped off the Incredibles:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUYW0JyzydA
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2015, 05:14:02 PM
Iron Man 3 didnt really make much sense.Killian wants to get revenge because Tony didnt meet him on the roof?Dick move for sure,but not worth basing your life around that.
We saw Iron Man suit taking a beating from Thor with barely a scratch,but not it falls apart when a truck hits it?Truck continues driving without any problems,which is even weirder.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 13, 2015, 10:39:37 PM
It's funny how people are saying that the Incredibles was a FF movie.  Well according to this, Iron Man ripped off the Incredibles:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUYW0JyzydA

It is actually kind of similar.  Hadn't seen that one before.  And the president in Rhodey's suit thing is a little weird.

Iron Man 3 didnt really make much sense.Killian wants to get revenge because Tony didnt meet him on the roof?Dick move for sure,but not worth basing your life around that.
We saw Iron Man suit taking a beating from Thor with barely a scratch,but not it falls apart when a truck hits it?Truck continues driving without any problems,which is even weirder.

You know those weren't the same suits, right?  The one the truck messes up is a prototype that is shown to be glitchy through the whole movie, and is designed to split up into a bunch of little pieces.  Clearly, the bugs aren't all worked out.

The Killian thing -it's responses like this that make me think you're trolling.  You're either grossly misrepresenting the movie to suit your point, or don't understand hu-man beings.  Killian hates Tony for being everything he's not, and having everything he doesn't.  Money, charm, looks, women - they're both smart guys, but Killian at the beginning of the film is a social pariah, while Tony is on his way up to a one night stand with a beautiful woman.  However, he doesn't base his life around revenge on Tony.  The whole point of the movie isn't to get Tony, or kill Tony, it's about manipulating the US government and making boatloads of money.  Revenge on Tony is a fringe benefit, a stretch goal.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 14, 2015, 04:09:35 AM
Those other suits in the finale dont do much better jobs.Mooks from Gundam last longer then them.
Thats kinda the impresion you get about Killian from the movie.I havent read Extremis,but apparently he dies at the begining.His role is a lot bigger here,but you kinda get the feeling we wasnt supposed to carry the movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 14, 2015, 12:58:15 PM
Spade you're jumping all over the place.  You can't compare Gundam with Iron Man and even though the movie was loosely based on the comic, you know they are going to change it to make it stand on it's own.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 14, 2015, 02:16:51 PM
Spade you're jumping all over the place.  You can't compare Gundam with Iron Man and even though the movie was loosely based on the comic, you know they are going to change it to make it stand on it's own.

Comparison was how suits lasted REALLY;REALLY SHORT.You know those jokes how in Gundam mooks explode even when a shot misses them??  :doh:
Figure of speech.You know like: They were dropping like flys?
About the movie being based on a comic: thats what I said,they changed the story.And thats really all to that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 14, 2015, 02:27:13 PM
My bad, It's been a while since I saw Gundam, Color me embarrasses
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 14, 2015, 03:53:48 PM
No problem.
Granted,that was mostly in Wing,but thats not important right now.
Who has the rights to Shi'Ar now?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 14, 2015, 06:38:29 PM
I would assume fox, since the property is associated with the xmen, and I believe was created in the xmen books.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 15, 2015, 03:13:22 AM
Yup,James Gunn confirmed it.Fox owns Shi'ar,Badoon,Skrulls and Kang.Are they planing to send X-men to space,I wonder?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 15, 2015, 06:18:09 PM
http://www.justjared.com/2015/07/11/jon-bernthal-pictured-as-the-punisher-on-daredevil-set/ (http://www.justjared.com/2015/07/11/jon-bernthal-pictured-as-the-punisher-on-daredevil-set/)
Jon Bernthal on the set of Daredevil.In his civilian identity,I guess.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on August 16, 2015, 02:43:29 AM
So this was pretty awesome:

https://instagram.com/p/6aSI2yBEWk/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 16, 2015, 01:52:00 PM
Yea, it looks awesome, but can she act?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 16, 2015, 01:55:32 PM
So this was pretty awesome:

https://instagram.com/p/6aSI2yBEWk/

I like Ronda Rousey, I think she's a great UFC fighter, and I absolutely do not want her as Captain Marvel.  This is similar to all those fan WWE castings, like people wanting Triple H for Thor a few years ago, and it's not a good idea.  She's been in a couple of movies, sure, but she's not an actor.  The fan art is cool though.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 05:32:41 AM
Well,phase 3 doesnt look that impresive.No offense to people who like it.I hear Blade and Runaways are in the work for phase 4.Thou we have over 5 years till that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 18, 2015, 05:51:08 AM
This is based on...? Because Dr Strange looks ok, Civil War looks really good, and nothing else is far enough along to say that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 06:47:47 AM
This is based on...? Because Dr Strange looks ok, Civil War looks really good, and nothing else is far enough along to say that.

My personal taste?Okay and Impressive  are very different things.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 18, 2015, 01:26:51 PM
There's really nothing concrete to base phase 3 on.  All we have is a list of movies, which can change at any time, and a lot of hype and pics about Civil War.  You can't tell if phase 3 is going to be good or not just by those things.  I think the best thing to do is to hold judgement until Marvel gives out more information. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: thalaw2 on August 18, 2015, 01:33:18 PM
My vote for Rowdy Ronda as Ms. Marvel!  My only problem is that Carol is so strong that you won't be able to see much of the hand to hand fighting that makes Ronda so dangerous.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 01:39:22 PM
^not gonna happen.So not gonna happen.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 18, 2015, 01:50:12 PM
My vote for Rowdy Ronda as Ms. Marvel!  My only problem is that Carol is so strong that you won't be able to see much of the hand to hand fighting that makes Ronda so dangerous.

Found this:
http://www.people.com/article/ronda-rousey-captain-marvel-superheroes-movie-role

I think she would better as Black Carney or the new Thor.  At least as BC she can show off her skills.  I still want to see Gina Carano play a Super hero
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: thalaw2 on August 18, 2015, 02:03:59 PM
My vote for Rowdy Ronda as Ms. Marvel!  My only problem is that Carol is so strong that you won't be able to see much of the hand to hand fighting that makes Ronda so dangerous.

Found this:
http://www.people.com/article/ronda-rousey-captain-marvel-superheroes-movie-role

I think she would better as Black Carney or the new Thor.  At least as BC she can show off her skills.  I still want to see Gina Carano play a Super hero

BC is DC so maybe Ronda would make a good Mocking Bird.  I loves me some Mocking Bird.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 02:11:44 PM
I think Mocking Bird already debuted,so thats not gonna happen either.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 18, 2015, 02:22:37 PM
Please, no athletes as major characters, unless they show they can actually act somewhere first.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 18, 2015, 02:23:11 PM
I know BC is DC, she should keep her options open.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 03:26:12 PM
Is anyone else a bit tired of seeing teenage Spider-man in every adaptation?  :unsure:
Why cant we ever get an adult Peter who works as a school teacher?(Please refrain from pointing out how that ended.Thank you)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on August 18, 2015, 03:33:21 PM
Is anyone else a bit tired of seeing teenage Spider-man in every adaptation?  :unsure:
Why cant we ever get an adult Peter who works as a school teacher?(Please refrain from pointing out how that ended.Thank you)

Because you would have to re-tell the whole story of how he became Spidey and then explained why he was never mention before during all the other Marvel movies.  Also I think they want Spidey to be the rookie of the MCU.  Back in the day, other heroes always seen him as a kid and I guess they want to project that in to the MCU.  I would like to see Spidey grown up and holding his own with Cap and Tony, but it will take a while for the movie to catch up with the comics.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 04:09:41 PM
Thats what I was thinking.But yeah,there was never any hope,really.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 18, 2015, 04:32:57 PM
Spade, I think you missed the point of my question... everyone else was talking about a *fake* picture of a wrestler dressed as Captain Marvel, when suddenly "Yeah, it looks like Phase 3 is gonna be bad." There was no context for the statement, no reason behind it, nothing. In the context of the conversation, it appeared as though you were saying it was gonna suck because of the Captain Marvel thing, which was, again, fake. Since I was pretty sure that wasn't the case, I asked for clarification, because it's entirely possible you were basing that statement on something you had just heard from another website and I was curious what that could be.

The simple fact is, we're WAAAAAAY too early in the game to blow off all of phase 3 based on what we know. Phase 2 had IM3 and Thor 2 as its first outings, and neither was terribly impressive... especially not when compared to CA2, GotG, Avengers 2, or Ant-Man. We don't even have an actress for Captain Marvel yet, let alone any knowledge of how those films are gonna work.

That said... while I understand how everyone is burnt out on Spider-man, I feel like shaming Marvel for it isn't really fair. They can't really tell Sony to stop making Spiderman films on their own, since Sony has a completely separate set of studios and directors to work with that one character. Marvel, on the other hand, is trying to juggle 20+ main characters in one studio, and is doing a lot of movies with ensemble casts as a result. Even with that, we've got Jessica Jones well into production, Captain Marvel is coming 2018, etc.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 05:18:32 PM
Really,that again.From the top.
From what I have seen about the movies in P3 Im not impressed.You know,Im not really that excited about it.Nothing cathes my fancy as of now.
I said I would like to see ADULT Spider-man in any adaptation.And thats all.No context.I would like to see Peter Parker as an adult in a movie or an animated show.But like I said chances are very slim at best.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 18, 2015, 06:25:35 PM
Spade, I think you missed the point of my question... everyone else was talking about a *fake* picture of a wrestler dressed as Captain Marvel, when suddenly "Yeah, it looks like Phase 3 is gonna be bad." There was no context for the statement, no reason behind it, nothing. In the context of the conversation, it appeared as though you were saying it was gonna suck because of the Captain Marvel thing, which was, again, fake. Since I was pretty sure that wasn't the case, I asked for clarification, because it's entirely possible you were basing that statement on something you had just heard from another website and I was curious what that could be.

The simple fact is, we're WAAAAAAY too early in the game to blow off all of phase 3 based on what we know. Phase 2 had IM3 and Thor 2 as its first outings, and neither was terribly impressive... especially not when compared to CA2, GotG, Avengers 2, or Ant-Man. We don't even have an actress for Captain Marvel yet, let alone any knowledge of how those films are gonna work.

That said... while I understand how everyone is burnt out on Spider-man, I feel like shaming Marvel for it isn't really fair. They can't really tell Sony to stop making Spiderman films on their own, since Sony has a completely separate set of studios and directors to work with that one character. Marvel, on the other hand, is trying to juggle 20+ main characters in one studio, and is doing a lot of movies with ensemble casts as a result. Even with that, we've got Jessica Jones well into production, Captain Marvel is coming 2018, etc.

He hasn't been impressed with any of the MCU.  Why be surprised when someone who doesn't like seafood complains about the fish?  Someone who's more excited about more Blade movies over Black Panther or Captain Marvel clearly cannot be trusted  :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2015, 06:32:17 PM
You didnt read my response,did you?Why the hell do I bother with you people?Your bullies who gang up on everyone who doesnt like the same things like you.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 18, 2015, 07:18:33 PM
Spade, calm down. I apologize for assuming your comment meant more than it did. I thought that there's no reason you would randomly post a comment dismissing an entire slew of movies in the middle of a conversation that other people were having for no apparent reason, because surely you realize that that's rude. I apologize for thinking that maybe, just maybe, the reason you'd posted had been because of some news no one else had posted yet... and that I was admittedly curious what that could be, especially since the D25 expo was happening and there was news from that.

The fact is, we ALL know your opinion about the Marvel movies. And in and of itself, that's fine. You don't have to like the marvel movies, and you're not wrong to point out the problems in them. But when you make random posts in the middle of conversations JUST to reiterate that you hate what people are discussing... that's rude. You pulled this same nonsense in the Agents of Shield thread, where everyone else was talking about the latter half of the season and all the new developments, and you posted just to say it was stupid based on the 3 episodes you watched. If there's something NEW that you want to express your opinion on, that's all well and good, but randomly posting a negative opinion that has nothing to do with the topic people are discussing is rude, and it's not appreciated.

If you want to complain about the concept art coming out on Dr. Strange, or the fact that CA3 is now doing re-shoots to add more Spiderman, or something that's relevant... yeah, that's a proper point of discussion. But please, for all our sanity, be mindful of proper social etiquette when you post.

Now then, back onto actual news about actual things that happened, a trailer came out of D25 for CA3 (apparently everyone had to put their phones in bags during the whole thing, so no leaked versions as yet) and there's been some Dr. Strange concept art floating around. I'll be honest, I'm not sure about the streaks of gray on Cumberbatch in the concept art... It's something they tried to do for Reed Richards in the previous set of F4 movies, and it looked silly there too.

That said, in more recent news, there's apparently a good reason Hope will not be appearing as Wasp in Civil War... apparently her actress was late into her pregnancy during principle photography. She has, however, been scanned for her superhero costume, so it's a good bet she'll be appearing soon enough.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on August 18, 2015, 09:30:00 PM
You didnt read my response,did you?Why the hell do I bother with you people?Your bullies who gang up on everyone who doesnt like the same things like you.

That definitely applies to me. I can't believe you don't like the MCU and I consider you inferior because of it which in turn makes me feel better about myself. Textbook bullying mentality.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 27, 2015, 04:47:43 AM
There are rumors about Fury MAX movie in the works.
I guess we could either see Nick Fury Sr. or they will move the timeline to ...ehm... newer events. I only mention that because its highly unlikely that current Nick Fury is old enough to have fought in WW2.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 27, 2015, 02:16:46 PM
There's also been a lot of talk about a potential new Blade project, one based on a similar premise to the upcoming comic, where he has a daughter who's a vampire slayer as well.  A lot of sites have reported it as a potential movie, (which I'm curious about, given Marvel's very full slate for the next few years) but it could also be a future tv show.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on October 07, 2015, 05:53:02 AM
http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/marvel-abc-comedy-tv-series-damage-control-1201608690/ (http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/marvel-abc-comedy-tv-series-damage-control-1201608690/)
Damage Control will be Marvels new TV show.What an interesting concept. :|
New Wolverine movie might actually be an X-23 movie according to some rumors.Yey?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on October 07, 2015, 12:37:33 PM
A Damage Control movie would be funny.  It can take place right after the first Avengers movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on October 08, 2015, 04:33:28 PM
More news from Marvel;

http://comicbook.com/2015/10/08/marvel-announces-three-new-movies-in-2020/

The only bad thing is that they keep pushing back Black Panther and the other Marvel movies.  Yes, there is now a phase 4 of the MCU
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on October 08, 2015, 11:14:53 PM
More news from Marvel;

http://comicbook.com/2015/10/08/marvel-announces-three-new-movies-in-2020/

The only bad thing is that they keep pushing back Black Panther and the other Marvel movies.  Yes, there is now a phase 4 of the MCU

Actually, Black Panther is getting pushed forward - it's coming out sooner now, with a February release.  I'm sad about Captain Marvel, which is now getting pushed back for the second time, but I enjoyed Ant-man, and look forward to Ant-man and the Wasp.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on October 09, 2015, 05:38:30 AM
More news from Marvel;

http://comicbook.com/2015/10/08/marvel-announces-three-new-movies-in-2020/

The only bad thing is that they keep pushing back Black Panther and the other Marvel movies.  Yes, there is now a phase 4 of the MCU

Actually, Black Panther is getting pushed forward - it's coming out sooner now, with a February release.  I'm sad about Captain Marvel, which is now getting pushed back for the second time, but I enjoyed Ant-man, and look forward to Ant-man and the Wasp.

On one hand, the one movie with a female lead they had is getting pushed back.  On the other, another movie comes with a female in the title but not top billing.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on October 09, 2015, 12:29:19 PM
This brings me back to what I was saying before; I don't think Marvel have a set story in mind for their MCU.  I think they had one in the past, but since their movies are becoming popular, they are going to expand on it.  This must be hard for the writers.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on October 09, 2015, 01:51:21 PM
Maybe something Dark Reign related?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 10, 2015, 04:03:37 AM
There's now a rumor the Inhuman's movie may be canceled, due to heavy use of Inhumans in Agents of SHIELD, plus the fact that the TV and movie series are now controlled by completely different people.  When the shift in control of the movie universe around, they neglected to do so for the TV properties, so there is no longer any coordinating control between the two, although they are still trying to be consistent.  With that being the case, both doing the same subject matter is going to be nearly impossible to keep consistent.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on October 10, 2015, 05:39:35 PM
http://comicbook.com/2015/10/09/bryan-cranston-wants-to-play-a-marvel-villain/ (http://comicbook.com/2015/10/09/bryan-cranston-wants-to-play-a-marvel-villain/)
He could be Crime Master? :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on October 10, 2015, 08:44:21 PM
Take this with a grain of salt, but if this is true, I'm excited for this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqKJSGzEaLs&feature=em-uploademail

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on October 11, 2015, 02:11:13 AM
There's now a rumor the Inhuman's movie may be canceled, due to heavy use of Inhumans in Agents of SHIELD, plus the fact that the TV and movie series are now controlled by completely different people.  When the shift in control of the movie universe around, they neglected to do so for the TV properties, so there is no longer any coordinating control between the two, although they are still trying to be consistent.  With that being the case, both doing the same subject matter is going to be nearly impossible to keep consistent.

Whether or not this ends up being true, it's being denied at the moment.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on October 11, 2015, 03:30:36 AM
It's more or less of Marvel Studios waiting to see how this season of Agents Of SHIELD goes with their full introduction. Since Marvel Studios is pushing for making Inhumans the cinemaverse "mutants" (thanks Fox for making that word taboo) er.. Enhanced then it's really hard to see how even the Royal Family should be handled if something goes south with how fans handle more Inhuman background details within the context of the show. It's NOT canceled or put on indefinite hold just more of keeping it's date locked so enough time can be allowed to expand on the cast or try something different with the movie versions.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 16, 2015, 09:38:45 AM
After some rumors, it has more or less been confirmed that Hulk will show up in Thor 3.  It's not as good as a new Hulk film, but it will do for now.

http://screenrant.com/thor-3-mark-ruffalo-hulk-cast/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 11, 2015, 06:51:30 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19l2Qqf9Evs (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19l2Qqf9Evs)
Another paint by numbers movie with a disposable villain.Only its sometimes funny.Tiny Iron Man as HT puts it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 11, 2015, 11:53:10 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19l2Qqf9Evs (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19l2Qqf9Evs)
Another paint by numbers movie with a disposable villain.Only its sometimes funny.Tiny Iron Man as HT puts it.

It's all true, but I still like the movie anyway.... :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 11, 2015, 02:00:16 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19l2Qqf9Evs (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19l2Qqf9Evs)
Another paint by numbers movie with a disposable villain.Only its sometimes funny.Tiny Iron Man as HT puts it.

It's all true, but I still like the movie anyway.... :)
That is the strange part.It works for some reason.But really something has to be done about the villains.Bryan Cranston said he wanted to play a villain in MCU,so I guess there is some hope.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on December 11, 2015, 02:59:33 PM
After some rumors, it has more or less been confirmed that Hulk will show up in Thor 3.  It's not as good as a new Hulk film, but it will do for now.

http://screenrant.com/thor-3-mark-ruffalo-hulk-cast/

I think it's better than a solo Hulk movie, these characters together are often greater than the sum of their parts. I can't wait.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 11, 2015, 03:03:18 PM
I can understand why people may want a solo Hulk movie, but do we really need one?  What would the story be about?  I figure that the next Thor movie would explain what happen to Hulk after Age of Ultron.  What I really would like to see is a Black Widow/ Hawkeye movie.  A movie that would go into their past and how they met.  Something like that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 11, 2015, 03:28:27 PM
I can understand why people may want a solo Hulk movie, but do we really need one?  What would the story be about?  I figure that the next Thor movie would explain what happen to Hulk after Age of Ultron.  What I really would like to see is a Black Widow/ Hawkeye movie.  A movie that would go into their past and how they met.  Something like that.
Solo Hulk movie wont happen because-legal issues.
It would be Planet Hulk.Why is that a discussion?  :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 11, 2015, 05:10:41 PM
I would be all kinds of on board for a Hawkeye/Blackwidow team-up movie!  I've been saying since the beginning that they needed to do that, and I think it would be awesome. 

A solo Hulk movie could certainly be good, but you'd just need the right story.  It doesn't write itself like some of these others.

And yes, Ant-Man is still quite awesome despite its problems, and Darren Cross was at least a little bit interesting.  Still, they do need to bring in some better villains, which is sort of crazy, because Marvel has pretty much all the best villains that aren't in Batman's rogue's gallery or named Darkseid.  If they had given us an actual Mandarin or given Maleketh some more screen time and development, they could have countered that trend, as both of them are good characters.  I'd love to see them dig into their villains a bit more.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 11, 2015, 05:41:20 PM
Legal issues,again,keep us from a number of villains.And those we have are one dimensional.
From big names I would like to see Kang.Or Mephisto(maybe that Spider-man movie has it covered).Well thats pretty much it from the Marvel Studios owned characters.
Wait,Mephisto was actually introduced as an enemy of Silver Surfer,so Im not sure Marvel owns him.Kang,just Kand.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 11, 2015, 05:53:05 PM
I'm not sure how they would do it, but I would like to see the Wrecking Crew and Titania, which would a cool way to introduce She-Hulk into the MCU
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 11, 2015, 05:55:09 PM
Has anybody seen the winter final of Agents of SHIELD?  It seems like they are getting into magic and mystic stuff.  Could this be a setup to get the MCU ready for Doctor Strange?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 11, 2015, 06:03:21 PM
Tv shows and Movies cant actually crossover because of an internal feud in Marvel.Feige and Perlmutter have issues.That really kill any intention I had about watching the Tv shows.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on December 11, 2015, 10:38:51 PM
I'd love to see the Avengers go up against Kang in a movie. However I remember reading that Fox has the movie rights to Kang because of his ties to the Fantastic Four.  :(
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 11, 2015, 11:06:59 PM
Bah, they had gotten past this nonsense with Marvel Studios, and now they're miring themselves in legal issues again. 

Obviously, the other studio-owned characters were already a problem, but come on, Marvel.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 12, 2015, 06:27:49 AM
I'd love to see the Avengers go up against Kang in a movie. However I remember reading that Fox has the movie rights to Kang because of his ties to the Fantastic Four.  :(
Fox owns all the cool villains.Maybe,just maybe,if they made a deal about sharing characters like with Quicksilver.
Otherwise,after Thanos,Avengers will be fighting Egghead.I guess there is still Super-Adaptoid,but that wouldnt be much of movie either.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on December 13, 2015, 03:32:42 AM
Tv shows and Movies cant actually crossover because of an internal feud in Marvel.Feige and Perlmutter have issues.That really kill any intention I had about watching the Tv shows.

Rumours only.  The biggest obstacle to Marvel's movies and TV crossing over is one of scheduling logistics.  Network shows film for months at a time with a hiatus, while the Netflix shows and movies film in intensive blocks of time, with reshoots scheduled later for the movies.  Any serious plot crossover, like the first season of Agents of Shield, needs significant planning, and lead to most of the first season being boring due to pattern holding.  Everything interesting had to be held to the release of the Winter Soldier.  The movie actors are contracted for set numbers of films, but TV isn't largely mentioned, so appearances on shows need to be negotiated specifically, and timed to be when the actor is both available, and not filming for a movie.

There have been some crossovers: Nick Fury, Maria Hill and Sif have all been on Agents of Shield, as well as the shadowy council leader from Avengers this season; some plot events on Agents of Shield led up to Avengers 2, and obviously Agent Carter and Howard Stark have been on Agent Carter, along with Dum-Dum Dugan.  Luke Cage was on Jessica Jones, as well as Rosario Dawson's character from Daredevil.  But I wouldn't hold my breath for Tony Stark or Captain America to show up on any of them.  The actors aren't under contract to appear in TV series, they would cost an awful lot for little gain, and they're busy.  From Robert Downey Jr's perspective, what reason would he have to appear on a middling to low-rated ABC drama?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 13, 2015, 06:11:25 AM
Still wouldnt expect Defenders in any movie.Marvel really needs to invest more into TV if they hope to go against DC.I mean Damage Control?Really?30 minutes comedy?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 13, 2015, 04:37:25 PM
I don't know, Spade, Daredevil all by its lonesome beats all of DC's offerings hollow.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 13, 2015, 05:10:18 PM
I don't know, Spade, Daredevil all by its lonesome beats all of DC's offerings hollow.
I would argue that Flash is the best superhero show on TV now,but thats not the point here.Point was that Marvel should invest more(in every sense) into TV department.Come on,Damage Control?
Just saying that I would like to see something bigger on TV by Marvel.Like Secret Avengers or Thunderbolts or Superior Foes.I know its not gonna happen,those are just examples.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on December 13, 2015, 05:58:44 PM
I don't know, Spade, Daredevil all by its lonesome beats all of DC's offerings hollow.

Agreed.

I don't know, Spade, Daredevil all by its lonesome beats all of DC's offerings hollow.
I would argue that Flash is the best superhero show on TV now,but thats not the point here.Point was that Marvel should invest more(in every sense) into TV department.Come on,Damage Control?
Just saying that I would like to see something bigger on TV by Marvel.Like Secret Avengers or Thunderbolts or Superior Foes.I know its not gonna happen,those are just examples.

What's your hang-up about a proposed Damage Control show?  We've already got, or are getting, Agents of Shield, Agent Carter, Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron Fist and their version of the Defenders.  So they're trying something with a different take on superheroes - it's not like there's a shortage of standard ones.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 13, 2015, 06:19:09 PM
You know,just saying I would like something bigger.All of those are a bit low key.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on December 13, 2015, 07:25:53 PM
You know,just saying I would like something bigger.All of those are a bit low key.

In other words, they are all doable on a TV budget.  Plus anything really big will be reserved for the movies, since that's where the real money is to be made.

Big stuff for movies, small stuff for TV.  That's how it is and how it is going to be.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 13, 2015, 08:01:52 PM
The Incredible Hulk came on today and I was wonder: How come they never follow up on the story?  It seems like the only thing they pulled from that movie was General Ross.  They mention the abomination 1 time in another movie, but you don't what happen to Betty or the guy who we all knew that was going to become the Leader, none of it.  Was it because the movie wasn't a big hit or the whole thing with Ed Norton and Marvel?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on December 13, 2015, 11:32:33 PM
The Incredible Hulk came on today and I was wonder: How come they never follow up on the story?  It seems like the only thing they pulled from that movie was General Ross.  They mention the abomination 1 time in another movie, but you don't what happen to Betty or the guy who we all knew that was going to become the Leader, none of it.  Was it because the movie wasn't a big hit or the whole thing with Ed Norton and Marvel?

The huge part of the problem is with Universal owning the distribution rights with solo Hulk movies which means they have say on how it's promoted and released (plus they some some of the profits in the deal). All of the plot points with Incredible Hulk were put on the back burner after Ruffalo's HULK took off big time in the Avengers films. Joss Whedon and Kevin Feige agreed that Hulk worked so much better as part of the Science Brothers (Banner and Stark) and the love/hate relationship that Hulk and Thor had with each other. They removed Hulk from Captain America: Civil War because he was too powerful (Banner has a cameo but probably just with General Ross) and they had plans with Thor in his third movie dealing with Loki and the Ragnarok storyline so they decided to adjust the storyline to make it a Hulk/Thor team up. Feige has said that he loved the idea of doing a Planet Hulk storyline but it just didn't make sense in the cinematic universe at this time but maybe they could have Banner join Thor on his quest to understand the Infinity Stones and maybe it might lead them into finding his World Breakers to help with Thanos.

The Leader, Abomination, and Betty Ross most likely will get to appear in Avengers Infinity War or somewhere in the Phase 4 films (Universal's distribution rights end in several years so they just might be waiting until they expire to do his next solo film).

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 14, 2015, 01:32:33 PM
You know,just saying I would like something bigger.All of those are a bit low key.

In other words, they are all doable on a TV budget.  Plus anything really big will be reserved for the movies, since that's where the real money is to be made.

Big stuff for movies, small stuff for TV.  That's how it is and how it is going to be.
So by that logic,DC should cancel Flash and Arrow and launch Young heroes in love series?Makes sense.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on December 14, 2015, 02:13:05 PM
I agree with you here, Flash has shown that big superhero shows are possible on the small screen, and Daredevil and JJ have confirmed you can have them without compromising the MCU's anchor to reality. There's no reason to keep things dialed back. I do like Agents of Shield  and Agent Carter a good deal, but I don't want Marvel to keep shying away from putting established superheroes on their network TV shows. Neither of the new spinoffs sound interesting to me, and I'm not sure I want to give them a chance to grow on me the way both Agent shows had to.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 14, 2015, 04:10:15 PM
Ehh, I know there are a lot of folks who are really loving The Flash, but for my part, I'd say it illustrates the limitations of superheroics on TV.  I watched an episode the other day with Atom Smasher and was pretty unimpressed.  The acting, the writing, and the effects were all pretty poor.  I suppose your mileage will vary, but I'd rather they do what they can do well, which it seems is street-level characters.  Still, it seems to me that complaining about not having enough superhero content on TV is a bit silly in this day and age.  Haha, we're spoiled for content, some of it truly, unquestionably good.  ^_^
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 14, 2015, 05:11:30 PM
Ehh, I know there are a lot of folks who are really loving The Flash, but for my part, I'd say it illustrates the limitations of superheroics on TV.  I watched an episode the other day with Atom Smasher and was pretty unimpressed.  The acting, the writing, and the effects were all pretty poor.  I suppose your mileage will vary, but I'd rather they do what they can do well, which it seems is street-level characters.  Still, it seems to me that complaining about not having enough superhero content on TV is a bit silly in this day and age.  Haha, we're spoiled for content, some of it truly, unquestionably good.  ^_^
When Marvel has telepathic gorillas and man-sharks then I will admit their shows are better.Tuesday night-Flash or Agents of Shield?I know what Im watching.
Daredevil managed to stretch an origin story(it adapts Frank Millers Man without Fear) worth at best 2 episodes to 13 FREAKING EPISODES.Again 13 episode origin story.Not saying it didnt have some good sides,but horrible pacing really runs into ground.
Netflix series had a lot of potential but they sadly wasted it.They were just trying too hard to be grimdark.
Now-what you like isnt really the issue here,the issue was just that DC pays more attention to TV-shows.Not saying every episode should be expensive as a movie,but a little more money and effort would go a long way.For example,wouldnt a show about black ops superhero team(however you name it) be interesting to see?
 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on December 15, 2015, 08:40:04 AM
Except that... no, DC really doesn't. *Greg Berlanti* cares about the TV shows, and it comes through in a show about Green Arrow of all things. *DC* by contrast, won't let the showrunners use half the characters they'd like... despite making a clear break between the movies and TV shows, DC still won't let the Arrowverse use characters and ideas it deems too important for them. Blue Beetle, the Suicide Squad, Green Lantern, etc. are all things DC corporate has either denied the use of or, in the case of the SS, had them remove later on to not conflict with the brand. They're not even allowed to make an offhand reference to Gotham or Batman because Fox owns the rights.

Meanwhile, Agents of Shield wants to have Nick Fury show up? Sure, why not. Daredevil and Jessica Jones want to make repeated references to the Avengers films? Go for it u guys, that's free advertising. Yes, most of the Netflix shows have fewer special effects then Flash, but what they lack in effects, they MORE than make up for in better cinematography, better writing, better acting, better sound work, and better overall stories. And if you bothered to watch more than five episodes of AoS, you'd know the effects on that show are easily comparable to flash, just with less psychic gorillas and more Inhuman monsters that blast holes in people's chests.

Don't get me wrong, I love Flash too (and seriously, Benton, don't let that be your only episode. That was easily one of the weakest in the season, probably in the show), but it has more than it's fair share of flaws... villains of the weak that are often more one-note than MCU villains, special effects that are good for tv, but not great, and it gets bogged down in soap opera-esque drama. It's saved by some fantastic acting with Wells/Zoom, intriguing overall narratives, and a clear love for the world and characters they're playing with... something the DCCU could learn from, frankly. But saying one is better than the other because that one is getting more "attention" is sheer lunacy. Yes, Marvels will they/won't they is annoying sometimes, but I'll take that over DC's flat indifference and absurd character limitations.

If they were connecting the universes like Marvel I'd be ok with it, but they've flat out said they won't do that. And honestly, the one advantage I see to keeping the media separate is that the Arrowverse CAN use Superman, Green Lantern, Blue Beetle, and whoever else they want on the TV shows, where Marvel is limited based on what actors are willing to cameo where.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 15, 2015, 10:05:31 AM
Daredevil and Jessica Jones want to make repeated references to the Avengers films.
Oh yeah,thats really the proof of good incorporation in the universe.  :thumbup:
But if you like your superhero shows grimdark and slow,who am I to stop you in that? ;-)
But seriously now,not saying that DC doesnt have problems,just saying they are doing a better job then Marvel(with some shows),even if Marvel is more marketing savvy.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on December 15, 2015, 10:19:21 AM
Daredevil and Jessica Jones want to make repeated references to the Avengers films.
Oh yeah,thats really the proof of good incorporation in the universe.  :thumbup:
But if you like your superhero shows grimdark and slow,who am I to stop you in that? ;-)
But seriously now,not saying that DC doesnt have problems,just saying they are doing a better job then Marvel(with some shows),even if Marvel is more marketing savvy.

So on the other hand they shouldn't make grimdark shows (even though the comic Jessica Jones based on is just as dark as the series) and on the other hand, you also think they shouldn't make a light hearted comedy?  So they should only make the shows with the tone that you approve of?  Bit arrogant there, don't you think?

What's wrong with Marvel shows appealing to different audiences with different tones?  The Netflix shows are darker, some of the ones in planning will be light hearted(and Agent Carter already is), and Shield stands somewhere in between.  Different tones for different folks.  What's wrong with that?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 15, 2015, 10:21:53 AM
Im rooting to see shows I like?How dare I? <_<
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on December 15, 2015, 10:30:43 AM
Im rooting to see shows I like?How dare I? <_<

That's fine, but first you say you don't like them doing a comedy, then you say all they are doing is grimdark.  That's what we call a contradiction.

In any case, Marvel is not gong to do traditional superhero TV shows.  There is way too much money in the movies for them to add any of the big names to television.  Furthermore, their TV show experiments, particularly the Netflix shows, have been far too popular and well received for them not to keep doing that.  Like it or not, the mass of people is not with you and they are going to market to the mass of people out there.

As for DC, they are trying to mimic Marvel.  Flash and Arrow slipped in before they started to do so, or they wouldn't exist either.  They aren't doing anything particularly dark at the moment except for maybe Gotham, a show I don't bother to watch, but you still won't see any new big name stuff on DC television unless Batman V Superman flops, and I just don't see that happening.

If both the Flash TV show and movie turn out to be successful because of each other instead of in spite of each other, than you might have a chance.  That's the only one I see.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 15, 2015, 11:22:09 AM
Here we go again...I said I didnt like the idea of low budget show focused on a cleaning crew-words I dont like comedy were never used.There are other titles more deserving of an adaptation.
But anyway,those were just my thought on what I would like to see,I dont really care to dissect EVERY show out there.But your welcome to continue without me.
Maybe if Marvel and Fox continue cooperating,we could see X-Factor investigations,or Alpha Flight or Excalibur in some form(TV,movie,any adaptation).Its never going to happen,but I can hope.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on December 15, 2015, 03:15:36 PM
Here we go again...I said I didnt like the idea of low budget show focused on a cleaning crew-words I dont like comedy were never used.There are other titles more deserving of an adaptation.
But anyway,those were just my thought on what I would like to see,I dont really care to dissect EVERY show out there.But your welcome to continue without me.
Maybe if Marvel and Fox continue cooperating,we could see X-Factor investigations,or Alpha Flight or Excalibur in some form(TV,movie,any adaptation).Its never going to happen,but I can hope.

I don't agree with much you've said, but X-factor Investigations would make for a good show.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 25, 2015, 05:09:01 PM
Deadpool Red Band trailer 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA)
Its so unfunny that you just have to laugh.Then you kinda feel bad for laughing.  :blink:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on December 26, 2015, 02:04:18 AM
This looks like the kind of movie a 13 year old kid with ADD would write while his parents weren't supervising him. Or in other words, freaking awesome.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on December 26, 2015, 03:28:12 AM
Deadpool Red Band trailer 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA)
Its so unfunny that you just have to laugh.Then you kinda feel bad for laughing.  :blink:

Ah, I am once again in complete disagreement with you.  All is right in the world.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 26, 2015, 05:55:09 AM
^So cute you think I care about your opinion. ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on December 26, 2015, 06:04:29 AM
Deadpool Red Band trailer 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA)
Its so unfunny that you just have to laugh.Then you kinda feel bad for laughing.  :blink:

WHAT?! Deadpool acting LIKE his comic character IN A FOX movie AND not written by Liefield ?!?! My God, IT WILL BE HORRIBLE!!!! DEADPOOL should be a mercenary with his mouth sewn shut.. oh, wait that was the movie version that sucked AND had him with katanas in his forearms with teleporting and optic blasts.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 26, 2015, 06:08:44 AM
You do know hes actually funny in the comics?At least if Fabian Nicieza is writing him.
Here-jokes are just so unfunny that they are actually hilarious.You do know that feeling right?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on December 27, 2015, 12:46:15 AM
Deadpool Red Band trailer 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZIM1HydF9UA)
Its so unfunny that you just have to laugh.Then you kinda feel bad for laughing.  :blink:

WHAT?! Deadpool acting LIKE his comic character IN A FOX movie AND not written by Liefield?!?! My God, IT WILL BE HORRIBLE!!!! DEADPOOL should be a mercenary with his mouth sewn shut.. oh, wait that was the movie version that sucked AND had him with katanas in his forearms with teleporting and optic blasts.

- CQ

I think we can all agree Deadpool's (all versions of Deadpool) style of humor is not for everyone and can be an acquired taste. He tends to ride the line between being genuinely funny and being annoying (so much so that in movies, cartoons and games, it's up to the delivery of the actor to sell the material) and his humor also is often crass (including here), and again, that's not everyone's cup of tea. I've always said that it says a lot about someone's sense of humor which writer(s) on Deadpool they prefer.

Quote
You do know hes actually funny in the comics?At least if Fabian Nicieza is writing him.

Having read a large chunk of DP's comics, I think it really depends on the writer. I was never that impressed with Daniel Way's run (the post 2009 era in general, actually) and always thought the jokes felt forced. I am a fan of Fabian's writing on the character, though personally Simone was always my favorite.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on December 27, 2015, 12:58:35 AM
^So cute you think I care about your opinion. ;)
Because everyone here hangs on your every word.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 27, 2015, 03:56:06 AM
^So cute you think I care about your opinion. ;)
Because everyone here hangs on your every word.

That's how I work on my upper body parts!   :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 27, 2015, 06:21:34 AM
^You are so funny you could actually write for this movie.If you dont care why are you starting an argument over it?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on December 27, 2015, 02:28:28 PM
^So cute you think I care about your opinion. ;)
Because everyone here hangs on your every word.

That's how I work on my upper body parts!   :P

 :thumbup:
That is pretty funny!
Anyway, back on topic, I think this movie will actually be pretty decent, but I was a bit worried about the quality of the cgi for colossus.  It should look ok in the finished product, though. I'm also surprised to see how much footage from the test reel they've used.   I bet that test reel was not only proof of concept for the producers, but also partway through the movie.

So are there any theories on who the mystery dude that made dead pool is? Related to Stryker in any way?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 27, 2015, 03:13:23 PM
Considering Ajax is the villain of the movie,take a guess who hes working for?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 30, 2015, 08:04:57 AM
comicbook.com/2015/12/28/jeff-wadlows-x-force-movie-lineup-revealed/ (http://comicbook.com/2015/12/28/jeff-wadlows-x-force-movie-lineup-revealed/)
We have concept art for X-force movie.There are rumors Cable will debut in Deadpool 2 btw.
Its pretty classic lineup-Cable,Domino,Warpath,Cannonball and...Boom-Boom maybe?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on December 30, 2015, 01:24:32 PM
It's not Boom-Boom  :( it's Feral.  I wish it was Boom-Boom, she was one of my favorites.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 21, 2016, 06:47:17 AM
www.geek.com/news/exclusive-guardians-of-the-galaxy-2-will-have-one-of-marvels-weirdest-characters-1645069/ (http://www.geek.com/news/exclusive-guardians-of-the-galaxy-2-will-have-one-of-marvels-weirdest-characters-1645069/)
Ego the living planet in Guardians 2. :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 29, 2016, 07:32:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt6uagFjJsU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt6uagFjJsU)
Kinda the same things I said 2 years ago. XD
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on March 10, 2016, 05:41:04 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKrVegVI0Us

Finally!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 10, 2016, 05:55:01 PM
YES! YEEESSSS!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on March 10, 2016, 05:58:19 PM
YES! YEEESSSS!

I can see Tomato waiting for the action figure to come out
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 10, 2016, 06:43:51 PM
Well... maybe not. Don't get me wrong, I love how they're showcasing him, but that costume... it's meh. The eyes are cool and I like the cleaner look to it, but ASM2's was pretty much perfect.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on March 10, 2016, 10:35:15 PM
I am hoping my high expectations for this film aren't a prelude to a letdown. Odd characterizations and some other silliness aside, Marvel took on a conflict between some pretty powerful ideas with the Civil War comic. I am certainly not saying that the conflict would happen just like in the comics, but  I am saying that that conflict definitely would happen.

It would be a major task to give a coherent treatment of the issues at stake in a couple hours if one could have professors laying them out in the most articulate possible terms. My best guess is that the Civil War movie also plans to

And, the movie plans to do those things while leaving the MCU intact for the ongoing continuity.

Part of me thinks Marvel is really biting off more than I can reasonably expect any movie to chew. Yet, somehow, I am kind of believing they can do it. :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on March 11, 2016, 12:56:14 AM
I would like to see a big disaster at the end and the reminding heroes form the New Avengers while some go on their way and Marvel start to introduce a second wave of heroes......or at least a cameo from the Marvel Knights (netflix)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on March 11, 2016, 03:34:57 AM
Well, that looks great....but, while I'm really holding onto faith in Marvel movies, I am still worried about this whole thing.  I'm still really excited, but this whole plot could so easily go bad.  I just want my heroes to be friends.  As long as this journey ends with something good, I'll be happy, but I am concerned.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 18, 2016, 09:35:35 AM
https://youtu.be/PfBVIHgQbYk (https://youtu.be/PfBVIHgQbYk)
New trailer for X-men.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 09, 2016, 04:51:58 PM
The film was screened for the press and Marvel decided to drop the embargo almost immediately.  Reactions have been very ethusiastic, with many saying the film is what Batman v Superman should have been.

http://screenrant.com/captain-america-civil-war-reactions/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 09, 2016, 05:53:09 PM
I'm very encouraged and not very surprised by this. :D  My favorite comment has to be this:
"this movie plays like a repudiation of BATMAN V SUPERMAN. A devastating reply."
That's fantastic, and I imagine once again Marvel is going to show the world how to make a superhero movie. It's a crying shame that WB just refuses to learn from their example. At least someone is working to give the world a better class of hero.

I'm really excited because, as I said, I was a little concerned about this movie.  The fact that it seems to be tons of fun, in addition to a good story, that makes me really happy.  I'm hoping that this will be worthwhile when the dust settles. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 10, 2016, 05:26:58 AM
Word is now that they are dropping the full review embargo on the 13th, at the same time they are doing a major early screening.  This is nearly a month ahead of release, which is very unusual.  To say they are highly confident of the movie is putting it rather mildly.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 10, 2016, 01:35:03 PM
This is very encouraging.  Muzzling reviews is rarely a good sign, not that the Marvel Studio films have ever done that, though this will be early even for them.  Batman v Superman not having any reviews until a couple of days before release was an early warning bell.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 10, 2016, 04:18:38 PM
It's been stated by those who have seen that film that Spiderman is in about 30 minutes of it.  10 as Peter and 20 in costume.

Him and Black Panther are being heavily praised by those who have seen it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 10, 2016, 04:21:41 PM
I'm super excited about Black Panther.  I can't wait until we get a Panther solo film, too.   :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 13, 2016, 09:23:54 PM
Full reviews have started to appear.

http://screenrant.com/captain-america-civil-war-reviews-preview/

This one seems to say it very well.

Quote
The shaming of “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” will continue apace — or better still, be forgotten entirely — in the wake of “Captain America: Civil War,” a decisively superior hero-vs.-hero extravaganza that also ranks as the most mature and substantive picture to have yet emerged from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Very much an “Avengers” movie in scope and ambition if not title (the conspicuous absence of Thor and Hulk notwithstanding), this chronicle of an epic clash between two equally noble factions, led by Captain America and Iron Man, proves as remarkable for its dramatic coherence and thematic unity as for its dizzyingly inventive action sequences; viewers who have grown weary of seeing cities blow up ad nauseam will scarcely believe their luck at the relative restraint and ingenuity on display.

I note that all of them that I see has indicated that neither side is portrayed as being the good guys or the bad guys.  They both have good and bad points.

This aleviates the major concern of mine.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 13, 2016, 10:49:56 PM
Hey-hey!  That's very encouraging!  I'm getting more excited!  :D

I particularly enjoy the BvS bashing.  :lol:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on April 13, 2016, 11:54:00 PM
Full reviews have started to appear.

http://screenrant.com/captain-america-civil-war-reviews-preview/

This one seems to say it very well.

Quote
The shaming of “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” will continue apace — or better still, be forgotten entirely — in the wake of “Captain America: Civil War,” a decisively superior hero-vs.-hero extravaganza that also ranks as the most mature and substantive picture to have yet emerged from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Very much an “Avengers” movie in scope and ambition if not title (the conspicuous absence of Thor and Hulk notwithstanding), this chronicle of an epic clash between two equally noble factions, led by Captain America and Iron Man, proves as remarkable for its dramatic coherence and thematic unity as for its dizzyingly inventive action sequences; viewers who have grown weary of seeing cities blow up ad nauseam will scarcely believe their luck at the relative restraint and ingenuity on display.

I note that all of them that I see has indicated that neither side is portrayed as being the good guys or the bad guys.  They both have good and bad points.

This aleviates the major concern of mine.

So no Fuehrer Stark is what you're saying here?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 14, 2016, 02:51:00 AM
The reviews I've read so far are basically raves.  I couldn't be more excited for this to come out!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 14, 2016, 06:03:37 AM
http://deadline.com/2016/04/spider-man-homecoming-sony-cinemacon-presentation-1201736748/ (http://deadline.com/2016/04/spider-man-homecoming-sony-cinemacon-presentation-1201736748/)
Upcoming Spider-man movie is titled Homecoming.How meta.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 18, 2016, 06:19:50 AM
Seeing the track record so far; and given that they are getting an ongoing and have appeared in Avengers Assemble,could it be that Marvel is preping Thunderbolts for a movie?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on April 18, 2016, 01:51:45 PM
Seeing the track record so far; and given that they are getting an ongoing and have appeared in Avengers Assemble,could it be that Marvel is preping Thunderbolts for a movie?

If so, who would actually be in it? I'd love to see the classic line-up, but most of them haven't actually shown up in the movies yet. What's the point of them being Supervillains attempting to reform if we haven't actually seen them be Supervillains?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 18, 2016, 01:52:24 PM
Seeing the track record so far; and given that they are getting an ongoing and have appeared in Avengers Assemble,could it be that Marvel is preping Thunderbolts for a movie?

It could definitely be interesting, but given that most of the classic Thunderbolts characters have yet to appear as villains in the MCU, would they introduce all those characters at once, or sub in some of the villains already in play?  And which version of the Thunderbolts would we get?  The villains playing at being heroes, former villains seeking redemption, or a state-sanctioned program not unlike the Suicide Squad?  At various times, the Thunderbolts have been all of those things.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 18, 2016, 02:43:34 PM
If I had to guess it would probably be a "government sanctioned" team.Like the Dark Reign era Thunderbolts.Maybe the authorities decide to adopt a harsher approach after Civil War.IDK,but I know that whenever somebody got a major push,they showed up in a movie.Or a TV show.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 18, 2016, 02:53:07 PM
If I had to guess it would probably be a "government sanctioned" team.Like the Dark Reign era Thunderbolts.Maybe the authorities decide to adopt a harsher approach after Civil War.IDK,but I know that whenever somebody got a major push,they showed up in a movie.Or a TV show.

If that turned out to be the case, what characters are around for them to use?  I've always felt it a little weird we've never heard or seen anything about the Abomination, who is presumably sitting locked away somewhere.  What other MCU villains could be potential members?  I'm having trouble thinking of too many options right now. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JKCarrier on April 18, 2016, 03:26:14 PM
What other MCU villains could be potential members?  I'm having trouble thinking of too many options right now.

They could lift some from "Agents of SHIELD": Absorbing Man, Angar, Graviton, et. al.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 18, 2016, 03:33:11 PM
If that turned out to be the case, what characters are around for them to use?  I've always felt it a little weird we've never heard or seen anything about the Abomination, who is presumably sitting locked away somewhere.  What other MCU villains could be potential members?  I'm having trouble thinking of too many options right now. 

Actually, Abomination was discussed in one of the Marvel Shorts contained on the Thor DVD called "The Consultant". He's revealed to be in General Ross' custody.

I could see Baltroc, since he's relatively low level and everything. That said... I suspect the rolling out of the Thunderbolts isn't so much about a current team, as much as it is A. Marvel getting them out there before Suicide Squad comes out and they're accused of ripping off that team later down the line, and B. Because Baron Zemo is set up in Civil War.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Podmark on April 18, 2016, 04:38:29 PM

I suspect the rolling out of the Thunderbolts isn't so much about a current team, as much as it is A. Marvel getting them out there before Suicide Squad comes out and they're accused of ripping off that team later down the line, and B. Because Baron Zemo is set up in Civil War.

That could be it. It's also possible Marvel Studios has decided against a Thunderbolts film and cleared the team for use in Avengers Assemble.

That said I think Thunderbolts has to be on Marvel Studios' radar. It's a long running comic that could be successful as a film with the right direction (like Guardians). Considering all the iterations the comic has gone through it's a versatile property - it could be their answer to the Suicide Squad. It would be difficult to pull off the classic twist as there's currently no Masters of Evil and you need something like the missing heroes caused by Heroes Reborn to make that plot work. So I think something leaning towards the Osborn or Cage eras where villains were forced to work as heroes by the government would make the most sense (ie Suicide Squad). But knowing Marvel Studios it will probably be a hybrid of some kind.

As for existing MCU characters who could appear:
Hawkeye, Luke Cage, and Zemo have all lead the Thunderbolts in the comics.
Blizzard, Batroc, Nuke, Crossbones, Mister Hyde, Red Hulk, Elektra, and the Punisher were all members at one point.
Graviton was a notable adversary in the comics as well.

Other villains from the MCU that might make sense:
Abomination, Whiplash (is he still alive?), Absorbing Man

Then the next set of films could introduce some characters. Moonstone would be a good fit in Captain Marvel. For Black Panther, Klaw has a connection to Songbird (Angar from Agents of Shield also has a connection). Goliath (Atlas) or Eric O'Grady would be logical fits for Ant-Man and the Wasp. Beetle, Venom, Shocker, Boomerang, Speed Demon and Osborn could all appear in Spider-Man Homecoming, though I'm not clear if they can be used in other MCU movies. Genis-Vell could appear in Guardians Vol 2 or Infinity War. Bullseye could appear in the next Daredevil.

And they could easily introduce some of the members in a Thunderbolts movie itself. Suicide Squad is introducing most (technically all) of it's cast so it's possible. How much introduction does Fixer really need? ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 18, 2016, 05:15:04 PM
Not sure if AA has the clause of not using MCU characters.Ultron and all.
Maybe they could be somewhat like Liberators from Ultimates 2.Like a superteam assembled by other countries as a counter to Avengers.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 18, 2016, 06:07:35 PM
A stumbling block I see in regards to a lot of these characters--Marvel Studios Film and TV sections still don't play that nice with each other.  Characters, etc., have moved from film to tv, but I don't think anything has gone the other way yet.  Of all the villains named so far, only Abomination, Crossbones, Zemo and Batroc are alive and in the hands of the film division, and Crossbones and Zemo are both in Cap 3, so their fate is up in the air at the moment.

Now, as noted, the characters don't have to all be carry-overs.  New ones can be introduced in the film itself, and in other upcoming movies.  I do feel the property is too interesting to stay dormant at Marvel for long.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 19, 2016, 05:20:15 AM
And next year is the 20th anniversary of the team so it would be the perfect time...
A lot of guessing on my part,but Im sure they wouldnt revive the concept if they didnt have something planed. Sure,its not Inhumans level push,but its much more then last year,for example.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on April 24, 2016, 02:29:54 AM
After being delayed already, the Inhumans movie has officially been bumped from Marvel's release schedule, presumably to help make room for sequels to Doctor Strange, Black Panther and/or Spider-man.  Some are theorizing that the Inhumans movie will never happen at all now, a victim of interdepartmental wrangling between the film and TV divisions.

If that does end up being the case, I can't say that I find it too upsetting.  The Inhumans have never really taken off, and while the right film maker could maybe have done something interesting, I think there are other Marvel properties I'd rather see hit the big screen.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 24, 2016, 03:23:53 AM
Hmm...I don't have any strong feelings about that.  While I'd love to see the classic Inhuman royal family, and I think that could prove to be a really cool movie, there are other characters that I'd like to see more.  I'm probably most excited about seeing a Black Panther movie!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 24, 2016, 09:32:53 AM
What,despite all the shilling?
There is only one possible story to tell with them anyway.Unless Marvel gets back ALL their cosmic characters or something.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 24, 2016, 05:32:48 PM
The producers have spoken about their casting of the Ancient One, for which they have been heavily criticized and accused of whitewashing.  They said they were in a no-win situation.  If they has gone with making him Tibetan, China would have banned the film.  If they had made him Chinese instead, that would have offended an entirely different group of people.  So they had to offend someone basically.  And they probably have a good point.  China bans anything that even hints at Tibet being a thing and siding with them on that issue would have been bad too.  This is probably the best of they could have done.

http://screenrant.com/doctor-strange-ancient-one-whitewash-china/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 24, 2016, 05:40:40 PM
It okay if they offend someone,as long as its not somebody important? ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 24, 2016, 06:10:29 PM
It okay if they offend someone,as long as its not somebody important? ;)

Well, no, what they are saying is that it's not okay, but nomatter what they do, they were going to offend someone.  They probably went with the most financially viable option.  Americans have a habit of getting offended about stuff then shelling out billions for the thing they were offended about anyway.  Many of parts of the world are single-racial anyway, so they aren't as likely to care this change since diversity isn't even a thing with them.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 24, 2016, 06:20:21 PM
And China is the second largest movie market,and is quick to ban everything...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 24, 2016, 06:29:32 PM
Well yeah, that is why not offending China is high on their list.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on April 26, 2016, 08:06:55 PM
There's a fictional news channel on Youtube now featuring in-universe stuff leading up to Civil War.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtJkDqZzoOFYbqwOIFn2Lng

EDIT: Apparently they've been around for a while and have done other Marvel films, but the last two videos are Civil War specific.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 26, 2016, 08:26:21 PM
That's very interesting, Cat.  I suppose from that point of view, I'm sad they DIDN'T cast someone Tibetan (if such an actor could be found).  Of course, you're right in that doing so would be financial suicide for anyone hoping to sell a film in the world market, of which China is a huge slice.

Hmm, I'm going to have to watch these videos!  I see they've got interviews with "Scott Lang" and "Darren Cross!"  How neat!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 27, 2016, 02:12:19 AM
For the record, I'm happy to say those Ant-Man videos were included on the Ant-Man blu-ray, which is how I saw them. Haven't watched the others, I'll have to put them on some time.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 06, 2016, 08:02:39 AM
I know its 1-2 months old news,but Sony is developing a Venom movie?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 06, 2016, 02:29:19 PM
If Marvel is involved, that could be awesome.  In fact, I would LOVE to see an Agent Venom movie specifically.  If they're doing it on their own, history indicates trouble.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 06, 2016, 02:35:21 PM
Only info is that Dante Harper is writing the script.Does that mean anything to anyone?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 08, 2016, 03:54:03 PM
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/684467-sharon-stone-to-appear-in-a-marvel-movie (http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/684467-sharon-stone-to-appear-in-a-marvel-movie)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 16, 2016, 12:05:40 AM
Marvel Studios films have now made 10 billion dollars.

That's a lot of change.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on May 16, 2016, 02:23:16 AM
They deserve every penny as far as I'm concerned. I can't think of many other movies that make me laugh at completely unfunny parts just because I'm enjoying myself so much. And then they continuously find ways to top themselves. What a time to be alive, I'll keep throwing money at them as long as I can.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on May 16, 2016, 02:59:10 AM
Marvel Studios films have now made 10 billion dollars.

That's a lot of change.

The MCU is (and actually has been for awhile) the most financially successful movie franchise ever, which is pretty damn impressive.  I mean, James Bond beats them if you correct for inflation, but still....
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on July 23, 2016, 05:30:37 PM
Gladiator Hulk confirmed for Thor 3.  The armor is on display at Comic Con.

http://screenrant.com/thor-ragnarok-gladiator-hulk-armor-comic-con/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 23, 2016, 05:37:16 PM
Hmm...that is...interesting.  I'm not quite sure what to make of that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 25, 2016, 05:00:43 AM
There so many news,whos going to list them all?Im just skipping to reactions.
Im cool with Brie Larson as Captain Marvel.Black Panther seems to be a regular MCU movie about a hero fighting his evil counterpart.Killmonger played by Michael B Jordan.
Homecoming might be going overboard with 3 villains.And Kurt Russel is Ego the Living Planet.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on July 25, 2016, 01:32:52 PM
There so many news,whos going to list them all?Im just skipping to reactions.
Im cool with Brie Larson as Captain Marvel.Black Panther seems to be a regular MCU movie about a hero fighting his evil counterpart.Killmonger played by Michael B Jordan.
Homecoming might be going overboard with 3 villains.And Kurt Russel is Ego the Living Planet.

Can you elaborate on the Spider-man villains?  I only heard about Vulture?  Otherwise, I'm cool with the rest of the news.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 25, 2016, 01:41:59 PM
Toy solicitations confirmed Shocker and Tinkerer.How large are their roles,we dont know yet.
There was some more castings announced,but nothing to really comment.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on July 25, 2016, 04:25:20 PM
Toy solicitations confirmed Shocker and Tinkerer.How large are their roles,we dont know yet.
There was some more castings announced,but nothing to really comment.

To play Devil's Advocate, toy solicitations can be flat out BS.  I know they do get it right sometimes, but for every Lego Giant-man there's a lego Mandarin.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 25, 2016, 05:18:46 PM
Well,its possible anyway.And not the Mandarin thing again...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on July 25, 2016, 05:44:56 PM
Well,its possible anyway.And not the Mandarin thing again...

I just meant that Lego sets showed some very different villain set-pieces for Iron Man 3 than existed in the movie, in contrast to Civil War, which lego largely got correct.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 25, 2016, 06:07:49 PM
I got you.Just saying it could happen based on a previous case.Of Civil War.
And btw,they should really do something with the real Mandarin plot.If there were any plans to do something with that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on July 25, 2016, 06:18:49 PM
Well,its possible anyway.And not the Mandarin thing again...

I just meant that Lego sets showed some very different villain set-pieces for Iron Man 3 than existed in the movie, in contrast to Civil War, which lego largely got correct.

A lot of that comes from the merchandisers getting early copies of the storyline and concept art which can radically change during the film process. During Phase One and the early part of Phase Two they still were hammering out the "big plan" which usually left a lot of stuff vague and toy designers just ran with their own ideas of what they thought MIGHT happen. I highly doubt that the director Shane Black wanted anyone to know his "plot twist" so the toy folks just took what they had and figured that he would have some big event battle and ran with it. In fact I heard quite a few MCU fans admit that the LEGO toys probably had a better concept for the ending then the CGI fest of suits we ended up with so it all could be made pointless by the credits.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 17, 2016, 06:46:24 PM
Looks like Hulu ordered a Runaways series.Interesting.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 18, 2016, 06:24:08 PM
(https://scontent-vie1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13939543_10154400189732403_8424911635982168265_n.jpg?oh=031690fa9305302806a261ac145a92d9&oe=584A54BB)
First official poster for Homecoming.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 18, 2016, 06:52:50 PM
I'm curious about the Runaways show.  They're the kids of supervillains, but supervillains are still a pretty rare thing in the MCU, so I'll be interested to see how they play the setup and connections to the MCU at large.  I imagine a lot will have to change.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 19, 2016, 03:30:07 AM
In before fan rage concerning the recent Mary Jane announcement to say I'm actually super stoked about it an all ya'll haters gonna hate
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 19, 2016, 04:09:17 AM
In before fan rage concerning the recent Mary Jane announcement to say I'm actually super stoked about it an all ya'll haters gonna hate

Nope, I'm on board too.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 19, 2016, 04:11:26 AM
(http://s2.favim.com/orig/140627/ehh-girl-grunge-hipster-Favim.com-1869412.jpg)
Who cares at this point?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 19, 2016, 07:04:19 AM
In before fan rage concerning the recent Mary Jane announcement to say I'm actually super stoked about it an all ya'll haters gonna hate

(http://www.stumpyanker.com/emoticons/sleep1.gif) If the presumed controversy is about what I suspect it's about, count me among those who don't care one way or the other. I am not familiar with Zendaya's work, but my baseline for a live-action Mary Jane was Kirsten Dunst's portrayal, so it won't take much to do better, IMO.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on August 19, 2016, 10:13:40 AM
In before fan rage concerning the recent Mary Jane announcement to say I'm actually super stoked about it an all ya'll haters gonna hate

Nope, I'm on board too.

It's not that I or anyone else is technically "off board" but I think it's the acknowledgment of the problem is what we seek.  It's nothing against Zendeya and I'm sure her and Holland will be completely adorable kids on screen.  To that point very few batted an eyelash when she was announced.  Only now that she's filling the role of probably the most notable redhead in comics does this make news.  But there was a reason why Kirsten Dunst wore red in Raimi films.  It would be different if this was Betty Brant or even Felicia Hardy.  But like a Valkyrie before her or Johnny Storm or going back to Aquaman.  It isn't a racial problem because I  honest think people care more in those cases than a Deadshot or MCD's Kingpin or Jonn Jonzz.  In those cases those characters don't have specific characteristics of them that are essentials to the character.  It's just pretty wonky.  And as a minority myself I really don't feel it's necessary to shoehorn ethnicities on characters seemingly just for the sake of diversity.  I know I've said it before, but Marvel's big budget blockbusters STARTED with a ethnic character.  Their next series will have an black lead with a majority black cast.  Now the next movie they're making will feature similar.  This is on top of the Anthony Mackies, Hallie Barrys, Sam Jacksons they've already featured in starring roles in blockbusters.  I don't think people are saying "man I like Marvel but they need to appeal more to minorities by casting Zendeya."  I mean sure, I'm not gonna complain if they want to put more minority faces in movies and tv, that's reflective more of my life and real life in general.  But it's just an inescapable feeling that it's being done not to find an actress to play a role but an actress to appeal to an audience, particularly when it isn't really necessary.  And THAT'S the rub.

Maybe just me...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 19, 2016, 10:33:37 AM
I'm curious about the Runaways show.  They're the kids of supervillains, but supervillains are still a pretty rare thing in the MCU, so I'll be interested to see how they play the setup and connections to the MCU at large.  I imagine a lot will have to change.

Yeah,but their parents were original characters created for the series,so I dont see a problem with the lack of supervillains this time.And I imagine it will be contained in its own bubble like the Netflix shows.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 19, 2016, 01:32:05 PM
A couple points here

-First, you're basing a lot of your argument on the fact that this is a Marvel Movie. It's not. It's a Sony film with Marvel's involvement. On that front, across all the Spiderman films (Raimi and Webb) how many black characters do you remember? Because offhand, I can remember all of two: Robbie Robertson (who didn't do much compared to the comics) and Max Dillon (who got zero character development and was turned blue anyway). So while you can point to a lot of racial diversity in Marvel Studios films, Sony isn't really on the same page. They've lagged behind Marvel, DC, and Fox in terms of representation for over a decade.

-Second, the director of Homecoming has gone on record stating that he is very specifically trying to get more diversity into the cast because Peter Parker lives in Queens. It makes ZERO sense that a high school set in Queens would feature mostly white students, and that every single character highlighted would be white.

-Third, and most important... I feel like the casting is based more on the spirit of the character than on appearance. Durst may have been a picture perfect Mary Jane as far as appearance, but in terms of character, she was just AWFUL. In my mind, Mary Jane was always the spunky neighbor who knew exactly who she was and what she wanted. Just based on what little I know about Zendaya, she'll make a FAR better Mary Jane Watson than Durst ever did.

-Fourth, we don't know she won't have Mary Jane's iconic red hair. Yeah, it may not be "natural" but neither was Durst's hair. And it's not like it'd be that out of place either... I've worked with several WoC who dyed their hair various shades of red, it's not uncommon.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on August 19, 2016, 03:48:41 PM
What was the Mary Jane announcement?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 19, 2016, 07:17:38 PM
So, they aren't going to have Mary Jane in the new Spidey flick?  That's fine; they've already done her in a movie.  I would definitely prefer it if they didn't call the new character Mary Jane, though, if they don't want her in their movie.  :P

Seriously though, this is the same old thing, but, I'd say, it's actually more of an issue with MJ.  She's almost archetypal as the 'fiery redhead with a mind of her own.'  Her appearance, like every comic characters' appearance, is part of who she is, but it is arguably more of an integral element than most of those they've race-switched over the years.  This is the same conversation, though.  It is an issue, part of the disregard for source material that otherwise sends folks up the walls.  Is it enough to ruin a movie?  Of course not.  Can the actress still do a fine job?  Of course.  Is it just as good overall as a faithful adaptation of that character?  I'd say no.  It is hardly everything, but it is also not nothing.

It also just strikes me as lazy.  If you want diversity in your cast, why don't you actually create some diverse characters?  You don't want Spidey's love interest to be white?  Fine.  I think an interracial relationship would be a good thing, speaking about the medium at large.  So, make a new character.  Make your own character.  That's what you do when you want to innovate.  I'm reminded of a Jack Kirby quote on that subject...I wish I could remember how it went. 

Shogunn, good points, well said.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on August 19, 2016, 08:55:43 PM
Okay, first thing's first: Despite what you all may have heard, there has NOT been an official announcement that MJ is going to even be in the movie, much less so that she's going to be played by someone who ain't a red head. On top of that, the actress who which has been purported to be playing MJ is actually playing a new character named Michelle, so that's thrown right out the window. And last but not least, there has been an image of part of an official cast list, and while some of Peter's other girlfriends like Liz Allen and Betty are on it, MJ is nowhere to be seen. (Though Z(endeya) is; just as Michelle.) Read 'em and weep:

https://imgur.com/NMXDOdJ

So yeah, now you know. (And knowing's only half the battle!)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on August 19, 2016, 08:57:29 PM
It's not just it being a Marvel movie.  I specifically pointed out Blade and X-Men as franchises that didn't need to do what they're doing.  Benton is right. If you want a diverse cast, then just have more diverse characters.  Or even do it in a way it would seem less conspicuous.  Again, if you want a more diverse cast I'm all for it.  Like you said, it makes sense in 2017 Queens.

But this seems like that.

Again the character is known for having a particular look. Say what you will about Dunst and her acting ability but it isn't uncommon to see a white girl with red hair.  Now I've been around hundreds of black women in my life and having red hair is far from a natural occurrence.  So much to the extent it can look completely unnatural(ie giving Jamie Fox a combover???)  I mean they can go the Rihanna route but why would you feel the need to do that?

Like Benton said it seems lazy and just being extra when you don't even have to.  Why can't she me Mia Watson or Maria Watson or Malyia Watson?

Again, if you want a diverse cast, that's completely fine. Audiences will watch.  But this just seems like you're not only ignoring the source material but purposely changing it when it ain't really that necessary.  Again, from the perspective of a minority I would rather have our OWN characters than a changed character just to seemingly fit a demographic represtation.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 19, 2016, 09:00:20 PM
Shogunn, it's interesting to hear from a person who is part of a minority yet who has your views on this subject.  I especially like your last point.  I can see that.

Well, if, as Kk says, this is a none issue, great.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 20, 2016, 12:27:10 AM
For clarification, this is the article (http://www.thewrap.com/zendaya-spider-man-homecoming-role-reveal-mary-jane-watson/) that discussed her actually being Mary Jane Watson. The article brings up the cast list Kkhohoho mentioned, but according to them multiple sources involved in the process have confirmed that this was a subterfuge and that she is playing Mary Jane Watson. It's not OFFICIAL confirmation, sure, but the lack of more significant love interests in the cast list seems suspicious anyway. Plus, that cast list has some awful big gaps in it... even ignoring the fact that the numbers aren't sequential (it skips from 1 to 8) there are several additions to the cast we know about that are not on that list, and the fact that several cast members are listed only by initials means the list was made with leaks in mind.

As far as "oh, just create a new character" goes... yes, let's add yet another love interest to Peter Parker's growing gaggle of girlfriends, see how long that sticks. The reality is, only 3 love interests have had any real staying power in the Spider-Man books: Mary Jane, Gwen Stacy, and Black Cat (and even that last one is a stretch). Peter's been in dozens of other relationships, but they never last and very few people care about them at all. Mary Jane was his wife for over a decade, she's been in every cartoon and over half the movies that have come out since the 90s. It's her name joe schmoe on the street knows as Spider-Man's love interest, and creating a brand new one after we JUST had Gwen Stacy muddying the waters for people is just going to confuse the poor sheepy brains of the mass market.

The reality is, I don't care what a person's race is, so long as the character is done properly. It doesn't matter one single iota whether Mary Jane is Black, Asian, Latino, White, or Purple. I care a HELL of a lot more about getting her personality right, and that's something Durst NEVER EVER did for me. So yeah, casting an actress who clearly has chemistry with Tom Holland and seems to be a much better fit for the character? Cool, I'm down with it.

Me, I see this as no different as one of the 2000 Spider-Verse universes out there. Spiderman might be white in 616 and others, but there's several where he's black, where he's japanese, and even at least one where he's indian. And yet, in each of those world, most of the general attributes of the Peter Parker character are kept in place... So why can't the same be true of his supporting cast?

(Speaking of whom, even if the MJ thing isn't true, Ned Leads, Flash THompson, and Liz Allen are ALL non-white actors. MJ being black isn't that far from left field)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on August 20, 2016, 12:44:51 AM
I did see a rather good point that the racial makeup of New York has changed since Spider-Man debuted and it makes sense to update that to fit in with what the city actually looks like now.

Which is, I suppose, a rather decent point.  Spider-Man was supposed to be a believable character set in a realistic version of our world and it is odd in this day and age that nearly everyone he has regular contact with in New York is white.  I'm normally against arbitrary changes, but I see the point.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 20, 2016, 05:18:29 AM
@Tomato,I think the general audience isnt that stupid as you give them credit.If people can figure out this is the third Spiderman reboot in 10 years,they could figure out that Spiderman has a new love interest.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 20, 2016, 10:07:18 AM
I take your point, Spade, that the audience isn't going to be especially confused by Peter having a new girlfriend who isn't Mary Jane or Gwen. I am not sure that Tomato was saying that audience confusion was the issue, but I agree that they could deal with it.

However, I think that changing the girlfriend entirely would be seen as a much bigger departure from canon than just ethnic background. That is, I think that the people who are concerned with keeping the movies more or less in line with the comics would be even more upset if movie Peter's new love interest isn't even one of the known ones from comics. I mean, change MJ's ethnic background and she's still MJ and there really isn't any substantial change to the Spider-Man corner of the Marvel universe (Sony version). But, make it so that Peter's steady GF is now some unknown instead of MJ or Gwen, and that's a more substantial change.

Think of it this way, if a Spidey movie had Peter dating Elektra, comics fans would blow a gasket, a la, "What the...!??!? These clowns don't even know what character they're filming!" I think Spidey dating a new unknown would be seen as a lesser affront, but an error in that same direction, where the film isn't even paying attention to who is who in the Marvel dramatis personae.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 20, 2016, 12:55:19 PM
From what I've read, it sounds like Zendaya is playing MJ, but but not "Mary Jane."  Her credit listing as Michelle isn't wrong, just misleading.  If this is true, she's halfway between a new character and just race-swapping an existing one.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 20, 2016, 01:48:58 PM
I guess from my perspective I fail to see why this is always such a big deal. On the one hand, this has been going on forever, and we have discussed ad nauseum times where it's benefited the films (Idris Alba, Sam Jackson, etc). On the other, it is absolutely asenine for people to complain that "MJ isn't like that in the comics!" when I can point you to comics where MJ is a waterbuffalo, not to mention several realities where she's a brunette. They've said from the planning stages of the latest SM films that each set of films is its own universe, so why do different rules apply to film universes than they do to alternate universes in the comics?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 20, 2016, 02:35:00 PM
Yeah,we did have this talk way too many times,but that's kinda not the point now.Point is that the movie would probably function all the same no matter is it Mary Jane or Michelle.And yes,there are probably hundreds of reasons why they went with MJ,but "to avoid confusing the audience" is probably the weakest of them all.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 20, 2016, 05:33:16 PM
The 'it's the same character' argument is flawed in my estimation.  As soon as you change a core aspect of a character, they cease to BE that character, and race is a pretty central aspect of someone's identity, whether it's obvious or not.  Of course, the whole 'appearance is character' element of comics also comes into play here.  Nonetheless, 'Mato's argument about alternate realities and different versions of the characters doesn't work for me, as you still recognize that this is not, say, Nick Fury, this is ULTIMATE Nick Fury.  This isn't Superman, it's ANTI-MATTER Superman.  They are different characters, even if they share the same name.  That's sort of the entire point.  Sometimes the differences are subtle, sometimes they are major, but they add up to a new character.  It's in the basic foundation of modern comics, with the reinvention of the Golden Age in DC.  Those were all NEW characters, even when they had many of the same qualities as their predecessors. 

I don't think that anyone is saying that this is "such a big deal," but it does matter, at least a little.  As I said, it is hardly everything, but neither is it nothing.  The way I look at it, once again, as I've said before, is that this is a point against an adaptation.  It is hardly a major strike, and it can certainly be overcome, sometimes simply by the amazing job the actor/actress does (Idris Elba, etc).  Still, it is a little mark against the faithfulness and thereby effectiveness of an adaptation, akin to changing any part of a character that isn't necessary for the translation.   

The girl, if she is playing "Mary Jane" won't actually be playing the character herself.  She'll be playing a different version of her.  That's fine, but that isn't an actual adaptation of that character.  It isn't the same.  If she's playing "MJ" but NOT "Mary Jane," I can't imagine the movie will make enough of the distinction for it to amount to anything.  If Mary Jane is so important to the Spider-Man mythos that you can't possibly replace her with a new character, then don't.  Put that character on screen.  That argument falls apart as soon as you put a DIFFERENT character, even if they share the same name and many qualities, on screen. 

I've said about all I care to about this subject.  It doesn't matter all that much to me.  I just wish that folks would take a more innovative approach to adding diversity to these casts.  Making The Falcon a major part of the Avengers is a much better solution than, say, suddenly making the Hulk black, Asian, or what have you. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on August 20, 2016, 06:01:55 PM
Actually, the comic book Hulk is Asian, although in his case it's a previously established character becoming the Hulk.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 20, 2016, 06:13:48 PM
You know what I mean.  :P 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 20, 2016, 06:29:03 PM
Well,the same things could be said about the comics.Surprise,its the same company,so same handling.
But like I said,the story can probably work no matter the name.And no,I dont buy "fans would complain about the new girlfriend" theory either.Its a third take,you might as well do something new and just your own.And anyhow,fans complain,but still watch movies.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 20, 2016, 08:12:01 PM
Here's where I guess my perspective differs from ya'lls though. For you, you're seeing yet another character you love changed by the Hollywood elites. Me though? I see the excitement from all my black friends and coworkers, who admittedly aren't that into comics, about Zendaya being cast as Mary Jane. I see tweets from Mica Burton, daughter of Levar Burton and member of an internet gaming group I admire, excited at the prospect of getting to cosplay as movie Mary Jane, without having to be a "black version" of the character. So if I seem dismissive about the notion of Hollywood making changes to characters to satisfy a quota, it's only because I see the impact that it has for real people. It's not as ideal as actually making characters who were always black from the start, but it's still better than looking at 5 spider man films and seeing a grand total of two significant black roles because there's 200 white characters we have to focus on first.

That having been said, I take umbridge with the entire notion of movies being perfect adaptions of the comics anyway. As I have pointed out ad nauseum, Kirsten Dunst was NOT an adaption of the Mary Jane Watson of the comics on any level except her appearance. Neither was Emma Stone playing anything even close to a faithful adaption of the 616 Gwen Stacy... If anything, I'd say she was closer to Ultimate Mary Jane than any version of Gwen Stacy. And frankly, those films were all the better for it.

Adaption is about more than just translating a story from the comics and making it work in a film script. In the case of comic book adaptations in particular, it's also about taking stories written in the 1960s and adapting them to be palatable for a modern audience. It's why Iron Man's origin isn't set in Vietnam, or why Hulk wasn't a byproduct of an Atomic Gamma Bomb. These things made sense in the era during which they were written, but that is no longer the case.

Likewise, if you're adapting Spider-Man to be a high school student in 2016, and setting his high school in Queens, surrounding him with all white people is as outdated as having all of Iron Man's enemies being dirty Commies.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 20, 2016, 10:44:42 PM
Here's where I guess my perspective differs from ya'lls though. For you, you're seeing yet another character you love changed by the Hollywood elites. Me though? I see the excitement from all my black friends and coworkers, who admittedly aren't that into comics, about Zendaya being cast as Mary Jane. I see tweets from Mica Burton, daughter of Levar Burton and member of an internet gaming group I admire, excited at the prospect of getting to cosplay as movie Mary Jane, without having to be a "black version" of the character. So if I seem dismissive about the notion of Hollywood making changes to characters to satisfy a quota, it's only because I see the impact that it has for real people. It's not as ideal as actually making characters who were always black from the start, but it's still better than looking at 5 spider man films and seeing a grand total of two significant black roles because there's 200 white characters we have to focus on first.

That having been said, I take umbridge with the entire notion of movies being perfect adaptions of the comics anyway. As I have pointed out ad nauseum, Kirsten Dunst was NOT an adaption of the Mary Jane Watson of the comics on any level except her appearance. Neither was Emma Watson playing anything even close to a faithful adaption of the 616 Gwen Stacy... If anything, I'd say she was closer to Ultimate Mary Jane than any version of Gwen Stacy. And frankly, those films were all the better for it.

Adaption is about more than just translating a story from the comics and making it work in a film script. In the case of comic book adaptations in particular, it's also about taking stories written in the 1960s and adapting them to be palatable for a modern audience. It's why Iron Man's origin isn't set in Vietnam, or why Hulk wasn't a byproduct of an Atomic Gamma Bomb. These things made sense in the era during which they were written, but that is no longer the case.

Likewise, if you're adapting Spider-Man to be a high school student in 2016, and setting his high school in Queens, surrounding him with all white people is as outdated as having all of Iron Man's enemies being dirty Commies.

Hear, hear.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 21, 2016, 05:37:42 AM
Yeah,but setting Tonys origin in Afganistan was also a product of its time,and it will probably be just as outdated in 20-30 years as Vietnam seems now.
Another thing,they are adapting characters themselves as story engines,not STORYLINES from the comic directly(at least in this case).You cant really point a finger and say,this was based on Clone Saga,or Gauntlet,or  Spider Island or XY.Its a Spiderman movie,work from there.
And a "Russian scientist who lost everything when Soviet Union fell apart" is really just an update on the dirty commie stereotype,btw.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 21, 2016, 03:39:08 PM
I don't disagree with you on most of that, but you're actually helping to underline my point: These aren't SUPPOSED to be 1:1 adaptations. Complaining that they're straying from the source material when they're creating their own stories and their own character arcs is like ignoring that the BBC Sherlock series is set in the 21st century but then complaining that Moriarty isn't a schoolteacher. Again, these can and should be looked at as no different than yet another Marvel Alternate Reality.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 21, 2016, 03:49:53 PM
I don't disagree with you on most of that, but you're actually helping to underline my point: These aren't SUPPOSED to be 1:1 adaptations. Complaining that they're straying from the source material when they're creating their own stories and their own character arcs is like ignoring that the BBC Sherlock series is set in the 21st century but then complaining that Moriarty isn't a schoolteacher. Again, these can and should be looked at as no different than yet another Marvel Alternate Reality.

I wasn't actually against you;Im pretty neutral towards the whole thing(I got used to it at this point).Just saying that they could have the same results without even mentioning MJ.(And btw,we all know 1984 series is the only Sherlock adaptation that counts.)

On the other hand;i think fans care more a good Spiderman movie that respects the source material,then about seeing a realistic portrayal of Queens.I mean,is that so important?Is it going to help anyone in any way?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 21, 2016, 06:51:08 PM
On the other hand;i think fans care more a good Spiderman movie that respects the source material,then about seeing a realistic portrayal of Queens.I mean,is that so important?Is it going to help anyone in any way?

Here's where I guess my perspective differs from ya'lls though. For you, you're seeing yet another character you love changed by the Hollywood elites. Me though? I see the excitement from all my black friends and coworkers, who admittedly aren't that into comics, about Zendaya being cast as Mary Jane. I see tweets from Mica Burton, daughter of Levar Burton and member of an internet gaming group I admire, excited at the prospect of getting to cosplay as movie Mary Jane, without having to be a "black version" of the character. So if I seem dismissive about the notion of Hollywood making changes to characters to satisfy a quota, it's only because I see the impact that it has for real people. It's not as ideal as actually making characters who were always black from the start, but it's still better than looking at 5 spider man films and seeing a grand total of two significant black roles because there's 200 white characters we have to focus on first.

Yes.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 21, 2016, 07:08:21 PM
So people can now cosplay characters they cosplayed anyway?OMG,thats almost like they found a cure for cancer.

Its a Spiderman movie.The world will continue to turn just the same after it.Either way,its not important.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on August 21, 2016, 10:45:04 PM
So people can now cosplay characters they cosplayed anyway?OMG,thats almost like they found a cure for cancer.

I think you're missing the point on that one, Spade.

Clearly the decision is making some people very happy and excited, not necessarily just for Cosplaying. It's getting many new people into our medium; the medium that we love so much. They are feeling more welcomed to share our passion and feel comfortable doing so by finding a hero that they can relate to. They can see themselves more clearly in these new versions of characters.

That was Tomato's answer to your question.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 22, 2016, 05:21:45 AM
You meant a supporting character?Not like its a Mary Jane movie.Like I was saying,its not a major breakthru in anything,its just a movie.Probably on the same formula like every other MCU movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 22, 2016, 08:42:34 AM
But, spydermann93 didn't claim it was a major breakthrough. The notion that people are more interested because the backdrop for the character is something familiar was (roughly) the point. Something doesn't have to turn the world upside down to be worthwhile. And, at least to my recollection, Spider-Man's social life is a pretty big part of the storylines in the comics. So, it may not be a Mary Jane movie, but MJ is a prominent role in a Spider-Man movie.

BTW, from a purely rhetorical standpoint, your earlier post kind of left a slow meatball hanging over the plate. "Is it going to help anyone in any way?" That question sets an easy standard to satisfy, as Tomato pointed out. If you had asked something like, "Is the benefit of this change greater than the cost of abandoning this aspect of the source material? Should filmmakers feel free to rewrite any aspect of an well-known character to achieve a social goal?" Then at least someone who disagrees has to do some thinking in order to address your point.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 22, 2016, 09:37:29 AM
Tomato didnt point anything there.People are excited about it,but its not gonna pay their bills or anything like that.A change(or a lack of it) isnt helping or harming anyone.Its just a casting call and nothing more.And seeing this isnt the first or last similar change-who cares?Were people excited just the same 5-6 years ago?Will they be just as excited in 5-6 years from now on?Did the world started spinning in opposite direction after any of previous changes?No.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 22, 2016, 01:36:44 PM
Tomato didnt point anything there.People are excited about it,but its not gonna pay their bills or anything like that.A change(or a lack of it) isnt helping or harming anyone.Its just a casting call and nothing more.And seeing this isnt the first or last similar change-who cares?Were people excited just the same 5-6 years ago?Will they be just as excited in 5-6 years from now on?Did the world started spinning in opposite direction after any of previous changes?No.

You're using a strangely reductive version of "help" here. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on August 22, 2016, 03:56:34 PM
Tomato didnt point anything there.People are excited about it,but its not gonna pay their bills or anything like that.A change(or a lack of it) isnt helping or harming anyone.Its just a casting call and nothing more.And seeing this isnt the first or last similar change-who cares?Were people excited just the same 5-6 years ago?Will they be just as excited in 5-6 years from now on?Did the world started spinning in opposite direction after any of previous changes?No.

You're right. The casting choice won't "pay bills their bills or anything like that." But that's not the point. This is a thread talking about Marvel's movies. People are sharing their thoughts and opinions on a subject. In this case, it's a casting decision. Sure, it's not a new, alternative, energy source or a way to rid somebody of dementia, but it is something that our FR friends want to discuss and talk about. That's kind of what this forum was built for. We talk about comics, FF, and movies here, Spade. Nothing we review or complain about matters in the way you're saying this casting decision doesn't, so I don't know why you're trying to use that angle to try and play this out as nothing. This is a place to discuss with fellow comic fans about what's happening in our medium. Some people like the change. Some people don't. You're neutral and that's fine. More power to you. Just don't downplay somebody else's opinion by acting like their thoughts don't matter because of a strange benchmark that doesn't really apply to these kinds of threads.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 22, 2016, 06:46:58 PM
Guys, I really think it's time to stop feeding the troll. If Spade is determined to believe that people being excited about the change is merely an insignificant detail not worth discussing, than he is entitled to that opinion. For that matter, we shouldn't even be discussing the SPider-Man films at all. There've been what, 5 of them already? Having one more isn't going to significantly change anyone's life 6 years down the road, so who really cares.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on August 23, 2016, 12:08:48 AM
Whoa hold the gosh damn phone!

This isn't an MCU movie? What's going to stop Sony from ruining it this time? I don't like this at all. Just give up on your dreams Sony, nobody believes in you.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 23, 2016, 04:53:56 AM
Guys, I really think it's time to stop feeding the troll. If Spade is determined to believe that people being excited about the change is merely an insignificant detail not worth discussing, than he is entitled to that opinion. For that matter, we shouldn't even be discussing the SPider-Man films at all. There've been what, 5 of them already? Having one more isn't going to significantly change anyone's life 6 years down the road, so who really cares.
Nice strawman tactic there.Then again,you made it pretty clear your just here to argue.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on August 23, 2016, 05:28:55 AM

Nice strawman tactic there.Then again,you made it pretty clear your just here to argue.
:doh:
I'm not sure about your assessment here. I love chatting with Tomato and he's got a lot of insightful things to say, artwork to share and he's constantly growing and pursuing interesting new things that he shares with the community. Meanwhile, I've found that the Comics and Movies forums just aren't that much fun to be around lately.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 23, 2016, 06:21:07 AM
The part where he is super excited that haters gonna hate?The fact that hes always the one who starts these funting arguments and then derails them into real world situations like the demographic of Queens?And paint anyone who doesnt share his oppinion as trolls?Insults people then howls at mods that hes the injured party?
And your not so vague with your comments as you like to think,btw.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 23, 2016, 07:15:06 AM
Folks, let's take this down half a notch. It's fine to discuss the impact various filmmaking decisions has on the comic characters the films are portraying and to disagree about those decisions and their impacts. We start to veer off course when we focus on other commenters and not on the content of their comments.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on August 24, 2016, 04:51:09 AM
Anyone watched that new AMC show "Geeking Out" with Kevin Smith and Greg Grunberg?  They had Jepp Loeb on the show for an interviewing and he was talking about Daredevil and changes from the comic and TV show.  He said the important part is to get the characters right.  Matt has to be Matt, Karen has to be Karen and Foggy has to be Foggy he said.  As long as you have those elements audiences will go along with certain changes. 

I'm paraphrasing but I think that's critical in any of these interpretations.  This is why so many rejected X-Men 3's Jean Grey and Dark Phoenix being a split personality.  Why Batman Begins and the Dark Knight worked well, kept the character consistent.  Anytime you change a character ANY WAY, whether it's race or motivation or even costume, it will cause a stir with fans.  Especially the nerd community.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 24, 2016, 12:25:27 PM
Anyone watched that new AMC show "Geeking Out" with Kevin Smith and Greg Grunberg?  They had Jepp Loeb on the show for an interviewing and he was talking about Daredevil and changes from the comic and TV show.  He said the important part is to get the characters right.  Matt has to be Matt, Karen has to be Karen and Foggy has to be Foggy he said.  As long as you have those elements audiences will go along with certain changes. 

I'm paraphrasing but I think that's critical in any of these interpretations.  This is why so many rejected X-Men 3's Jean Grey and Dark Phoenix being a split personality.  Why Batman Begins and the Dark Knight worked well, kept the character consistent.  Anytime you change a character ANY WAY, whether it's race or motivation or even costume, it will cause a stir with fans.  Especially the nerd community.

Yeah, I'm gonna say that's mostly BS.  Foggy and Karen are definitely not the same as their comic book counterparts.  Batman Begins and the Dark Knight are pretty terrible examples of being faithful to the comics as well.  That's not to say they're bad, and you could make the argument that they've kept the heart of the characters from the comics (which X-men 3 did not, and I would argue most of the MCU adaptations have).  To tie this back in, if the heart of MJ's character is that she's a redhead, if a character's defining trait is easily found or removed by hair dye, then that is a terrible character. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 24, 2016, 01:27:28 PM
 :blink: ... Like... I'm sorry, but on no level whatsoever does Batman Begins or The Dark Knight adapt anything CLOSE to the comic counterparts. I love the films, but you cannot bash Mary Jane Watson's casting in the same breath as claiming that Heath Ledger's joker, as amazing as that performance was, looks exactly like the Joker from the comics. Those films changed SO MUCH of the comic lore to fit Nolan's vision from the universe, which btw DID and DOES have people up in arms much more than MJ ever will, that I'd argue they didn't even keep the spirit of several characters in that film.

Heck, if anything, the Nolan films actually disprove your argument... Nolan outright blew off the comic lore most of the time for the sake of his vision, and the films are still critically and financially successful outings.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on August 25, 2016, 03:32:49 AM
Relax guys, I did not say the quote nor am I saying those films are exact adoptions of the source material.  Its not about Batman Beigins or the Dark Knight.  What Loeb is saying is Bruce Wayne is Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins or Year One. Or in comic or film or animated.  Of course there are differences outside of that but what he saying is as long as the characters are consistent then that's what's most important. Whether you agree or disagree with this instance or not is your opinion.  But Bruce Wayne is still the rich guy that saw his parents killed and dresses in a Batman costume.  In his example Matt Murdock is still a blind lawyer that goes and fight crime.  And here, Peter Parker is still the kid that gets bit by a spider and gets super powers. 

What he saying as if Nolan made some random rookie cop the new Robin..........

So if you are saying such changes in characters has people up in arms then that's what I'm saying.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 29, 2016, 11:29:37 AM
http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/136157-watch-what-thor-was-doing-during-captain-america-civil-war.html (http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/136157-watch-what-thor-was-doing-during-captain-america-civil-war.html)
Now we know what thor was doing during Civil War.
-Is purple
-Has a magic glove
-Doesnt like standing up
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on August 29, 2016, 04:04:41 PM
-Is purple
-Has a magic glove
-Doesnt like standing up
Donny Osmond (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22donny+osmond%22+%22captain+purple%22&tbm=isch)?

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 29, 2016, 04:12:41 PM
And thats why Thor isnt worlds greatest detective...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on August 29, 2016, 10:38:59 PM
Okay, that was worth watching.  The fact that they don't take themselves too serious is probably part of the reason they keep succeeding.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on August 29, 2016, 10:56:40 PM
So much of that was entertaining.  Thor, slightly pathetically waiting for a call from either Tony or Steve, Daryl low-key hating him the entire time, Mjolnir's bed--all nicely done.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 31, 2016, 03:48:40 PM
http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/136169-marvel-and-abc-reportedly-working-on-new-warriors-comedy-series.html (http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/136169-marvel-and-abc-reportedly-working-on-new-warriors-comedy-series.html)
New Warriors might happen on ABC.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on August 31, 2016, 04:02:12 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/m/caf1c541-7f2a-3e9e-913e-355634197aba/ss_fan-theory-about-stan-lee-as.html

Makes sense to me. After all, we know what position Jack Kirby holds in the Marvel Universe...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on August 31, 2016, 11:25:13 PM
The Team Thor thing was hilarious.  Cat is right, there's definitely an element of fun evident in this that is part of Marvel's continued success.  Ha, it is just so great that these folks seem to really be invested in this world and these characters.  They're clearly having a good time, and that is paying off.

"Send a raven."   :lol:

DG, man, if that turned out to be true, it would be beyond amazing.  That would make my decade.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on October 26, 2016, 02:10:18 PM
So I just left the theater for Doctor Strange. I think Marvel has another hit on their hands. The FX in this movie are just off the charts. The story is what youd expect from Marvel, full of action, drama, and of course it's funny.
There were quite a lot of references to the source material, too.  :thumbup:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Talavar on October 26, 2016, 04:36:12 PM
Glad to hear you enjoyed it!  It's currently sitting at 98% on Rotten Tomatoes, so it is looking like Marvel has done it again.  Now if I only I could overcome my jealousy that you can already have seen this when it doesn't come out in North America for 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on October 26, 2016, 06:01:21 PM
Yeah Korea's pretty lucky for getting movies early.
Ill probably watch it in theaters again.  It was that good. Need to brush up on my objects/relics of power before i watch it again though. I did identify quite a few of them, but im sure there are more easter eggs i missed.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on October 28, 2016, 02:34:05 AM
How were the villains in this movie?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on October 28, 2016, 03:28:15 AM
Re:villains (plot point spoiler free, names only)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on November 03, 2016, 05:51:26 PM
http://itcamefromdarkmoor.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/bbc-online-posts-new-captain-britain-tv.html?m=1 (http://itcamefromdarkmoor.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/bbc-online-posts-new-captain-britain-tv.html?m=1)
Here is an update on that rumored Captain Britain project.Rumored is the key word.
Another rumor is that Deaths Head might show up in GotG2.That would be nice,yes?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on November 04, 2016, 01:12:49 PM
So I was originally gonna watch Strange today, but my friends dragged me to a late showing last night. Really good film, probably the most visually impressive film Marvel's done, by far.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: cmdrkoenig67 on November 11, 2016, 01:00:57 PM
I'm excited to see Dr Strange soon.  I just bought Capt America: Civil War and really enjoyed it.  I also purchased Ant-Man (which I had already rented) and loved it just as much in this second viewing.  I do wish they had Dr Pym's daughter named Janet and her mom named Maria (Pym's 1st wife in comics).

Dana
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on November 11, 2016, 04:57:22 PM
Except that canonically, Hope IS Hank and Janet's daughter in the comics... albeit in an alternate future timeline. Having Janet be Hank's daughter and not his wife would have upset a lot of fans, and it'd be a really bad idea because now you'd now have people who had only seen the movies go see the HankXJanet in the comics and think something entirely different was going on. That would not have been smart, on any level.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: cmdrkoenig67 on November 14, 2016, 06:13:08 PM
I didn't know that, Tomato.  That makes much more sense to me..lol.  Thanks for the info.

Dana
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on November 16, 2016, 06:58:35 AM
Doctor Strange was better then I expected.Its still a pretty by-the-numbers origin story thou.
Mordos arc went pretty well,and sets him up as an interesting villain in the sequels.And they kinda wasted Scott Adkins here,I have to say.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 12, 2017, 01:10:13 AM
Pinker Dinklage is reportedly up for a role in Avengers Infinity War.  (http://ca.ign.com/articles/2017/01/12/game-of-thrones-peter-dinklage-up-for-role-in-avengers-infinity-war)
As soon as I saw this I immediately thought of Pip the Troll. Which, if played by Tyrion Lanister, would probably be the only time I actually liked Pip. Others have suggested the Watcher. I could totally see him as the Watcher, but hopefully he do a better job as him than he did in his role in the video game Destiny. "That wizard came from the moon."
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 12, 2017, 06:04:24 AM
Elf with a gun? :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 12, 2017, 02:52:50 PM
That'd be one way to go.

Actually, I hadn't thought of this last night (I was kinda tired at the time, so maybe that's why) but come to think of it, Fox probably has the rights to the Watcher since he originated in Fantastic Four and tended to interact with them a lot.

[Edit: D'oh, I said Sony when I meant Fox. And that's not even the first time I made that mistake today while talking to someone.]
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 12, 2017, 05:25:33 PM
Could be, SS.  He's certainly strongly associated with them, and that deal ended up including a ton of characters.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 12, 2017, 05:37:01 PM
But apparently,they trade characters sometimes.Thats how Mavel got Ego for GotG 2.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on January 12, 2017, 08:16:56 PM
Pinker Dinklage is reportedly up for a role in Avengers Infinity War.  (http://ca.ign.com/articles/2017/01/12/game-of-thrones-peter-dinklage-up-for-role-in-avengers-infinity-war)
As soon as I saw this I immediately thought of Pip the Troll. Which, if played by Tyrion Lanister, would probably be the only time I actually liked Pip. Others have suggested the Watcher. I could totally see him as the Watcher, but hopefully he do a better job as him than he did in his role in the video game Destiny. "That wizard came from the moon."

Maaaan, Stan Lee is the Watcher.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 12, 2017, 09:28:59 PM
I've heard that, and if they went that route, I'd be totally onboard.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 20, 2017, 06:14:49 PM
Photos have emerged of Peter Dinklage getting his hair dyed a fiery red, lending credence to the theory that he's playing Pip the Troll.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on February 07, 2017, 01:24:40 AM
 Marvel Studios boss Kevin Feige is saying that Thanos will be the main character in Avengers: Infinity War.  (http://www.gamespot.com/articles/marvels-avengers-infinity-war-will-have-a-surprisi/1100-6447588/) "That's a bit of a departure from what we've done before."

I really like the sounds of it. After several years and 3 movies of Thanos sitting on a throne in a mere cameo, they have to really deliver the goods and this sounds like a way to go. It also sounds like the potential to replicate Thanos morbid fixation with Death from the comics and fix the main recurring criticism of the MCU movies, that most of the villains aren't fleshed out or interesting.

 On a slightly related note, here's the Guardians of the Galaxy superbowl ad (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaLNiC-bKHQ)

MANTIS!!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on February 07, 2017, 02:36:32 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on February 07, 2017, 02:45:20 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 22, 2017, 05:54:09 PM
Still a bit of a rumor really,but the word from Fox is that Alpha Flight and Exiles are being considered.After Deadpool,Gambit and X-force cycles.
I kinda thought Marvel still owns the right to AF.They are an X-men spinoff,but not a lot of mutants there IIRC.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on March 22, 2017, 11:21:32 PM
Still a bit of a rumor really,but the word from Fox is that Alpha Flight and Exiles are being considered.After Deadpool,Gambit and X-force cycles.
I kinda thought Marvel still owns the right to AF.They are an X-men spinoff,but not a lot of mutants there IIRC.

That would be very interesting. Hmm...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 23, 2017, 06:25:30 PM
I hate to complain about representation,but can we get Excalibur?Or something?Anything?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on March 24, 2017, 03:31:13 AM
I hate to complain about representation,but can we get Excalibur?Or something?Anything?

Not unless you dirty red coats are willing to admit you lost the War of 1812. We're still a bit sore over the whole White House burning thing you know.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 24, 2017, 04:34:27 AM
Now,lets not go into who lost which war.Or who showed up late for every war.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 24, 2017, 01:02:38 PM
I mean... weren't there talks of a BBC produced Captain Britain show going around for a bit? What happened to that?

But yeah, I think the big problem with Excalibur right now is that Marvel is trying to keep up with not only the growing number of sequels, but also trying to squeeze in new films like Black Panther and Captain Marvel, which have a more diverse selection of lead actors. Having yet another team film show up with a white male lead (much less another Captain) might be problematic.

Also, Excalibur itself might be a problem due to rights issues. That's a book that's typically made up of at least half X-men characters, so is it straight up included in the X-men rights (if so, good luck getting it out of Fox) or is it a Marvel property but they just can't use X-men in it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 24, 2017, 02:00:13 PM
Last I heard(sometime last year),it still wasn't even pitched to Marvel.So the lack of news leads me to believe its not happening.
Actually,I was talking about Fox possibly doing Excalibur,since I assumed they own the rights to it,like with Alpha Flight.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 25, 2017, 12:02:42 AM
They might well have full rights (I did a bit of googling after posting and that does SEEM to be the case) but even then, it's Fox. Y'know, the same movie company that hasn't even made a good Fantastic Four movie, and whose X-men films only seem to have a 50% success rate? Even if by some miracle they bothered with Excalibur(and again, this is the same company that had to be bullied into Deadpool, who has a much more vocal fanbase than Excalibur), would you really want to see the mangled mess that they put out?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on March 25, 2017, 02:07:39 AM
Now,lets not go into who lost which war.Or who showed up late for every war.

I'll have you know, America is never late. We arrive exactly when we mean to. Gandalf says so.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 25, 2017, 06:13:13 AM
@Tomato That was just wild guessing on my part,I really doubt Excalibur will happen.Best case scenario,AF is 8-10 years away.
On the company to company basis,I think Marvel would have handled F4 better,but I also doubt they would ever okayed Deadpool or Logan.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 23, 2017, 12:50:22 PM
I think they would have Oked Deadpool (Marvel has pushed Deadpool in extended media for a while. XMLII, Marvel Ultimate Alliance, Hulk Vs Wolverine, the Deadpool game...) but I think it would have been a very different film than we got. I highly doubt Disney would have allowed the raunchy, hard R rated film that went out of its way to be snarky about the genre that made Marvel Studios billions of dollars. That said, it WOULD have had a better budget (though, I've always been a proponent of restrictions like budgets can lead to a better product).

On an unrelated note, I went out and finally bought Guardians of the Galaxy in preparation for the sequel (don't get me wrong, it's a good film, but unlike say, Ant-Man, where I had an invested interest in the character, I don't care AT ALL about the Guardians outside of the MCU). I've been putzing my way through the special features, and I find it interesting that the one thing brought up constantly by James Gunn, the actors, and the production staff isn't the humor, the story, or much about the CGI... the biggest thing they were thinking about was color. James Gunn's big push for Guardians of the Galaxy was to bring color back to space operas, and a LOT of care was taken to find just the right shades of green for Gamora, of pink for one of the major alien races, the colors for Drax... even the dreary, desolated planet the film opens on is balanced by a vibrant skyline. It's one of those things that sounds bizarre to talk about... until you look at the other side of the aisle and see the utter failure of color usage.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 25, 2017, 06:02:50 PM
Hmm, that's fascinating about GoG, 'Mato.  That makes perfect sense, and the result is quite a brilliant job on their part.  It looks like it may have had the intended effect too, judging by the coming attractions.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on May 02, 2017, 11:30:35 AM
Just left the theater for Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.
 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Just a fantastic movie, and so many great references for comic fans. Ill be seeing it again, for sure!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 05, 2017, 07:12:46 PM
DM is right.  Here's my initial impression:

To take a break from the doom and gloom that is becoming the standard in our world, we went to see Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 yesterday.  It was amazing.  Go see it immediately, especially if your spirits could use a lift.

It's hilariously, uproariously funny, and it also manages to have a solid emotional core.  The movie blends absurdity into its dramatic moments which makes them both ridiculous and yet touching at the same time.  That's an impressive balancing act.

It is also a spectacle of the highest order.  It is just a BEAUTIFUL film, full of riotous, wondrous visuals and joyous neon colors.  I haven't had this much fun watching a movie in a long time, and I would say it is even better than the first one.

On a slightly spoiler-y note:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

We're living in a golden age of superhero films (that are made by Marvel), where the hard work has been done, and now we can just bring the beautiful madness of comics to film.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on May 05, 2017, 07:22:56 PM
On a slightly spoiler-y note:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

We're living in a golden age of superhero films (that are made by Marvel), where the hard work has been done, and now we can just bring the beautiful madness of comics to film.

Who are you calling obscure, BG?!?!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 08, 2017, 09:36:19 AM
All joking aside, pretty nifty, even if non-comics fans are gonna have no idea who any of these guys are.

Saw it this weekend. Worth seeing. I feel it's a great an example of a movie that's paradoxically so good that you can forgive that it's not that good. I don't think it's as good as the first one by a good amount, but it's definitely not bad. It's Marvel Baby!

The two big issues for me (which I've seen shared by others both online and in RL) is wonky story structure and the humor being a little more forced and hit-or-miss. But you love the characters so much and the dramatic elements of the film are done well enough that it doesn't really matter. I also found the film, compared to the first one, contrived to have the retro soundtrack in play this time around. We know from the first film why Star Lord cares so much about those tunes, but why is everyone else so eager to put them on?

I'll say this though: the movie's a visual spectacle, that's for sure. Almost makes me regret not seeing it in 3D.

Kurt Russell was great in this. I'm not that familiar with his work, but he did great stuff with his material here, and made for a really cool, interesting take on a Marvel character I've never had much interest in.

Good to see Stallone still getting work, even if this is quite possibly the easiest paycheck he's ever earned in his career.

Space-Merle...I mean Yondu was great in this. I still want that high tech arrow weapon of his.

I was disappointed to see a lack of discussion of Mantis, both in the reviews I watched and in general. So I'll just say I love the MCU version of Mantis. I love the look, I love the way she talks, I love that she comes off like the kind of cute alien girl Captain Kirk would want to romance. I love the interactions between her and Drax, I love how she's another example of the MCU not just adapting a longtime character but actually elevating them (such as with Tony Stark, Star-Lord, Drax, Ultron, Vision, Kingpin, Purple Man and arguably others). I like that she had a decent role in the plot (more than I was expecting, to be honest). It's always a good sign with a new character when your big takeaway is that you want to see more of them (a feeling I also had with the new young stars in the Force Awakens).

[edit] one other thing:

Quote
The movie blends absurdity into its dramatic moments which makes them both ridiculous and yet touching at the same time.  That's an impressive balancing act.

You know, I was thinking about that too. The thing it most reminded me of in that regard is some of the more creative manga and anime series like One Piece and Full Metal Alchemist. Outside of that wheelhouse (and maybe Scrubs) you don't tend to see that balancing act too often.

Perfect example:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Some breif spoiler discussion:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

On a less happy note, I would like to take this opportunity to vent a long-overdue rant about industry sites being, to quote Star-Lord, A-holes when it comes to spoilers.  I'm going to put this in a spoiler tag, because it's a bit long and has (censored) profanity and I encourage people to skip it if they don't want to hear me complain about spoilers.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on May 15, 2017, 03:20:07 AM
Liked GOTG2 a bit and ended up going to see it a second time. Shortly I liked the first one and felt the second retained both the spirit as well all the little things that made the first fun, added I felt it was much more deep and did a better job in character analysis and development. I'll even give it I wasn't thrown slightly by their take on Ego and more could see why it worked better that way than getting it closer to the comic would have. Same with changing Star-Lords origin as the Spartax weren't really established. Though I would give anything to see The Imperial Guard in a film sometime. Oh and another great soundtrack of course.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on May 22, 2017, 04:39:43 AM
Not up to Guardians 1 or 2 yet but I am now almost caught up wit the MCU.  AT almost 1 hour into Thor the Dark World, I can say that it is, so far, my least liked of the films.  The plot holes are too gaping even for a superhero film.  Evil Elrond says he's killed his own race except for one goon and then comes back with an army?!? Heimdall takes down an invisible scout craft with TWO SWORDS and the rest of Asgard can't take down any with cannons!  Loki had to tell the goon to use the stairs on the left but somehow dude found Agard's shield generator on his own?!?  And the Asgardians let Evil Elrond's ship just sit there while he was looking for Jane Foster?   :angry:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 22, 2017, 06:05:40 PM
Wait till you get to the tank in Ant-man.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on May 23, 2017, 12:28:27 AM
Wait till you get to the tank in Ant-man.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 23, 2017, 01:02:08 AM
I liked the tank.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 23, 2017, 04:04:09 AM
Wait till you get to the tank in Ant-man.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
He does.Its stated in the movie that things retain their mass when shrunk.So how did Pym carry around a 64 ton keychain?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on May 23, 2017, 05:25:34 AM
But ants lift Ant Man, and even the whole "proportionate strength" thing isn't going to keep him from squashing them. He will probably sink into the dirt like an ice pick would at ant-size, and if he were to jump onto a wooden floor, he would bury himself up to his waist. However, he has always had some way for the mass of a shrunken object to kind of disappear (into the negative Zone , maybe?). Or, maybe his mass stays the same, but his weight diminishes... of course, it would still be like lifting the hammer of Thor to pick up a 64 ton key chain, having to overcome all it's inertia.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on May 23, 2017, 02:20:04 PM
In it's defense Ant-Man is still more fun of a watch then Thor 2. I'd rate it about the first Daredevil film, not mind-blowing but well enough to stick with. Though props as the character becomes more notable in Civil War. Glad I'm not alone on Thor 2. It was just...yeesh! Again I could forgive most of it but Selvig in his underpants and that chick with the knitted cap getting more screen time then Jane. Not what I want out of a Thor movie just saying.

Sorry for being ranty but I just have to add some cognitive dissonance to it. So due to involved events Selvig looses it...way after the fact. But he was totally cumbersome as a scientist meeting a God and that God dating his daughter, like let's have a beer and some lunch with God and give him dating advice kind of relaxed.  :thumbdown:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on May 24, 2017, 12:40:49 AM
I already watched Antman.  The tank was a bit of a Deus ex machina, I grant that.  However, I cannot think of a size-changing hero that really treats mass consistently.  I am bit skeptical that the tank fuel would not have presented a problem.

Kat Dennings is pretty hot in Thor but Evangeline Lilly as Hope VanDyne just cranked it up to 11.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on May 24, 2017, 01:31:46 PM
However, I cannot think of a size-changing hero that really treats mass consistently.
I mean, the Atom is fairly "consistent" in the comics in that he can control his size and mass independently (thereby acknowledging that it is not the rules of size-changing that are changing, only his manipulation of said rules).
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 24, 2017, 05:41:48 PM
Realistic physics are one thing;movies own internal logic another.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on May 24, 2017, 11:51:43 PM
Realistic physics are one thing;movies own internal logic another.

Which they kept consistent
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 25, 2017, 03:59:23 AM
Ummm... no, they didn't. By the movie's internal logic, Ant-Man hits bad guys with the full force of an adult human at small size because his actual mass doesn't change. But he also rides ants, something he cannot do with the mass of an adult human. The tank should not be able to be carried around, the giant ant-dog should float away because it has less relative mass than the air, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Ant-Man, but saying the logic is consistent is nonsense. And that's not even going into the fact that if the science of shrinking works like the film explains, him shrinking into the microverse like he did would have created a black hole.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on May 25, 2017, 04:12:36 AM
Ummm... no, they didn't. By the movie's internal logic, Ant-Man hits bad guys with the full force of an adult human at small size because his actual mass doesn't change. But he also rides ants, something he cannot do with the mass of an adult human. The tank should not be able to be carried around, the giant ant-dog should float away because it has less relative mass than the air, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Ant-Man, but saying the logic is consistent is nonsense. And that's not even going into the fact that if the science of shrinking works like the film explains, him shrinking into the microverse like he did would have created a black hole.

Yeah, their descriptions were off (they didn't know what they were talking about), but in practice, everything worked consistently. Nothing weighed the same as they would at full size, nothing got flimsier when they grew in size. Just like the comics.

Yeah, based on real-world physics, it didn't work, but in the film, everything that shrunk or grew behaved the same. They're different. Spade even mentions that. So playing real physics to all of the mumbo-jumbo means jack-all. Practically, the effects of the resizing was the same.

I'm not saying that the descriptions given by characters made sense, but it's not like the movie flip-flopped on how things worked. That's what I am saying. They were stupid, but consistent.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on May 25, 2017, 06:00:14 AM
Something to remember: IT'S A SUPERHERO MOVIE...it doesn't have to make sense, just entertain.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 25, 2017, 07:52:53 AM
(http://www.theouthousers.com/images/jce/logabbitt/2016/12/robo02.jpg)
Nobody expects complete realism from a movie,but if you bother so much with explaining how you "science" works,at least follow those rules.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on May 25, 2017, 03:56:53 PM
Yeah I agree with Tomato and Spade. The movie should follow its own rules, or else not explain their rules at all. It's not about science, it's about storytelling.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on May 25, 2017, 04:09:31 PM
The point is: why is the tank scene so outrageous and belief breaking for everybody when all of the other size-altering is fine? It makes no sense to me.

You guys are confusing consistency with matching up with our universe's physics. They don't match up with ours, as I've stated before and you guys are so quick to point out. But that's not the issue, here. Why is it that the tank scene in particular is so ridiculous? That's the one scene that I hear chewed out for no reason. Nah, a man becoming the size of a thumb tack and knocking full-sized humans is fine. Thomas the Train Engine growing to absurd proportions and crushing a house? That's fine, too! But a tank retaiming its durability when small, just like Ant-Man does? Perposterous!

It's fine if one were to have a problem with all of the size-altering science in the movie, but to have a problem with one scene when it follows the same logic as all of the others, as broken as they are from the descriptions given by the characters and especially when compared to our real world physics, is just as silly to me as you guys believe my argument to be. Yes, logically, theor descriptions don't make sense to us, but practically, it all works out in the same manner.

The movie is consistent. It might not make sense, but at least it's "wrong" all the time and doesn't flip-flop around.

I'm going to go ahead and agree to disagree. I don't think anybody's mind is going to change, so rather than me derailing this thread even more, I'm going to stop now.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 25, 2017, 04:18:06 PM
As mentioned before,the movie explains that Ant-Man retains his mass when shrunk.That's why nobody can just step on him(They could,but it would be like jumping on a nail). So why doesn't the same apply for tank Henry carries around like a key-chain?It not even hand waved as pym-particles-magic.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on May 25, 2017, 04:25:35 PM
Exactly. He cracks the bathroom tile from a 2 foot drop, which can be easily explained by their dialogue about him retaining his mass. However, he can also ride an ant no problem.

Anywho, I still enjoyed the movie. On a side note, I loved size-change effect. Totally reminiscent of the comic.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on May 25, 2017, 04:28:24 PM
I bet The Ancient One could explain why but she would probably expect us to go on a soul journey and for us to have a personality adjustment first.

Really when you think about that, not a bad trade-off. The cost of gaining magic potent enough to mold reality to your whims is you have to read some books and be nicer in general to people. I'd do it!

And I'm with Spade and Outlah too. Like I enjoyed the film but little things like that aren't a matter of physics but they are a matter of proper film and story structure. I feel the same about the Back To The Future films for example (don't get me started!). Doesn't make a film bad but is a red check mark and makes the production look sloppy. Like leaving a nail head sticking out of a floor you built.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on May 25, 2017, 05:00:07 PM
As mentioned before,the movie explains that Ant-Man retains his mass when shrunk.That's why nobody can just step on him(They could,but it would be like jumping on a nail). So why doesn't the same apply for tank Henry carries around like a key-chain?It not even hand waved as pym-particles-magic.

Yes, that is why I've stated that their descriptions don't make sense. I realize their attempts to describe how the process works are flawed, but when it comes to practical examples, I don't see the problem. Everything behaves consistently.

Exactly. He cracks the bathroom tile from a 2 foot drop, which can be easily explained by their dialogue about him retaining his mass. However, he can also ride an ant no problem.

When he cracked the floor, it was to show that he retained his density, and apparently mass can stay the same, but weight can change independently (with no change in gravity). The tank is the same thing; it is just as strong as it would be at full size, but its weight is clearly reduced enough to carry around. Flawed logic and descriptions; consistent behavior. And if the descriptions were accurate, then the physics of the world are different.

It's not like they had Ant-Man be super frail when tiny but kept the tank just as durable, or try and pass Scott weighing 180 lbs when shrunk but just said the tank was half an ounce.

That is why I don't understand the hate for the tank scene in particular. If it was an issue with world building, then it would be way more issues than just that scene in particular that people would have an issue with, but apparently, that's not the case.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on May 25, 2017, 07:11:16 PM
IT'S JUST A MOVIE!!   :banghead:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on May 26, 2017, 04:37:38 AM
IT'S JUST A MOVIE!!   :banghead:

Are you seriously saying everyone should turn their brains off just because 'it's a movie'?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on May 26, 2017, 05:25:32 AM
I dunno... I read SF from the '30s 'til the present, and I've read a lot of unlikely science, my favorite being a gravity based energy storage system (the more energy you put into it, the more you can put in it). A lot of it has been rendered obsolete; Isaac Asimov wrote essays for each Lucky Starr story when they were reprinted, detailing the changes in scientific knowledge, and Fred Pohl wrote some HeeChee stories even after one of the big ideas was proven totally wrong (involving living in a Black Hole).

Talk about it, complain about it, be sure an tell the kids that it isn't possible, but it isn't on PBS, so it isn't meant to explain real physics. I mean, next thing you know we will be figuring out why Superman can't fly.

This is, of course, Stan Lee's fault. he actively encouraged such nitpicking in his comics. Although, I have read similar discussions in Astounding SF where the science in a story was pretty thoroughly dissected and eliminated.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on May 26, 2017, 01:06:33 PM
Oh, don't get me wrong-- I have no expectations for superheroes to adhere to physics. In fact, it's kinda silly when people explain why "that wouldn't work in real life."

Reminds me of this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl2I-UU0cz4&t=17s). They hate on the classic Avengers costumes by photoshopping exaggeratedly poor versions of the comic costumes on to the actors, even though most of the characters they're talking about in the movies have suits that are already plenty comic accurate.

And Spyderman93, I see what you mean. Whenever he has momentum on his side and is hurtling toward something, he hits the target with a lot of force, and whenever somebody (or something) is lifting him up, he doesn't weigh much. So yeah, I agree that in general the powers were consistent, even though (as you said) their descriptions didn't really match that.

I'm just going to add to my headcanon that the scientists didn't really know how to explain Pym particles and they just kinda said the wrong thing with confidence.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 26, 2017, 05:14:47 PM
Well, what matters for a film is internal consistency.  Do you create a universe where a man can fly?  Where someone can shrink and ride ants?  If so, then you succeed, no matter how ridiculous the thing is in real life.  Fantasy is all about make believe worlds and situations, and it's been a key part of human storytelling since there have been humans. 

Does Ant-Man succeed at that?  Mostly.  They should have adapted the Atom's explanation.  'You can change your size AND mass,' and then problem solved.  Their explanation is flawed, but despite that, the setting they create is internally consistent.  So, it's one flaw, and a not insignificant one, but it doesn't ruin the film or completely destroy suspension of disbelief.  It would be worse if their explanation was flawed AND the portrayal of the power was inconsistent.  (Looking at you, Man of Steel)

Ouflah, that's a great and believable no-prize explanation.  I could totally see that happening.  :lol:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 26, 2017, 05:17:22 PM
Thou,in all honesty,there are better heist films around.  :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on May 28, 2017, 03:29:28 AM
Well, I'm going to incite some irritation here.  Guardians of the Galaxy (1) was okay. I like it better than Dark World and unlike Dark World, it did not have such numerous and glaring plot holes. I think I just didn't like the characters or find the story as engaging as many of the other Marvel films.

My one major Quibble with Dr Strange was simply casting.  I totally would have cast James Hong as the Ancient One.  The guy deserves to be the Sorcerer Supreme for once.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0393222/ (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0393222/)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on May 28, 2017, 03:38:27 AM
My one major Quibble with Dr Strange was simply casting.  I totally would have cast James Hong as the Ancient One.  The guy deserves to be the Sorcerer Supreme for once.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0393222/ (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0393222/)

Yeah, about that. Nothing against Hong, but the sad fact is that Marvel wasn't going to cast any Asian guy as the Ancient One simply due to China having a hate-on for Tibet. If such a grand position as Sorcerer Supreme were given to a Tiebetan character, China (one of Marvel's most lucrative investments in terms of movie-goers,) would have freaked, and while they well could have made Hong Japanese or even Chinese, Marvel still probably thought it'd be a bit too close for comfort. Mind you, it still sounds freaking stupid, but it was simply the reality of the situation.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on May 31, 2017, 05:15:21 AM
Jumping back to Iron Man 3; there was great casting on that film.  Case in point, Guy Pearce's number one stooge, Savin, had almost no dialog but the visuals combined with the very capable acting of James Badge Dale, made me hate the character so much I was disappointed that his death scene was so short.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 31, 2017, 12:30:24 PM
Yeah, I don't really have a problem with Ant-Man having that plot hole. If they paved over it by phrasing a line or two better, it would have improved the film, but only by about .1%-1% IMO. To me the important thing was that it was a fun movie that did the characters justice and do lots of cool stuff with the size changing motif and for me they did it. I'll always acknowledge that not everyone was going to love Ant-Man, and it's not one of the best MCU movies, but it's one of my favorites chiefly because I have a fondness for the source material.

To give an example of the opposite, I'm not a Dr. Strange fan, so I didn't love the movie, but it was certainly decent. Neat visuals, and Cumberbatch was good as course. I watched it as a digital rental but once the psychedelic imagery started showing up I naturally said "This would have looked great in 3D".

James Hong would have been fun as the Ancient One. I always love that guy whenever he pops up in stuff.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on June 01, 2017, 06:07:14 AM
So... Captain America Civil War.
Overall, I enjoyed it though I consider it more of an Avengers Light than just a Captain America movie.
Ironically, I found it absolutely believable that General Thunderbolt Ross, the man responsible for the MCU's Abomination, was made Secretary of State and charged with ensuring the Avengers don't run amok.
But the conveniently placed video camera recording the assassination of the Starks was a little hard to believe.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 01, 2017, 04:21:33 PM
YL, I think you could no-prize the camera as a deliberate choice on the part of the Russians, who wanted it documented: i.e., they chose the spot BECAUSE of the camera.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on June 01, 2017, 07:39:44 PM
Maybe until you realize that Bucky shoots the camera.  He was brainwashed enough to kill a man he knew but not enough to just just take down the video camera.  Oh, no! Instead he gets a sullen look on his face, points a gun at it, and blows it away.  Obviously, aham-handed screenwriting to provide credible proof of Buck's guilt to Tony Stark.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: yell0w_lantern on June 02, 2017, 02:16:32 PM
My one major Quibble with Dr Strange was simply casting.  I totally would have cast James Hong as the Ancient One.  The guy deserves to be the Sorcerer Supreme for once.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0393222/ (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0393222/)

Yeah, about that. Nothing against Hong, but the sad fact is that Marvel wasn't going to cast any Asian guy as the Ancient One simply due to China having a hate-on for Tibet. If such a grand position as Sorcerer Supreme were given to a Tiebetan character, China (one of Marvel's most lucrative investments in terms of movie-goers,) would have freaked, and while they well could have made Hong Japanese or even Chinese, Marvel still probably thought it'd be a bit too close for comfort. Mind you, it still sounds freaking stupid, but it was simply the reality of the situation.

According to the dvd case, the temple is in Nepal. So it looks like they completely avoided Tibet which brings me right back to JAMES HONG, Mr. Burton! 😀
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on June 02, 2017, 03:58:39 PM
Yeah I totally agree, James Hong as the Ancient One would have been perfect.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 02, 2017, 04:26:15 PM
The movie add more confusion by the claim she is Celtic.Whats the point there?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on June 02, 2017, 11:39:38 PM
The movie add more confusion by the claim she is Celtic.Whats the point there?

The point is 'Not remotely Tibet.' ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 03, 2017, 04:31:33 AM
Notice the temple is in Nepal,not Ireland.They bothered so much to avoid being banned in China,yet they also decided that the oriental mystic thing is too cool to give up.
But this is another thing we went over a dozen times already.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 03, 2017, 03:52:32 PM
That's an interesting reasoning and giving more credit to boardroom execs than I would have. I thought the reason was because casting an Asian in the role of the Ancient One would come off as debased, therefore they steered away from that. In other words an old Asian man with a ridiculously long beard that perhaps adds too many w's too his vocabulary which in turn sounds very Yoda. Just noting that in a lot of films and who can blame anyone really. When they do that even when it's meant to be genuine the kind of red glare that ignites both online and in the syndicated media...well, yeah.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 03, 2017, 05:09:01 PM
Well,I will risk sounding blunt,but the thing is-Hollywood likes Asian culture,but Asian people,not so much.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on June 03, 2017, 06:16:19 PM
Interesting notion, SA. I wouldn't have too much trouble believing that well-intended efforts at diplomacy or political correctness (or whatever you call it when people avoid doing something that is fine except that it might offend someone) at either end of the spectrum kept someone like Hong out of the role. Interestingly, Hong is an American from Minnesota who I overheard at a hotel in San Jose at one point speaking without any accent.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 04, 2017, 01:45:10 AM
Exactly though. Like they have no issue with representation culture if it doesn't stand out as stereotypical. Like Cho for example is Asian but not stereotypical. Again even when genuine, the backlash from Django Unchained outspoken as such. Else when I thought about this today if it's down to realism Celtic Druidism is actually a closer match to how they use their powers (circles, summoning, spell-crafting, runes, symbols and invocation) then is Tibetan lore.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on June 06, 2017, 01:44:15 AM
Infinity War first look video.  Note that there is no footage from the movie whatsoever and the first half is the Thor actor clowning around with action figures.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg6X22hFuV8

But you do get to see some concept art, some interviews and the actors for Spider Man, Iron Man, and Star Lord all together for the first day of filming, as well as an explanation of some of the basic plot.

Apparently, the purpose of Civil War was to make Thanos more threatening by ensuring that the heroes were not untified enough at first to stand against him.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on June 10, 2017, 02:32:38 PM
Black Panther trailer!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBiZX_ceqO0
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 21, 2017, 08:03:20 PM
NO! NO! They've made their point! Stop this!  We simply cannot take any more! For the love of everything holy spare us all!

Oh, the humanity!

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/06/20/new-fantastic-four-movie-fox-kids-rumours/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 22, 2017, 02:56:12 AM
Why not Power Pack then?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on June 22, 2017, 03:38:46 AM
X-babies...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 22, 2017, 07:55:22 AM
At this rate 3D-man movie seems just around the corner.IN 3D!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on June 22, 2017, 09:53:10 AM
They seem rather determined to keep that license whether they make any money or not.   I can see why Marvel is upset.   They are basically willing to destroy the reputation of F4 in order to keep the license for it.  Why?  Who knows, at this point.  They just started to relax the F4 branding embargo a bit too.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on June 22, 2017, 02:14:31 PM
Well, I mean, it could be good. The concept in itself isn't bad, it's just hard to care after all the movies that weren't good.

EDIT: Keep in mind, all the sources I've seen say it's a rumor, so it's not confirmed.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on June 22, 2017, 02:27:09 PM
If it was similar to The Incredibles, it might not be too bad. Something like that might be the best way to go, especially if you made it a CGI cartoon and hired good voice talent. I mean, the SFX should be good if the entire movie is, in effect, a special effect.

Bear in mind, I have absolutely  no faith in this happening.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 22, 2017, 03:11:14 PM
They seem rather determined to keep that license whether they make any money or not.   I can see why Marvel is upset.   They are basically willing to destroy the reputation of F4 in order to keep the license for it.  Why?  Who knows, at this point.  They just started to relax the F4 branding embargo a bit too.
Unfortunately,they bought it,they cant just give it back.They also proved they cant make money on it,so reselling the rights back might be the best option.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 30, 2017, 06:08:05 AM
Good freaking heavens!  Why can't they learn from their mistakes?  Disney has enough money to make selling the rights back worth it.  Just do it and stop beating the dead horse!

Yes, it could be good, but I think they've proven that they don't have the understanding or the respect for the material necessary to treat it anywhere near right.  Yet, the question of the quality of this one movie really isn't the main issue.  No, the real problem is that if this movie actually manages to be good (or even if it just makes money despite being bad), it will just prolong the slow death of these characters, because Fox clearly has not ability to make consistently good superhero movies, especially not about the FF.  Even worse, it keeps the FF out of the Marvel U, which is where they belong.  They'd make a great center for a wave 4 of Marvel films.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on June 30, 2017, 09:38:35 AM
Honestly, the Fantastic 4 have a terrible reputation among movie goers now, so I doubt any film with them can be successful.  The only thing that could save them at this point is the giant reputation Marvel studios has for making good movies out of concepts that shouldn't work, but of course they are specifically not letting them do that.  The smart money at this point is to make a deal like Fox did with Spider Man where they retain distribution right, but hand control of the franchise back to Marvel.  Win for everyone.  But no, they are too stubborn about it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 30, 2017, 11:03:30 AM
This kinda reminds me,what MCU really lacks is any form of resolution.You are watching movie 1 to see it set up movie 2 which sets up movie 3 and so on.Without a conclusion to any of them.To me,the investment is just not worth it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on June 30, 2017, 03:20:41 PM
See, I get what you're saying, but at the same time... these are adaptations of comic books, and comic books have been leading from story to story and having character crossovers for decades. Heck, you could make the case that's how Marvel made a name for itself in the first place... early Spider-Man and Fantastic Four issues are littered with crossovers to other books to act as a gateway for new readers.

So while I get not feeling like there's a big payoff for all these interacting movies... I don't need one because to me it's the same as a comic book issue leading into another one. Yes, Infinity War is going to be huge... the culmination of all these characters AND the Infinity Gem subplot, but as for an actual "conculusion" to the MCU... why? Life doesn't have an end, comics don't really have an end, why should comic book movies? I'm content with the film covering specific adventures.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 30, 2017, 03:35:44 PM
Okay,look at it from a different angle,how much longer will these actors manage/want to play these rolls?What happens when you accumulate another few years of continuity and it becomes hard for new viewers to follow along?Do you reboot and start everything over?
For example,do we care to make a (insert your own example here) movie that stands on its own?Or is the point to use it as a building block for Avengers 5?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 30, 2017, 05:39:40 PM
I'm with cat. F4 is just one of those things that doesn't transfer from paper to film. They'll still peddle it of course, they pay for that copyright after all and added when companies like Fox contract the franchise rights they have a legal obligation to not only make X number of films about it but as well meet a profit margin, lest they get sued and they have as such already. Same as how we'll see umpteen revamps of films like Judge Dredd, Robocop, Godzilla, so on. Not that there's a vision or need but the company pays for these copyrights annually and they want their money back. Like if you have an employee and they don't earn, well you have to let them go in favor of not paying their insurance upkeep anymore. I just do myself the favor in not getting my hopes up about a Fantastic 4 film being good and therefore am not disappointed. Nor do end up shelling out theater prices to see it of course. In that vein I'm not jumping through hoops about the new Spider-man flick either. Maybe it will impress me, who knows. But given the track record so far I'm not going to set my bar high in anycase.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 30, 2017, 05:46:39 PM
All in all,just another brick in the wall.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on June 30, 2017, 08:36:07 PM
I'm with cat. F4 is just one of those things that doesn't transfer from paper to film. They'll still peddle it of course, they pay for that copyright after all and added when companies like Fox contract the franchise rights they have a legal obligation to not only make X number of films about it but as well meet a profit margin, lest they get sued and they have as such already. Same as how we'll see umpteen revamps of films like Judge Dredd, Robocop, Godzilla, so on. Not that there's a vision or need but the company pays for these copyrights annually and they want their money back. Like if you have an employee and they don't earn, well you have to let them go in favor of not paying their insurance upkeep anymore. I just do myself the favor in not getting my hopes up about a Fantastic 4 film being good and therefore am not disappointed. Nor do end up shelling out theater prices to see it of course. In that vein I'm not jumping through hoops about the new Spider-man flick either. Maybe it will impress me, who knows. But given the track record so far I'm not going to set my bar high in anycase.

Not sure how that constitutes agreeing with me, because I don't agree with most of that, especially the first part.  I think Fantastic 4 would be a great property for a good movie.  It's good good characters, good character interactions, some great villains, a fun scientific adventure theme not found anywhere else.  Perfect for big screen.  What I AM saying is that they have long since ruined the properties reputation.  Moviegoers who aren't comics fans associate the Fan 4 with several bad movies.  Any further ones will be doomed by that reputation.  Marvel could do it, because they have a reputation of making good movies out of things that sound terrible, so folks would give them a chance, but they won't give anyone else a chance.

I really wish I didn't have to repeat all that, but I don't want anyone think that I agree with ANYTHING that SA just said.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on July 01, 2017, 12:23:29 AM
To be fair, there was that one Fantastic Four movie that was really darn good. Shame they didn't use their actual name. What was it called again? Oh, that's right. The Incredibles. ;)

Seriously Marvel/Fox, just hand the FF over to Pixar and let them work their magic. They've already done a heck of a Not!FF movie; think of what they could do with the actual FF. The potential's there; it just needs to be dug out, and Pixar's already proven they could do it with aplomb.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on July 01, 2017, 02:21:51 AM
One of the Youtubers I follow had a brilliant idea on how to bring Fantastic Four into the MCU and still maintain the "old fashion" family dynamic that feels classic FF (without modernizing them which has already been done to death in the original FOX films AND Fan4Stic).

In a nutshell,  Reed Richards and Sue Storm are a couple pulled straight out of the '60s nuclear family. Reed is the loving work obsessed husband who often gets lost in his work and doesn't always remember to come out of the lab to eat or even change clothes on a daily basis. Sue is the wife who loves making sure her husband is happy way before herself and often feels like she is invisible in a very male dominated time period. Johnny is the impulsive hot headed brother of Sue who listens to loud rock music and driving fast cars without too much care of what trouble he gets into but he always looks after his sister when duty calls. Ben is a close friend of Reed and Sue and serves as their personal driver/pilot and even as their body guard. Reed often talks about clashing with one of his classmates in college, some know-it-all mad scientist named Victor,  who often boasted that his inventions would make him rich and famous enough to own his own country. One year Reed manages to create his own small crew spacecraft which could go to any planet using very little fuel and be strides ahead of anything NASA had on their drawing boards for future missions. Of course NASA doesn't really think Reed's genius can pull off this amazing craft without proof of it going on test missions first or even using animals as crew if could survive long term missions in zero gravity beyond the moon. Reed convinces Sue, Johnny, and Ben to be his test crew on a very simple mission traveling around the moon and testing some new radiation shielding along the way. The craft is launched a few months later at a private rocket testing site with Reed's crew aboard without any problems at first until they orbit the moon. Some strange radiation hits their craft out of nowhere and sends it spinning out of control. For a brief moment their ship blinks in and out of some kind of strange vortex and then it regains enough control to return back to Earth. Everyone on board feels ill and fighting to stay conscious enough to get the craft back into the atmosphere enough to crash land into the ocean. The ship succeeds it's reentry and crashes just off the coast of Florida. Reed and Sue are the first to wake after being knocked out from the impact but open the hatch to find a whole new world waiting for them. It's now 2017 and their ship is surrounded by all kinds of media and coast guard ships and helicopters. Quickly, Reed and his crew are taken to a secure location to be debriefed and they are filled in by agents that their craft was lost around the Moon and didn't even reappear until just moments before it crashed. Johnny and Ben both suddenly become very ill and their powers start to manifest. Ben transforms into a giant Rock creature and Johnny bursts into flames often flaring up to levels that are near solar flare levels. All of them are taken to old SHIELD facilities used to keep powered people in check while being studied. Sue and Reed also discover their own powers emerging but at a slower rate and try to keep their powers from being discovered until they find a way to escape with the rest of their team. Just moments after they escape some strange monster emerges from the ground near a major city (Florida? New York?) and Reed decides to jump into action by placing his family into the fray to test their new abilities. Of course they defeat this strange monster after a huge battle and now the general population sees them all as great heroes. They are dubbed the Fantastic Four by the media and Reed decides to put his full effort into finding what happened to them and hopefully finding a way to return them to normal. Now the news footage shown on film breaks away to that same moment looking at a monitor in some strange castle at while some large figure sitting on a throne in the shadows leans foward. His eyes glow brightly and he screams, "RICHARDSSSSSSS!!!" *end credit*

I'll see if I can find the video later this weekend. But I agreed this works perfectly and allows for more growth of the Fantastic Four in further sequels and expansion even within other MCU films by showing Human Torch cameoing in Spider-Man sequels or even The Thing showing up as a wrestler on some random TV program in the background.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 02, 2017, 10:03:25 PM
I agree completely, Cat.  They're one of the most perfect concepts to be found in comics.  They come prepackaged with everything a story needs, conflict, pathos, humor, and hope.  They'd work wonderfully on the big screen or, even, if special effects budgets weren't a thing, on the small screen, as an episodic format would be great for their exploration themes.  They're a great set of characters, and there is a reason that their introduction to comics was revolutionary. 

CQ, that's an interesting take, but I'd say it adds wrinkles to the concept that aren't really necessary.  You'd have a whole fish-out-of-water element in such a treatment that isn't really the Fantastic Four.  A straight treatment of the characters would work just fine if it were done right, as The Incredible proved, really.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on July 05, 2017, 01:27:20 PM
Just got out of the theater for Spider-Man: Homecoming. Another homerun for Marvel in my opinion. Very funny, and one of the best villains of the MCU. His motivation is quite good, and Michael Keaton just nailed it, such a grounded character (odd, since he is a flier :P).  there are lots of cameos in the movie, too. unexpected actors and marvel characters.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 09, 2017, 07:53:22 AM
Yeah, I saw it with a group tonight and we really enjoyed it. I feel very comfortable saying it's my favorite Spider-Man movie made yet. Yeah, I'd heard Micheal Keaton was great and I really enjoyed him, as well as the cameos. A lot of the humor really worked for me.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Courtnall6 on July 09, 2017, 04:43:23 PM
Saw Spider-Man: Homecoming on Friday. I haven't been this disappointed with a Marvel film since Iron Man 3 (worst MCU film by far). After Civil War...I think I had my hopes set to high for this one.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 14, 2017, 04:54:07 PM
Well,if that didnt trigger anyone,this place is even deader then I thought.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on July 14, 2017, 07:46:49 PM
Nah, the discussion hopped unto another thread and everybody forgot about this one.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on July 15, 2017, 04:30:34 AM
Saw Spider-Man: Homecoming on Friday. I haven't been this disappointed with a Marvel film since Iron Man 3 (worst MCU film by far). After Civil War...I think I had my hopes set to high for this one.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I know! Why couldn't Peter be going to one of the all white NYC technology magnet high schools?

Yknow if the founding fathers knew they'd end up being represented in our superhero movies,  they probably wouldn't even have invited all those minorities over here.

This is all Sunny D's fault. I'm only drinking purple stuff from now on.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 15, 2017, 04:53:14 AM
Yes, clearly C6 hates minorities and that's the only reason he would object to changing a character's race, as that obviously has no impact on who a character is, and clearly neither comics nor movies are visual mediums where characters are defined by appearance as well as by personality.  Don't be ugly, BWPS.  We've had these conversations before, and there's nothing racist about wanting accurate translations of the source material.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 15, 2017, 07:07:30 AM
I agree to a point, but being absolutely dismissive about the changes because they don't conform to a certain version of the characters is absurdity. It's one thing to be frustrated at how, say, Flash Thompson is portrayed for example... I see what they were trying to do, but it's clearly at odds with the football jock he's always been in pretty much every version of the comics. It's another to complain about a "diversity checklist" as though having a diverse student body in a school in New York is somehow unrealistic or shocking.

I do understand his point about some of the casting choices, and specifically in the case of Ned Leeds... who is CLEARLY supposed to be Ganke and it's annoying to here him constantly referred to as Ned in the movie when they could have just CALLED HIM GANKE... but I go back to points I've made here and elsewhere: THERE IS A UNIVERSE WHERE PETER IS A PIG, AND MARY JANE IS A BIRD. There is a universe where Peter and all his supporting cast are Indian, one where they're Japanese, and one where Captain America insults France despite fighting alongside them in WW2. And I don't see the people arguing against the changes here complaining about those, because that'd be stupid: Everything I've listed is an alternate reality. The fact that THIS ITERATION features a half-black Liz and an Indian Flash is no different then my favorite cartoon featuring a Latino Liz Allen. What matters is THEIR CHARACTER, which... yeah is a valid place to attack this film from, I'm not even going to argue. Flash is not quite Flash, Liz is not quite Liz, and Ned sure as heck was not written or cast to be Ned.

That having been said...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So... yeah, I understand your stance Benton... but the "diversity checklist" remark by C6 definitely rubs me the wrong way too. I've maintained this whole time that they shouldn't NEED to justify why they didn't cast all white actors when half those same characters have an iteration where they're cartoon animals. And to be fair, he's not WRONG about the characters being off... they absolutely are. And not in ways I'm 100% ok with either. But there are ways to express that without opening this can of worms.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 07:44:42 AM
Well,nice to see everything is back to normal.
To be fair here,its also unrealistic for a guy defrosted from 1945. to be PC by today's standards,so what does that prove.
And for those who havent seen the movie,could you please clarify,was this a Spider-Ham adaptation? :huh:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 15, 2017, 01:09:19 PM
My point in bringing it up is merely that saying that "they're white in the comics" is a pretty flimsy justification when I can point to a comic where MJ is a Water Buffalo and Flash is a Goat. The only member of the side cast whose race matters at all in the comic is Flash, and that's really just because his father is a drunken racist jerk and that's typically an area dominated by white people. And before people throw the "sassy redhead" thing at me AGAIN, I would remind you that that trope isn't as recognizable for my generation as, say, sassy black girl. And yeah, that's kinda racist too, but so is the sassy Scottish trope the redhead thing comes from.

(Also, given MJ's shade of red in the comics, it's almost certain she dyes it, since natural redheads are actually more orange. And I have seen African American coworkers and friends dye their hair that color or close to it FAR more often than white ones.)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 01:33:00 PM
As opposed to say being a work of hundreds of different colorists?Whats next?Yugi also dyes his hair?Seriously,how did you extrapolated that fascinating piece of info?
You didnt really answer my questions.You cant insist on realism and only pick the realistic parts you like.Second,afaik its an adaptation of the main universe Spiderman,key word adaptation.You see whats the peoples problem here?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 15, 2017, 02:01:37 PM
Because it fits more with MJ's character that she purposely dyes her hair to a bombastic red to make her the center of attention? Especially given that it's a shade of red (going by her first appearances) not seen in nature?

Going back to your other statement... You're purposely misinterpreting what I said, and it's gotten old. Read my posts again: I'm not saying it's BETTER because it's "more realistic," I'm saying that the focus SHOULD be on changes to the characters personalities and motivations, because those are the things that ACTUALLY MATTER. The fact that they chose to cast someone who isn't white should be inconsequential to the discussion. The spirit of the character is far, FAR more important to me... and this movie does deserve that particular criticism.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 15, 2017, 02:36:01 PM
<throws up the "It's a movie! It's a piece of entertainment, so just enjoy watching it!" sign> You people are sooo serious... :-P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 03:08:18 PM
Because it fits more with MJ's character that she purposely dyes her hair to a bombastic red to make her the center of attention? Especially given that it's a shade of red (going by her first appearances) not seen in nature?

Going back to your other statement... You're purposely misinterpreting what I said, and it's gotten old. Read my posts again: I'm not saying it's BETTER because it's "more realistic," I'm saying that the focus SHOULD be on changes to the characters personalities and motivations, because those are the things that ACTUALLY MATTER. The fact that they chose to cast someone who isn't white should be inconsequential to the discussion. The spirit of the character is far, FAR more important to me... and this movie does deserve that particular criticism.
As always,your opinion,not a fact.And again,your not answering the question.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 15, 2017, 03:52:18 PM
Your question, if I understood it, was "none of it is realistic, so isn't it better to be closer to the source material" and my response... which I've said 2-3 different ways now, is that I don't give a flying monkey about the race or appearance of the characters so long as the spirit of the character is intact. And again, I'm not claiming that they are... I have given multiple examples of how they aren't and why it's to the movie's detriment that the spirit of the characters isn't maintained, despite my enjoyment of the film as a whole.

What I object to, specifically with C6's wording, is the implication that they had some sort of "race checklist" that they HAD to tick off lest the Hollywood gods smite them or whatever. That somehow the creative process for the film was hindered by the choice. However, by all accounts, it was the director who made those decisions, not the studio. Heck, if anything, I suspect the studio would have preferred the opposite: Casting all white actors is safer, and it's what Sony did with the last two adaptations. They chose to go a different direction this time, to do something a bit different... and I feel like the only reason it's a problem is that this is somehow supposed to be the "definitive" cinematic version despite being the third version to come out in the last few decades.

To put my feelings another way... Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane. Now, I have made no secret that I am one of the few people that HATES the Raimi trilogy (in part due to the "best" movie for most fans being the most frustrating for me personally) but Mary Jane in particular goes from the loud, in your face "you just hit the jackpot" lady I fell in love with in the comics, to the typical damsel in distress that screams for the majority of the films. Her relationship with Peter in particular is PAINFUL, with all the worst aspects of soap opera drama thrown in there to pad out their relationship.

Does it really matter that Dunst looks like she walked right out of the comic pages when every single other aspect of her character spits in the face of the comic they're adapting? I'm not saying it is nor should be an either/or situation, I just feel like the appearance stuff is like 5% of the character's total package, whereas personality, chemistry, upbringing... those things make up the other 95% of what defines us as human beings.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 04:12:04 PM
Well,you are making a 20th or so movie in the franchise and a 6 Spiderman movie.No chance in hell you are going to do something original,so a rogue casting is the only way to surprise the audience.So it might not be a checklist,but its a very cynical,calculated move in any case.Hey,lets piss off the nerds,as long as they are talking about it...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 15, 2017, 04:32:38 PM
Alright, I'm ending this now! It's a movie! The studio, producers, and director can do whatever they feel like because that's their job. As long as people go see it and pay money on merch, that's what makes them happy. Do you have to like it? No! Do they care? As long as they are making money, no! Aside from wasteful griping about miniscule and trivial problems about the movie, can you change it? No! Unless you are willing to go out and raise the money, cast, write, direct, and release your view of what the movie should be there is no reason to get into an argument or whatnot about it. Everyone can have their opinion but getting into a fight over something as trivial as a movie is a waste of time and energy. IT'S A MOVIE! HELL, IT'S A SUPERHERO MOVIE. JUST SIT BACK, SUSPEND LOGIC, AND ENJOY THE PARTS YOU FIND ENJOYABLE!

Now, I'm going to go get a case of vodka and when I come back if this is still going on...well, I'll probably just yell some more but still...I rarely step in and do that so yeah!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on July 15, 2017, 04:36:17 PM
Alright, I'm ending this now! It's a movie! The studio, producers, and director can do whatever they feel like because that's their job. As long as people go see it and pay money on merch, that's what makes them happy. Do you have to like it? No! Do they care? As long as they are making money, no! Aside from wasteful griping about miniscule and trivial problems about the movie, can you change it? No! Unless you are willing to go out and raise the money, cast, write, direct, and release your view of what the movie should be there is no reason to get into an argument or whatnot about it. Everyone can have their opinion but getting into a fight over something as trivial as a movie is a waste of time and energy. IT'S A MOVIE! HELL, IT'S A SUPERHERO MOVIE. JUST SIT BACK, SUSPEND LOGIC, AND ENJOY THE PARTS YOU FIND ENJOYABLE!

Now, I'm going to go get a case of vodka and when I come back if this is still going on...well, I'll probably just yell some more but still...I rarely step in and do that so yeah!

Yeah, no. Just because it's a movie doesn't mean it's automatically free from any and all criticism. If two people have differing opinions on a work, then they have every right to debate those differences as long as it doesn't turn into a flame war or anything. And I honestly don't think we're at that point just yet. Basically, if someone wants to get upset about a movie and make a point, then they should darn well be able to make that point.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 04:43:16 PM
Alright, I'm ending this now! It's a movie! The studio, producers, and director can do whatever they feel like because that's their job. As long as people go see it and pay money on merch, that's what makes them happy. Do you have to like it? No! Do they care? As long as they are making money, no! Aside from wasteful griping about miniscule and trivial problems about the movie, can you change it? No! Unless you are willing to go out and raise the money, cast, write, direct, and release your view of what the movie should be there is no reason to get into an argument or whatnot about it. Everyone can have their opinion but getting into a fight over something as trivial as a movie is a waste of time and energy. IT'S A MOVIE! HELL, IT'S A SUPERHERO MOVIE. JUST SIT BACK, SUSPEND LOGIC, AND ENJOY THE PARTS YOU FIND ENJOYABLE!

Now, I'm going to go get a case of vodka and when I come back if this is still going on...well, I'll probably just yell some more but still...I rarely step in and do that so yeah!
Oh come on,it FR tradition.We do this every movie.
We werent really arguing,at least how I saw it.I  asked Tomato to clarify some thing,he did for the most part,and that it for now.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 15, 2017, 04:47:37 PM
 :rolleyes: Spade... Dude, I know you haven't seen the film, but the whole "no new ideas" thing is silly. They mined PLENTY of new material and ideas for this version (not all of which I personally cared for) and WAS a very fresh take on the mythology and that fact had nothing to do with casting. Liz Allen being the love interest, the implication that Michelle finds Peter intriguing for some reason, a villain that's a working class schmuck instead of a mad scientist, Not-Ganke being in a support role... I might not agree with changes like making Flash someone *I* could beat up, but they did play up the innate jealousy that's been a longtime part of Flash's character in the comics and hasn't been explored in film before.

Heck, the fact that we are even talking about the secondary characters at all, when in previous films Flash could have been a cardboard cutout and no one else showed up in high school except MJ/Gwen (and occasionally Harry), shows that this film DID manage to take a much different path than films prior.

As for the whole "it's a controversy" thing... I get where it might seem like it's a problem, but I don't feel like it's as big a deal as it seems to be here. Sure, comic boards like this are an echo chamber, but when I'm discussing the film with friends and people from my generation, it doesn't even come up. Frankly, the same people complaining about it would be complaining about the costumes or how Vulture should be bald or any number of other things even if the races hadn't been changed. If anything, the changes made non-comics fans I know MORE excited, because they got to see themselves in the minorities that got represented in this film.

I dunno. I just feel like it's such a pointless thing to complain about when the change has made so many other people happy.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 04:57:22 PM
:rolleyes: Spade... Dude, I know you haven't seen the film, but the whole "no new ideas" thing is silly. They mined PLENTY of new material and ideas for this version (not all of which I personally cared for) and WAS a very fresh take on the mythology and that fact had nothing to do with casting. Liz Allen being the love interest, the implication that Michelle finds Peter intriguing for some reason, a villain that's a working class schmuck instead of a mad scientist, Not-Ganke being in a support role... I might not agree with changes like making Flash someone *I* could beat up, but they did play up the innate jealousy that's been a longtime part of Flash's character in the comics and hasn't been explored in film before.

Sure, comic boards like this are an echo chamber.

I dunno. I just feel like it's such a pointless thing to complain about when the change has made so many other people happy.
1. I take your word for it.See the previous few pages for many reasons why I dont feel like watching it.Or in short-superhero fatigue.

2.You noticed it too?

3.For the love of Kanye,not that argument again.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 15, 2017, 05:03:18 PM
Kkhohoho: People are allowed to complain about it all they want but when it becomes nothing but a back-and-forth complaint routine between two folks with different opinions and both of them appear to be stuck 100% to their opinion only - and it seemed to me where this could've been heading - it becomes a waste of time and effort. Someone has to step aside and walk away at that point because it's a pointless exchange otherwise.

Spade: It used to not be a FR tradition and truthfully even if it had been, not all traditions are good. And while you might not think it an argument, the tone of both your's and Tomato's post read like a growing argument to some of us.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 15, 2017, 05:28:51 PM
TBF, the argument I had was mostly directed at C6's original statement: I understand the opinion he meant, but the diversity checklist remark is offensive, and was bound to start a fight, regardless of his intentions. Spade stoking the fires for a movie he hasn't seen, admits he won't see, and being deliberately obtuse is par for the course. Heck, his "well if that doesn't start things nothing will" comment is him reacting to C6's post and hoping this exact fight would break out. Because otherwise why would he be discussing the film?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on July 15, 2017, 05:30:35 PM
I would like to point out to spade, that things were perfectly calm and peaceful, C6 made his comment and everyone left it be, but you were the one who apparently cold not let that go and had to go fishing for an argument.  This kind of discusion would not have launched had you not seen fit to provoke it.  I am tempted now to look at past comment and see if you have been provoking similar argument in the past, but for my own sanity I won't.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 15, 2017, 05:41:48 PM
That was really just an observation,since again,this happens for every movie.
Tomato,as always you internet-cold-reading are very sharp.I don't know how you managed to guess what I was thinking.Really,slow clap from me.by now,you probably also guessed my address and what I had for breakfast;based purely on a few sentences I wrote.
Now,feel free to report me,just like every other time I disagreed with you.
Or better yet,enjoy you echo chamber and keep up the good work.Bye-Bye,since I really have no more energy to read your SJW campaigns.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 15, 2017, 07:46:36 PM
...and the blow up I was trying to prevent still happens. <sighs> Nobody ever listens or pays attention to what the old hand says...makes me wonder why I even try nowadays.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on July 15, 2017, 09:12:41 PM
No pun intended , but can we please keep the conversation civil?  Someone already reported trouble.  Let's all play nice, M'kay?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on July 15, 2017, 09:27:17 PM
DJ: you try because you have to, to wit:

No one is wrong here. It is not wrong for someone to wish for a more faithful adaptation of the character in the comic (whatever they feel that means), nor is it wrong for someone to like the "alternate" version presented in a movie. Look back at all the movies and TV adaptations of comics-there are versions that some will disagree with the casting and people who loved the choices (except maybe David Hasslehoff as Nick Fury... and the whole Jon Sable thing...). I'd love to see the version of the characters I grew up with, but, hey, those haven't even been in the comics for thirty years or more. And if comics stay around long enough, many of you may find yourselves in a situation similar to mine.

The depth of feeling we have for these characters is a tribute to the writers and artists that created them, and those writers and artists that followed. 

This is probably not really a discussion an old white guy from Alabama ought to get into...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on July 15, 2017, 10:43:18 PM
I agree with Spade, Tomato. Your SJW campaign of asking kindly for people to stop causing trouble while having the audacity to suggest non-white people's existence be reflected in movies is just too much. Stop setting our American flags on fire.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on July 15, 2017, 10:44:59 PM
 :doh:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 15, 2017, 11:31:37 PM
<facepalm> That's it, I'm done with this section of the forum...tired of all the wasteful anger and drama...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 16, 2017, 12:40:30 AM
I want to apologize to anyone who feels like I was belittling their opinions about how a proper adaptation includes doing justice to the appearance to a character. I do understand it... to the shock of probably no one here, it bothers me seeing movies set in, say, egypt cast all white actors. So on the one hand, yeah, I tend to feel that this sort of thing is the other shoe dropping and helps balance the scales somehow. And unlike in the egypt example, at least with stuff like homecoming we see groups represented that haven't seen a lot of love in superhero movies prior.

But I do get it. And as I have repeated: I'm not arguing C6's original points are invalid, because... they are absolutely valid, even if the wording could be better. As I have expressed, there are changes in this movie that frustrate me too, particularly Ned "Not-Ganke" Leeds. Not because I don't like that character, but because it is clearly not intended to be Ned Leeds in anything other than name. And the choice to cast flash thompson as a tiny dude whose butt *I* could kick is detrimental to his adaptation. But on the flipside, I don't feel like race factors into Liz Allen OR Michelle in any negative fashion, since both characters did their jobs in the film and I genuinely liked them both.

So there IS a legitimate discussion here. Not SJW bashing or the reverse, but an honest to goodness discussion about the actual changes they made to the characters and how those changes work in the context of the film.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 16, 2017, 01:51:03 AM
Well, Tom, I'm glad to see you say that. We can all stand to try to be careful how we phrase things here. The problem we keep having on this forum seems to be that the way some of use phrase things rubs others the wrong way (and I admit my snarky self is guilty of it as well) and the thing we all got to remember is we've got a few different people here of different age groups and walks of life with different values and takes on things. What's important to you in an adaptation might be different for someone else. Just remember to try to be more civil. Because we may end up going through this at least once every two years though since the film made a bajillion dollars and is guaranteed sequels, and it's MCU so that means cameos ect.

I had a bunch of other stuff I wanted to say but I don't really have time right now and it's hot where I am, and I grow tired, so I may come back to it at a later film. In the meantime let's all please try to get our opinions accross without resorting to personal attacks.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 16, 2017, 03:30:32 AM
Well said, SS.  You covered most of what I wanted to say.  I've been extremely busy today and haven't had the time to intervene here, but I'm disappointed with the way this conversation developed.  I was able to check in a few times and I was saddened to see the way things were going.

Spade, I think your response here was stronger than was called for.

BWPS, if you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem. 

'Mato, I also am glad to hear you say that.  I was actually going to send you a message on that front.  It's a sign of character to respond in this way.

As DJ said, this is just a movie.  Of course, it's also much more than a movie, both because art is a reflection and a component of culture and because people are making assumptions about what lies behind the comments about said movie.  That's the problem.  Let's do each other the courtesy of treating each other's posts the way we'd want ours treated, I.E., judging them on what they say, and not what we assume about their motives, giving each other the benefit of the doubt.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 16, 2017, 05:31:00 AM
So for discussion's sake, I'm gonna make a big old post on here with a ton of spoilers about my feelings on the direction the movie takes 3 of the supporting characters, Ned Leeds, Flash Thompson, and Michelle... no last name given. Warning, there will be a novel in the spoiler tags.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 17, 2017, 05:41:35 AM
Sorry, I was having surgery. So real belated. On current I'm not speaking for anyone but myself but I don't actually get personal about anything online anymore sans a death in my local news. It's easy enough without personal exchange to project educed Pavlovian response but the fact is no one else is in anyone else's mind and therefore can't construct a proper image of another's current paradigmatic state. Or to speak of the now well established research into psychological button pushing online via traditional narcissists where a different point of view is misconstrued as a "one-up" (as it disagreement too closely resembles cognitive dissonance without emotional tone of course) and/or the establishment of libel (reality is this place is small water drop in the scheme of an ocean in oceans). To sum it up but we aren't here to discuss social discourse I'm sure. Know in my case if am offended ever, I will type those words exactly as I tend to be blunt. Fact is I almost never will be because I simply outgrew it more or less. I'll read it and move on to eating some M&M's. Hold that thought. *munch munch crunch munch* If any of you are ever personal offended by my words I'd ask that you tell me though a PM is probably the best place to iron out such things and I'd happily rectify myself. Phew. Back to comic movies.

At cat, sorry I confused what you wrote. I guess we stand aloft on that one. My logic is that potentially anything can be a great movie. I can think of how I would like any comic book movie to play out and have done so since childhood as I'm sure has everyone. But I face static evidence in contrast to my desires and the evidence I see thus far is the Fantastic 4 never translating well to cinema, yes including Corman. To say it could never of course not but as it stands to date adaptation of the comic has just fallen short. As the comic itself can be written to the point of accolades that tells me that the series itself isn't the issue rather the valley between it's concept and what current Hollywood has as far as resources to bridge that space.

Again not to say that can never change, but just where I stand. If were digging farther I believe what that franchise needed and could use in a reboot say if potentially it switched hands to the MCU proper is a prior establishment, like say one based on The Books Of Doom to concrete his character first, then tie his relations to Strange, then the first family as it were. But I also believe that to get the notion of family to a larger audience as any marketing group would declare it needs to be relatable and I think for that and as far as the term "family" goes we need to zip ahead and get the children involved. In fact the Future Foundation model lends itself even more to the big screen when I think about it. And of course Disney plus family film literal equals win. But hey, believing and seeing, seeing and believing and so forth.

As far as the topic of race of actors and/or in-canon characters I'm going to short and sweet because that is a powder keg topic as much as religion is and equally as unresolved. I don't care imo.
1.) It's a different canon. I interpret it as such.
2.) If the actor brings an entertaining performance and better pitches the core qualities of the fictional counterpart well it works for me.
3.) I believe in the cases of comics, film and otherwise that putting more diversity in is a good thing in light of the fact that it can't be denied that fiction does influence, and fiction larger targeted at youth in this very case, and taking responsibility for what we teach youth and making an effort to let them be more open to other cultures and less to prejudice or at least providing that option is something I'll get behind however the means to ends. Certainly the opposite course has done nothing else thus far if just nothing at all. I had my eras take and still keep it with my inner child so I'm at no loss.
4.) In the film industry itself the unions are required by Federal law to uphold fair hiring practices as are any other large commercial entities. There's no logistical pathway around that, it's just the law and it seems often neglected by critics. It isn't the 70's anymore to paraphrase.


Else this is again my personal feelings on that subject as again I recognize it as one of those things that does literally come down to ones preference and anothers, and really there isn't going to be a budge in that in our lifetime. Your going to like what you like and I'm going to like what I like. No one is in any event actually wrong when it comes to tastes. Speaking of which M&M's. *munch munch crunch munch*. Anyways I enjoyed Homecoming overall again. Also DJ, you should change your signature to the MST3K Mantra if anything jest for giggles.

Peace.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 17, 2017, 10:06:49 AM
Yall trippin...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on July 17, 2017, 11:37:28 PM
I have seen the movie and have some thoughts on it. However, at the moment, my concern is this discussion.

And, it has been a civil discussion, mostly. From a moderation perspective, that's great. The problem typically arises when things take a personal turn. That includes portraying someone who posts a different view as though they are exhibiting some sort of social or moral deficiency. And, that portrayal occurs both when someone directly says, "Your view indicates that you are a [fill-in-the-blank]-ist" and when mocking someone by "adopting" their view in a way that makes it clear the mocker thinks the mocked is some class of bad person.

(BTW, someone might actually conclude that another poster is a bad person. Being judgemental is part of life. The point here is that FR is not the place to post that conclusion.)

Discuss the movies and aspects that are good and not-so-good. But, refrain from implying that there is something wrong with members who disagree.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 18, 2017, 12:34:55 AM
Well said, Stumpy.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Starman on July 18, 2017, 02:17:33 PM
Quote
The casting came off more like diversity check list for a Sunny D commercial than anything else.

The comedy was weak and cringey as hell at points. Eye rolling dialogue like the pointless slavery banter at the expense of Michelle's white (therefore lame) professor. Marvel comics are absolutely riddled this "Identity Politics" crap and are suffering badly for it. Keep it out of the movies.

Uh, since when it has been in the harmonious spirit of this board to refer to multiracial casting as a "diversity checklist", etc?

Does C6 get a reprimand too or is everyone just more comfortable dog-piling on Tomato and Spade?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 18, 2017, 02:35:38 PM
'Mato and others already spent a page pointing out that C6's comments were not phrased well.  However, his comment was not attacking anyone else, and until he cares to explain himself, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and not assume nefarious motives for his post.  That is precisely what were were just talking about, after all. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 18, 2017, 03:21:51 PM
I say we just lock this thread and start a new one to talk about Marvel Movies otherwise this has the potential to reflare/continue. Just my thoughts and , as has been shown quite often lately, mean diddly squat.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 18, 2017, 07:09:47 PM
'Mato and others already spent a page pointing out that C6's comments were not phrased well.  However, his comment was not attacking anyone else, and until he cares to explain himself, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and not assume nefarious motives for his post.  That is precisely what were were just talking about, after all.

Not phrased well?  I mean, I'm a grown up and I don't take offense easily, but as party of a "diversity community", it's a hard to not take offense by it.  I can't help but to wonder and ask "what's wrong with diversity?" That and the comment about the teacher being "lame" BECAUSE he's white(as if Peter or Toomes were lame), it's kind of hard to divorce any comments specifically about changing the source material vs being race specific to the point of disparaging.  There's a line there.  Benton, you and I have BOTH been critical of such changes and I think it's fair criticism.  But I didn't think that was fair to be honest.  The comments seemed more focused on the diversity of the cast than specifically about certain characters.  Just my opinion... in case anyone wanted to ask a black dude.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 18, 2017, 07:52:02 PM
Quote
I say we just lock this thread and start a new one to talk about Marvel Movies otherwise this has the potential to reflare/continue. Just my thoughts and , as has been shown quite often lately, mean diddly squat.
Personally, if we're talking about locking the thread, I think we should move all the posts regarding Homecoming to the Homecoming thread. This is a thread for all Marvel movies, and it'd be a shame for it to be locked because of Homecoming.

Shogunn, not for nothing, but you're not helping. In addition to an Admin saying to knock it off, Benton (and I) have been trying to be diplomatic, while you're being confrontational. I actually have a lot to say on the matter (as I said earlier in the thread the other day) but honestly I probably shouldn't say anything because I don't want to rile people up. What I will say, specifically since you brought it up, is I don't find C6's comment offensive. I find the dogpiling on C6 for that one brief post offensive.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 18, 2017, 07:58:21 PM
Quote
I say we just lock this thread and start a new one to talk about Marvel Movies otherwise this has the potential to reflare/continue. Just my thoughts and , as has been shown quite often lately, mean diddly squat.
Personally, if we're talking about locking the thread, I think we should move all the posts regarding Homecoming to the Homecoming thread. This is a thread for all Marvel movies, and it'd be a shame for it to be locked because of Homecoming.


That's why I suggested starting a new Marvel Movies thread...but your idea works too.  Just tired of the potential anger/hatred that keeps reflaring it seems like....
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 18, 2017, 09:20:37 PM
Once again, well said, SS.

Shogunn, I hope you know that I have great respect for you and am always particularly interested in your thoughts on this topic.  That being said, SS is right, and I think restraint and diplomacy are what is called for here given the fact that tempers are clearly high.  To be fair, I did rather mean what I said; C6's phrasing was, I think the problem.  I stated it that way because I think I know him well enough to know that he's a decent fellow and A) would not intentionally be ugly to members of the community and B) is not insensitive or racist.  Thus, I assume that what he meant is rather something different than what folks have taken from his statement, going back to my point about giving each other the benefit of the doubt.  Do I think the statement came off badly?  Yeah.

I do think that it was poorly phrased, or, perhaps (?), poorly developed.  I won't try to speak for the man, and, honestly, I don't have much desire to engage in this debate in the current climate, but I think I can understand where he was coming from.  After all, we all know that there is a tendency for producers and the powers that be in Hollywood to have a very cynical and soulless approach to the products they create.  They tick the boxes they know are likely to create something marketable.  Love interest?  Check.  Handsome cast?  Check.  Big names?  Check.  Those of us old enough to remember the 90s with clarity probably remember this attitude applied to diversity all over the place.  There's even an entire trope for it on TV Tropes:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FiveTokenBand
Now, whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends largely on the application and your perspective, and that era had the very fortunate effect of leading to a more natural and organic diversity in our media by normalizing the presence of minorities.  So, even if a text in question was a product of a soulless corporate checklist resulting in a catalog of marketable cliches (and I can certainly think of cartoons that were very much like this), there was a positive side to the trend.  Nonetheless, I don't think anyone would argue that actually thoughtful, organic, and intentional choices produce better art, no matter what category you're talking about.  That includes character races. 

Now, I haven't seen the movie (can't wait!), so I can't comment on whether C6's views are off-base or not, but let's reserve judgement until he explains what he meant, if folks haven't driven him off already.  And, more importantly, as I've been stressing, let's try to grant each other the benefit of the doubt. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Starman on July 18, 2017, 09:28:46 PM
Quote
'Mato and others already spent a page pointing out that C6's comments were not phrased well.  However, his comment was not attacking anyone else, and until he cares to explain himself, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and not assume nefarious motives for his post.  That is precisely what were were just talking about, after all.

He phrased some insensitive comments that diminished racial representation in the movie and comics quite well, I thought.

Also, any time you write something desultory about diversity or "identity politics", you're indirectly attacking someone. This is a multiracial board, after all...


Quote
Shogunn, not for nothing, but you're not helping. In addition to an Admin saying to knock it off, Benton (and I) have been trying to be diplomatic, while you're being confrontational. I actually have a lot to say on the matter (as I said earlier in the thread the other day) but honestly I probably shouldn't say anything because I don't want to rile people up. What I will say, specially since you brought it up, is I don't find C6's comment offensive. I find the dogpiling on C6 for that one brief post offensive.

Shogunn wrote "what's wrong with diversity?" in reply to "The casting came off more like diversity check list for a Sunny D commercial than anything else" ... and Shogunn is being confrontational?  :blink:

People have hardly been dogpiling on C6 - if anyone got dogpiled on here, it was Tomato just for pointing out C6's comments were out-of-line.

Lock the post, but the same kind of unaddressed comments will always cause the same kind of flare ups. You're better off deleting or editing C6's comment.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 18, 2017, 09:38:08 PM
Well, I'm glad my message was so well received and my efforts so well rewarded.  Starman, I don't know how much more clearly I could say, 'this isn't productive; let it go,' while still being polite, so let me put it this way:  This isn't productive; let it go.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Cyber Burn on July 18, 2017, 09:48:42 PM
I've been trying to stay out of this debate, but it seems that it's no longer a discussion about the original topic, and has since focused on less pleasant subject matter. Our Community no longer has the active membership that it previously had, and as much as I'd like to say otherwise, a discussion like this would serve as nothing more than a driving point to push new members away.

Regardless of the intent, a comment was made here, while some have moved forward, others have not. I would hate to see bridges burned, I know how hard they are to rebuild, if they are ever rebuilt at all. As such, since there has already been one request to lock this thread, I am going to second that request. I'm sorry if this offends or upsets anyone, but since the discussion is having such a difficult time staying civil, I feel that this is the best course of action.

All hate mail can be sent to me via PM, I'd rather that than see our Community self destruct over this.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 18, 2017, 09:57:46 PM
The Titans and mods are considering the matter.  In the meantime, I think it's safe to say that everyone has been warned about civility.  Please keep that in mind and consider further posts carefully.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 18, 2017, 10:01:34 PM
The Titans and mods are considering the matter.  In the meantime, I think it's safe to say that everyone has been warned about civility.  Please keep that in mind and consider further posts carefully.

One of these days I'm going to have to get that Titan thingie...:P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 18, 2017, 10:02:41 PM
The Titans and mods are considering the matter.  In the meantime, I think it's safe to say that everyone has been warned about civility.  Please keep that in mind and consider further posts carefully.

One of these days I'm going to have to get that Titan thingie...:P

And have you drink all our booze?  You've got to be crazy!  :lol:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Starman on July 18, 2017, 10:08:23 PM
Um, BentonGrey, you posted a massive wall of text literally one minute before I posted my comparatively meager reply. If anyone needs to "let it go"...

I'll add: making lengthy excuses for somebody else's blunt comments in their absence (with a side of "let's reserve judgement until he explains what he meant") doesn't help anything at all. It certainly isn't being diplomatic.

Quote
I won't try to speak for the man, and, honestly, I don't have much desire to engage in this debate in the current climate, but I think I can understand where he was coming from.

 Sigh... :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 18, 2017, 10:28:04 PM
* throws a towel and spit bucket into the ring before zipping back to whatever it is I do *

#sidenote: Yes and I am the best there is at whatever I do and whatever is eat Skittles while staring blankly at the alarm clock.

Oh and to be on-topic, not just because but I've been thinking about this, what's anyone think about Milana Vayntrub as Squirrel Girl?
I'm largely unfamiliar until the very announcement but watched some of her online sketch comedy (Prude Girls Live or something) and think
she'll be a good fit. She has the spunk and look for it and more gets the nuances of proper comedy like subtle gesture and such. 
Again though only from recent minimum exposure to her and well long time maximum exposure to the character.

Back to some rainbow tasting escapades then...

*steps in the spit bucket on the way out*
"SPLORSHY!"
 :doh:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 18, 2017, 11:29:34 PM
I'm not really a Squirrel Girl fan at all, but from the picture I saw she looks like a perfectly decent choice to play the character. I still kinda wish Anna Kendrick got to play her like she wanted.

The New Warriors tv show looks...neat. Like the Runaways and Cloak and Dagger shows it's way too early for me to get a good sense of what they'll be like or if they'll be any good, but the casting looks good. I'll say this, I was pretty happy with the Runaways casting. They look great for the most part. I'm a little iffy on Chase but he might be fine. And I'm fully expecting Molly to be an Inhuman (she almost certainly won't be an Mutant, that's for sure).

I'm more iffy on the big streaming service coup Marvel and DC are going whole hog on these days. As I mentioned in the Star Trek thread, everyone's trying to get a piece of the Netflix pie these days so now in addition to shows like Arrow, Flash, Supergirl, Shield, Gotham, Inhumans and a new X-Men show, we also have stuff like Legion on FX (I still haven't seen it, but I want to. The first episode aired on basic cable in Canada, and I really liked that, I just haven't gotten to see any more yet), Titans (along with Young Justice) on a new DC streaming site, it's just a little annoying and hard to keep track off. I'd watch some of this stuff, but they're all on different networks, some of which I don't get (I'm positive I don't get Freeform) so who knows if I (and others, of course) will get to see these. Plus, while I'm not a "superhero fatigue" guy...man that's a lot of superhero shows.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 18, 2017, 11:43:36 PM
One thing on the dispute and I'm done:

Starman - I wasn't dogpiling on anyone. I was calling the whole thing out of line esp seeing as it is nothing but a summer superhero movie (ie sit back and enjoy it as entertainment). Sorry if it came out as dogpiling on 'mato and them. As for the racial tension, that was the reason I wanted it locked because currently this thread is full of anger and drama...no good discussion comes about in that emotional whirlwind. What we need to do is diffuse this, take a breath, step back, calm down, and then have a true, meaningful discussion on it.

But what do I know? Not like people care...and I'm done.

Shocker: Dear Satan, that is a whole load of superhero fatigue potential! Looks like they didn't learn from the 70s and 80s over-saturation...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 19, 2017, 12:03:05 AM
I know right? I don't blame anyone who says "there's too many Superhero movies/tv shows" at this point!

Speaking personally for myself, it'd be one thing if it was stuff I'm not a fan of (like say, Ka-Zar or Warlord, or Kamandi or something) but I like all of the properties I just mentioned. And while I didn't used to be a fan of Legion, I've started reading his X-Men Legacy run while waiting for my chance to see more of the show, and he's growing on me.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 19, 2017, 12:29:58 AM
Last post I make before I leave this discussion alone too:

I want to say for the record that I do not feel that anyone in this thread has "attacked" me or "dogpiled" on me. I respect the points made by everyone arguing with me the last few pages of this thread (yes, even Spade. I may think he was trolling, but he DID bring up valid points) and, if anything, the people trying to defend me have been more frustrating than the people supposedly attacking me. I don't like the phrasing of C6's comment either, but even I feel it's long since been addressed by this point. And it kinda disgusts me to see people continuing to use me and my posts to justify continually attacking other board members. I may DISAGREE with them, but that is the entire POINT of discussion. Benton in particular is a good friend of mine, and we are probably going to continue discussing Homecoming in a civil manner via PM.

SS: I feel you on there being a ton of comic book shows to keep track of. People always ask me if I watch non-superhero tv shows, but I'm like "Do you even understand how many Marvel/DC shows I have on my plate right now!?! I don't have time to watch ___ seasons of ____"
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 19, 2017, 12:41:01 AM
Getting caught up on long-running tv shows is time consuming. I was behind in Walking Dead for a good 2 years and it's too bad, because when I finally caught up I found the show got a lot better.
I watch a lot of stuff in groups so that helps.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 19, 2017, 12:49:05 AM
Anyone making streaming shows is understandable. It is or may be the next platform. Getting in now means having a solid place in it's future if it does outmode conventional cable service. It always seems improbable now but I remember when that was thought about satellite exclusive shows (namely SciFI channel, Comedy Channel and Cartoon Network as well the Howard Stern Show got it's start there). Or reality tv shows. Second, and I read this a few times, streaming free's artists up from editorial and network dictation and allows them to do the kind of shows they want to. Or at least not have their pitch sitting in a board room full of executives for the next year or so.

Saturation agreed. And how! I'm probably worse then most though. The most I saw of Agents Of SHIELD was the first season, past that I've only caught cinematic releases and three out of four on video release. No biggie though, I haven't nor do read every comic released either. I have had Legion pitched at me a few times though and read and loved the run it was based on. That one gets a maybe in downtime check.

Anyways, your all people and great people. Your all humans and have emotions sometimes. We all have problems relating ourselves and with composition at times. No one in this thread is a villain. Okay, I am. But I'm also super lazy so the world needn't worry. On the topic any of you seem to be at odds about you all also seem to have stated your stances, intents and feelings towards the issue. You still all respect what another thinks and thats something, just what I'm reading imo *shrug* (I still say I miss the fun stuff when I'm in the ER, lol). Else if I may what I usually see in situations where there's a charred string of posts in a thread is the brass just deletes/omits that chunk from where they determine it began to ended. Just my suggestion. Else and finally on that the topic of racism, bigotry, and the interpretation of what is offensive and how to rectify the situation is an important one. Perhaps a separate topic for that alone? Naturally with a disclaimer and something like " no hitting below the bread basket ". Or "dogpiling " either it seems jk (not even sure what that is but I detest animal abuse). Yadda yadda, have a fresh cup of OJ, hug and what not. Won't matter to any of you that much a week from now if it hasn't already fizzled out like I said in my former post so might as well not yield it now either, eh? Stay fantastic people.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 19, 2017, 01:56:01 AM
QUICK SEQUE:

You dang kids! Get off me lawn!

Now where de 'ell is me vodka?!?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 19, 2017, 03:27:35 AM
They were peeing on it! And they where in their fifties! You'd throw a hammer at too, yeesh.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 19, 2017, 07:14:03 AM
Just a quick note for anyone that might be interested, I was just giving MY perspective coming from someone that would be considered "diversity".  That's all.  I'm not even mad.  In fact, I don't know what's all the fuss is about as far as "lock this thread" and stuff.  I didn't really think anyone was out of line really. 

But... that said, Tomato, I hope you're reading THIS part:

Technically speaking, they never used the name "Ned Leeds" in the movie.  Though that probaby won't help your problems you have with the character, I just thought I'd point it out it could(could) be someone else.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 19, 2017, 01:55:27 PM
That's commendable Shogunn. Full disclosure there's been a pretty scathing term flipped out here and there that from my end is a real no-no, but likewise I'm not getting riled either and just kept reading. I pretty much notice intent in all things, part of my clinical training, and haven't seen any yet. Bringing up things and terms that are charred and disparaging yes, but I don't see anyone going guns blazing at anyone with those things in the barrels either. Again I wasn't present though and I'm more focused on my own physical thing right now so more *shrug*.

Else back on topic. Anyone who has taken in the volume of Marvel based shows I would ask what they believe of them is the one that's the most imperative to watch, the must see. I'm interested myself and add episodes in my down time here and there but like Tomato here and others just don't have the time to see em all.

-
Actually I'm going to edit here and hit on topic one of three as well. As far as Homecoming is concerned I don't think any of you have been wrong but I'm wondering if your keying into the why or not. Peter is a white teenager. His classmates and friends that he pays the most attention to and has repertoires with are not. His teacher is an old lame white guy. The Vulture is an older white jerk, which he actually is in the comics anyways. The why is pretty standard though and it's marketing. Disney acquired Marvel back when for a primary reason and it was that they had issues getting the attention, favor and of course monies of teenage boys.

So take a look at this version of Peter and align it to any current demographic studies of white boys his age (current again, not when we we're kids). You'll find this is pretty inline with how white guys his age actually think. And I'll add here the US has changed and diversity has been more spread out especially over the course of the past decade. The melting pot effect is now in full swing and whereas yourself as a child may have say attended a high school that only had a handful of students and/or faculty that were not white or you were one of those few diverse these days that isn't the case at all. In most public school system classrooms and out to city populations there is widely more diverse spectrum of people then there was when Spider-man the comic book was conceived. So this is actually logical.

Back to Peter and boys his age, despite artistic integrity foremost it is a product and needs to make money. It needs to pay back it's initial investment and to do that has to sell x2 that gross in net, not even speaking of the shareholders here and all the people involved in the film getting checks and royalties. Nor the current state of piracy and the chunk that takes out of projected revenue. And so forth. The point I'm driving is of yes it does not match the Peter you grew up with. Because it's not supposed to. That Peter was meant to sell to your demographic. It wasn't foremost artistic either. But that day is long gone and this Peter is for all intents and purposes meant to the Spider-man for this generation, generation of course meaning children his age not adults ours. Because there parent are the ones that are going to be buying them all the merchandise related to it. There the ones that are going to for example buy up trapper keepers with Peter in his homemade costume fighting the Vulture next month for the school year. And again it isn't all immoral either anyways. It can be said it's a good thing to appeal to youth and let them have something in fact it is the priority of most parents and peers. As well imo again laying out the option for children, especially white boys, to have a role model that encourages them to respect diversity as well the opposite sex isn't a bad thing because the opposite turn certainly hasn't done any good in raising open minded and kinder adults.

So in summation all of you are correct in that the things your pointing out in the film are in fact in it, also no fault of your own as you did not put them there but are you sure it's actually a flaw in the production and/or does the state of an enterprise in a long past era really have any baring on one in 2017? In case that's too vague what I'm saying is as a comic book diehard I've read the notion " Doesn't match the source material " as often as have you all. And it clearly does not but what I'm asking is how does that have any real import on the current motion vehicle? Because I can't follow the logic there, not when weighing it against the entire audience for this media. The keyword here is adaptation.

That's what I got out of all this in the briefest nutshell I could type.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 20, 2017, 03:14:48 AM
That's quite the brief nutshell, SA. ;)

Anyway, I hear what you're saying.  And although there's the line between those that prefer a strict adherence to the source material and those that don't mind changes because of it being, what you said an "adaptation" or what others have said a different "MCU Universe" and that's all well and good.

But in some cases it's just weird.  Like Michelle.  Okay you want to call her MJ.  Fine.  You want her to be Peter's love interest?  Fine.  Don't want to give her the red hair and say it's more metaphorical than anything?  Okay, I'll let it slide.  Then just call the girl Mary Jane already. Lol.  Rather she is or she isn't.  It's like they tried to put half their foot in and one out.  I think Zendaya did a splendid enough job either way and would love to see more of her, whether she's "Michelle Jane" or "Mary Jane", black white or purple.

Not a huge gripe. It's whatever... just weird.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 20, 2017, 05:34:54 AM
For me it is. When I don't get it down in detail then I confuse people. So more *shrugs* Shruggle McShruggleMuch in here.

I get the fine line too. I'm an eighties kid. So me I'm looking at it going "erm". But just hitting on the why's of it and why it doesn't constitute a flaw in film making, which comic fans tend to point to it as. It doesn't align with ones preference, understandable and totally in the right even. But that doesn't mean it's produced wrong either. Thing is as hard as it can be to even swallow these things only matter in a large way to people who read lots of superhero comic books. It's burnt into our retinas so much that we can't help but to see it stand out. Like picture a person raised in a bunker who is shown pictures of the sun but it's blue. Then they see the actual sun and of course even after being detailed on how it's supposed to be it's going to stand out to them. At least for so much as time before they adjust to it, hence the nature of change and the human minds struggle against. The other part of that jagged pill is those of us who devote to reading comics are a tiny fraction of a worldwide released major motion pictures audience, perhaps even the smallest demographics that will actually be paying to see it. Not because a large number aren't getting there but comic diehards are a minority. Hence retroactively anyone producing the film is going to look at the majority of their customer demographic and what appeals to them first and foremost. Like I cared that Juggernaut was a mutant as well. Most of the people that watched and enjoyed the film and the film version of the character wouldn't be affected by such a thing.

Just pointing this out. We are here so of course the amount of comic diehards is 100% right here and now, so it matters to us. But it doesn't denote production quality regardless and now that the numbers are in this sucker...whoo, looks like they did something very right by a lot of peoples accounts.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 20, 2017, 08:31:44 AM
Yeah, I get that.  Like I understand Tomato's gripe with Ned.  I've heard others say similar.  The thing is I wasn't a big reader of Miles Morales's Spider-Man so I had no frame of reference.  Even Donald Glover's "yeah I have a nephew that lives in the city" went on deaf ears and I wouldn't know known anything about it until I was told days later.  So if Tomato says Ned is pretty much all the characteristics of "Ganke" but just named "Ned" instead it wouldn't bother me.  Or many others who aren't as familiar with the book at Tomato is.  But since he's familiar with the book, I can see how it might stick out and I respect that.

Nice analogy with the sun though.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 20, 2017, 04:03:03 PM
Did a bit of digging on a few things, figured I'd share them

-Michelle in the MCU is credited as "Michelle Jones," thus the "MJ" nickname. I'm kinda with Shogunn, I wish they'd just call her Mary Jane, but the way it was presented it was supposed to be a "Surprise" in the last minutes of the film (which is why I kept trying to spoiler that bit initially, but oh well).
-Ned's last name isn't given in the film, but I wouldn't be shocked if down the line he's credited as "Ned Lee," which is not only a natural mix of "Ned Leeds" and "Ganke Lee" but also the name given to Ned in the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon. Ironically, Ganke has used "Ned" as a pseudonym in the comics, but it was more recently and that may have a nod and wink to the film choice rather than the other way around.

Again, I think my only issue with Ned is that because he's a "mix" of both characters, it leaves little room for us to see both.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 23, 2017, 04:53:51 PM
So I came across a cool little MCU related article today I thought I'd share:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/tom-holland-confirms-that-peter-parker-appeared-in-iron-1796423390

Quote
For years, it was one of the better fan theories out there, and now it’s confirmed to be true: Peter Parker was in Iron Man 2.

“It is Peter Parker,” Spider-Man: Homecoming star Tom Holland told The Huffington Post.

He’s referring to a moment near the end of Iron Man 2 when a young boy wearing an Iron Man mask at the Stark Expo stands up to Hammer drone. Then Iron Man comes down and saves him. “Nice work, kid,” he says. Here’s the scene:

We never see the kid’s face and fans had long thought that could have been Peter Parker, since a) he lives in Queens, which is where the Stark Expo was held; b) Peter would be interested in technology and a fan of Tony Stark/Iron Man; and c) the age lines up.

Now granted, this is totally retconned in and Holland later clarified this (He had a conversation with Feige about it and was allowed to say it, but it clearly was not intended from the beginning) but it's still a really cool bit of trivia to have out there.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 23, 2017, 07:44:04 PM
Yeah, I heard about that a week or so ago. Neat.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on July 23, 2017, 08:57:56 PM
I have to say I had an issue with this movie's MJ. Mary Jane is the life of the party, or at least that's how she was written in the classic comics. She was upbeat, positive, and outgoing-- a good reason why many people liked her better than Gwen. Homecoming's MJ was the opposite. Her defining personality trait was being critical of her friends/surroundings. If this was how she was written in the ol' Stan Lee/John Romita comics, I bet Gwen would be alive today.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on July 24, 2017, 06:02:38 AM
Interesting point, Ouflah. My on-again-off-again reading of the Spider-Man comics left me with a similar impression that MJ was sort of a popular kid, which isn't what we saw in this movie.

However, another aspect of MJ that showed up in comics was that she had other troubles in her life that she hid from most people at school. And, there is plenty of room for that part of her backstory to develop with this movie's MJ. Hiding something with popularity can make a character interesting, but so can hiding something with standoffish behavior. Obviously, we didn't see any hidden aspects of the new version yet, because we didn't learn much about her at all. But, it would easily fit with what we have seen if they decide to explore it.

Also, I think a quirky/nerdy MJ fits well with the backdrop of a science magnet high school. And, keeping in mind that Peter is basically a genius, I'd sort of have an easier time believing something between him and an MJ who could keep up than at least one earlier movie MJ, who was, well, not-so-brainy.

And, to be honest, while I wasn't overwhelmed by this movie, I was actually glad that it wasn't another Peter-and-his-awkward-dating showcase. Yes, I understand that that is part of the teen experience and there was definitely some of it in SM:H. But, it's not the most interesting part of Peter's story and, after the previous several movies carpet bombing us with that, I am happy for a break.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 24, 2017, 10:29:18 PM
Another thing to remember is, this is MJ specifically as a freshman in High School. Remember, the MJ from the classic comics? She's from Peter's college years. A LOT can happen from high school to where we see her in SM:H. And as stumpy pointed out, there's layers to her attitude in college as well: we know that a lot of her "party girl" attitude was a pose to deflect attention from how broken her home life was, which is part of why she gravitated towards both Harry and Peter.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 24, 2017, 05:34:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ILCTco-9vo&index=1&list=WL (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ILCTco-9vo&index=1&list=WL)
An interesting commentary on the current state of Spider-Man.With a good deal of focus on Homecoming.
No,really,where is Uncle Ben in this movie?There is never any indication that Peter and aunt May have financial problems either.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on December 09, 2017, 05:35:32 PM
There's apparently lots of credible rumors that Disney is close to buying out most of 21st Century Fox, which means they would own the film rights to X-Men and Fantastic Four again.  It seems unlikely at this point that the X-men could be made to fit into the current Marvel movie universe, but the Fantastic Four could with no problems.  This I would like to see.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 13, 2017, 03:12:00 PM
Yeah, as much as Disney acquiring yet more power and companies is probably bad for all of us long-term, I would love to see the Fantastic Four actually return to Marvel and get the treatment they deserve.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on December 14, 2017, 07:59:36 AM
I think Avengers 4 is wrapping in a few weeks or next month or so, which would make it hard to imagine they'd included anything X-Men/Fantastic 4 related there.  Perhaps reshoots with added dialogue referencing Professor Xavier or Reed Richards, etc. 

However, I'd think they're making this deal for everything Phase 4.  Disney might just stop with Avengers and do X-Men related films....

Of course this all depends on the details of the deal... finalized later today apparently.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on December 14, 2017, 09:21:21 AM
Fantastic Four being part of Phase Four of MCU seems like a huge deal but there is a slight wrinkle.. FOX owns the distribution and production rights but the actual character rights belong to Contantin Film (a German film company who snagged them during the Marvel bankruptcy movie rights super sale) and they were the brains behind every single film that FOX did and even pushed through the infamous Roger Corman Fantastic Four. We can only hope that Kevin Feige has had them on speed dial these last few weeks to make sure that Contantin is willing to let his film team do the job right or include their character rights as some kind of side deal with acquiring FOX's films as a whole package.

Guess we will find out during Marvel/Disney's announcement when the U.S. Stock Market opens and their media blitz over the course of the day.

- CQ

Oh, I'd just love to see Marvel Studios actually pull off calling the next Spider-Man film.. Homecoming Chapter 2.. which reveals that after the whole Thanos event that Avengers Tower was purchased by Reed Richards and Spidey runs into the MCU's team during his second year of being New York's guardian wall-crawler and ends with Peter's old costume being destroyed forcing him to wear one of the Fantastic Four's spare suits with a sack over his head for at least a scene or two before getting his Spider-Armor out of Tony's Armory (I'm still thinking that Tony only allows Peter to access this armor during emergencies to keep him from being overpowered all the time).
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 14, 2017, 02:41:43 PM
On one hand we might actually get an F4 comic,on the other hand homogenization of pop culture continues.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on December 14, 2017, 08:38:31 PM
And the deal is officially done.  What exactly this will mean for the stray Marvel properties is not yet completely clear, but it seems likely that Disney would want to fold in the stuff that it can.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 15, 2017, 05:11:01 AM
Also,that solves the problem with Excalibur movie rights.And also makes Avengers vs X-men movie possible. :o
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on December 15, 2017, 02:24:12 PM
If I had to put money on things, I'd estimate that any sort of merger/development with Fox's Marvel properties will happen around Avengers 4 in 2019. That gives both studios time to finish whatever films are in the works, maybe start moving things in the direction of a crossover/reboot, but then also have the big tentpole film to bring that to fruition. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the reason they decided to change the name of Infinity War II was partly because of this merger.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on December 16, 2017, 08:08:48 PM
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the reason they decided to change the name of Infinity War II was partly because of this merger.

Agreed! I'm 150% sure that once Isaac Perlmutter gave up his seat at the Marvel table to tackle more political ambitions that Bob Iger and Kevin Feige dropped some paperwork about their arrangement with Sony in Fox's Inbox. However, Rupert Murdoch was already thinking of trimming down FOX to just it's news and sports divisions which made for some very interesting behind the scenes talks between all involved parties. Disney wanted to get X-Men and Fantastic Four under their cinematic banner and desperately wanted access to the original prints of The Star Wars Trilogy so they had HUGE motivation to use this deal to complete those franchises once and for all. I'm sure once Disney was very close to finalizing the deal in time for Christmas 2017 they cleared their production slate including their plans for Infinity War Part II so much larger events can be set in motion.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 29, 2017, 08:17:32 PM
Since I dont feel like starting a thread,anyone seen Runaways?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on December 29, 2017, 10:33:01 PM
Yeah, I've been watching Runaways. Like Star Trek Discovery, it airs on actual tv in Canada. I like it, the cast is great (both the kids and adults, who unlike the comic, are legitimate main characters). It takes a LOT of liberties with the source material. Which I think works out pretty well for a tv version of it that might not necessarily deliver on the further Marvel connections.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 04, 2018, 08:07:18 PM
So you soundtrack for a movie about an African king is American rap.Makes sense?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on January 04, 2018, 10:36:02 PM
Would you prefer Beethoven?

Does it really matter?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: UnkoMan on January 05, 2018, 01:27:31 AM
So you soundtrack for a movie about an African king is American rap.Makes sense?

Yes, because the primary target audience is African Americans whom marketing people would presume would have more than a passing familiarity with such type of music.

PS: I am hoping the Black Panther is as dope as the one trailer I saw made it look. He was awesome in Civil War, I thought.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 05, 2018, 02:06:42 AM
Yeah, hopefully the movie will be good, but I will second that he was awesome in Civil War. That was literally what I was thinking when I came out of the theater after watching CA:CW.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 05, 2018, 05:07:45 AM
So you soundtrack for a movie about an African king is American rap.Makes sense?

Yes, because the primary target audience is African Americans whom marketing people would presume would have more than a passing familiarity with such type of music.

PS: I am hoping the Black Panther is as dope as the one trailer I saw made it look. He was awesome in Civil War, I thought.

Your whole answer boils down to "cuz hes black", you do realize that?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on January 05, 2018, 05:19:20 AM
Wait, he's black?!? I thought he was cordoroy?!? (Couldn't help the joke...sorry...)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on January 05, 2018, 06:23:46 AM
So you soundtrack for a movie about an African king is American rap.Makes sense?

Yes, because the primary target audience is African Americans whom marketing people would presume would have more than a passing familiarity with such type of music.

PS: I am hoping the Black Panther is as dope as the one trailer I saw made it look. He was awesome in Civil War, I thought.

Your whole answer boils down to "cuz hes black", you do realize that?

Because in this case it's true?  He's one of the first, if not the first, black superheroes to helm a blockbuster movie.  And it's a character who's genuinely awesome in his own right.  I can't blame people for wanting to hype that up.  I would have preferred them to go with more traditional African music as most of the character are not African Americans, but  those in charge have chosen to theme the music in that way.  There may be more to the reason than that.  Perhaps it's just he director's favorite music. It doesn't really fit the setting or characters of the movie all that well, but I suspect the movie will be cool as it is, and it's hardly the end of the world if their musical genre choice comes across as a bit strange.  I've loved the character since Earth's Mightiest Heroes and really look forward to seeing him in his own movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: UnkoMan on January 05, 2018, 07:22:20 AM
That is how marketing people think.
But also, everybody I know who is black seemed really pumped about the fact that there is a mainstream superhero movie with a primarily black cast, black director, and this soundtrack. Did you know score's composer "traveled to Senegal and South Africa to record local musicians to form the "base" of his soundtrack"? Also, the director chose Kendrick Lamar personally, because he feels that his "artistic themes align with those we explore in the film."
So yeah, the hip hop is there because he's black, and that's awesome. Kendrick Lamar? SZA? I don't know who else is on the soundtrack, but so far sounds pretty hype to me.

Anyhow, Black Panther rules!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on January 05, 2018, 10:28:16 AM
Anyone remember any complaining when they chose Led Zeppelin to be on the soundtrack for a movie about Norse Gods?

 &lt;_&lt;
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 05, 2018, 10:36:55 AM
I was wondering if the actual film was likely to feature the rap/hip hop sounding music, or just the trailers, so that's neat.

In the case of him being black, well, he's the King of an African nation, so it's kinda hard to do Black Panther without leaning into that angle. It's just hard coded into the character. As I've noticed in some series (such as Avengers stories such as Busiek's run) if you downplay all the African-centric stuff (as will likely happen in an ensemble cast team book setting) he basically gets whittled down to a Batman clone (as does Moon Knight if you leave out the stuff that makes Moon Knight unique). Physical brawler, athletic, gadgets, money, trust issues with other super heroes, lot of skulking about.

Quote
Anyone remember any complaining when they chose Led Zeppelin to be on the soundtrack for a movie about Norse Gods?

I'm assuming you're talking about Thor III which, as Benton pointed out, is NOT the best go-to example of properly representing its source material of origin.

Also, I hate to be that guy, but so now we're not allowed to complain about or criticize things in the trailer? I recall seeing an entire thread awhile ago about someone's feelings on the Avengers Infinity War Trailer.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 05, 2018, 02:19:28 PM
I wasnt questioning the movie or its protagonist,I was saying I find the choice of soundtrack odd.Lets leave it at that before this goes the way any movie discussion goes here.
Also,I think Falcon was the first black superhero.1969,IIRC.DC had Tyroc in 1976,I think,and not as many assume,John Stewart(1979). #themoreyouknow
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: UnkoMan on January 05, 2018, 04:08:38 PM
Oops. I didn't mean to make it into an argument or anything.
I was just saying there's a very good and obvious reason for an American made movie about an African king to feature a soundtrack by contemporary American artists of primarily African decent.
I could see more complaint when, say, The Great Gatsby featured a hip hop soundtrack... though, I actually heard a lot of praise when that happened.
Anyway, we're all pals here. No problems.

Also, Black Panther was created in 1966, if we are wondering. July/August, FF#53/53.
Mandrake's sidekick Lothar kind of counts as a superhero, and he first appeared in 1934. 1947 saw Lion Man who came from a comic which actually featured an all black creative staff. Pretty progressive stuff! Just one issue though. (I just learned about that one from Google!)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 26, 2018, 10:46:40 PM
Okay,Captain Marvel costume...not a fan.Green and leather dont really mix.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on January 26, 2018, 11:39:28 PM
For the most part I like what they're going for. I'm a fan of the original green Captain Marvel suit-- it looks really different and alien. That said, if I were a reporter in the MCU, I'd strongly believe that the same person made the suits for both Ant-Man and Captain Marvel.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on January 27, 2018, 07:58:31 AM
Okay,Captain Marvel costume...not a fan.Green and leather dont really mix.

Funny that I've not seen many folks complain about Oliver's leather green costume on Arrow. Course we usually don't see too many costume shots of him taken by unofficial photographers and without the digital enhancements done in the final edit. Course, That's just me. It's meant to look alien and green has always been the uniform color of the Kree military.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 27, 2018, 11:53:00 AM
You do realise he is GREEN Arrow?But thats not really related to anything here.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 27, 2018, 04:06:42 PM
Which is like saying Iron Man and Superman wear red.
Anyway,why is it whenever I make an observation Im greated with animosity worthy of a comic journalist?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 27, 2018, 04:26:49 PM
I'm not crazy about this either.  It looks okay, and if they're going for something approximating the original Captain's kree uniform, that could be sort of cool.  Nonetheless, replacing the white with more gray in that costume makes it look much less interesting.  In the end, I just find myself hoping that this is not her main costume.  Captain Marvel, original and Carol version, has one of the near-perfect costumes.  The relatively modern Carol Captain has a fantastic look, and it would be a huge waste not to use it.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/digitaltrends-uploads-prod/2015/03/captain-marvel.jpg

I'm also not crazy about the casting.  She's a decent actress from what little I've seen of her (Kong), but she isn't quite the type I would have chosen.  She doesn't really seem to have the right kind of presence.  I am, however, willing to be convinced, of course.

Also, on the topic of green leather, it is fair to say that the context for a street vigilante and an interstellar hero is rather different and expectations of costume design can be different as well.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 27, 2018, 06:17:28 PM
Actually,it was YOU who brought up Green Arrow,I didnt comment on his costume in this thread.So I dont really see why your acting like I kicked your dog.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 27, 2018, 08:05:51 PM
Well,after having my own opinion mansplained back to me,I have to admit defeat.
Its an awesome costume,you win.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 27, 2018, 09:13:33 PM
Let's play nicely, folks. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on January 28, 2018, 12:39:04 AM
I saw a color corrected pic someplace, but I was wondering... if the green might be something they could use with the Chroma Key (or whatever) process, and computer-correct the thing after filming.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 28, 2018, 01:11:11 AM
That seems a lot of trouble to go to...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: UnkoMan on January 28, 2018, 01:31:20 AM
If you are wondering if they'd remove the green to give it a "space" pattern, doubtful. Chroma green is much brighter, and generally when they want to recreate a part of a character they will use motion tracking jimmies, then make a 3d model, then overlay that.
It's probably just green, guys.

Colour Corrected:
https://movieweb.com/captain-marvel-movie-costume-classic-colors-fan-art/
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 28, 2018, 03:26:09 AM
That looks so much better, it's hard to believe.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on January 28, 2018, 04:26:16 AM
I agree.  The red and blue version does look nice.  A lot of people think she'll switch colors during the movie anyway.  We shall see.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on January 28, 2018, 06:10:41 AM
Well, Mar-Vell (Ever wonder if that is a Kryptonian name?) started off in a white and green costume, so maybe they are using that as a precedent.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on January 28, 2018, 06:16:47 AM
I agree.  The red and blue version does look nice.  A lot of people think she'll switch colors during the movie anyway.  We shall see.

That's what I've been hoping for, and that's more or less what my first thought was when I saw it, given it's similarity to the original Cap's original costume.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Ouflah on January 29, 2018, 09:20:27 PM
That's very likely. It's not unusual for Marvel to include the original suit design in the origin story before switching to the more mainstream costume (Iron Man, Captain America, Dr. Strange).
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: JeyNyce on February 02, 2018, 12:49:21 PM
Why couldn't they give her her old costume from 1977???  I say this sarcastically  :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on February 09, 2018, 09:11:38 PM
Okay, Black Panther's coming out next week and we've been getting more and more tidbits about the movie over the last few months.  I just saw something that gave extended clip and dialogue that provided a pretty key plot point of the movie that I don't think has been done before.  Alas, I'm not the biggest BP fan and don't know if this is something that's been done in the comics.... with him.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on February 10, 2018, 12:24:55 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on February 14, 2018, 01:57:15 PM
So I just saw the movie today.  I definitely recommend it! Here are my spoiler free thoughts, but in a spoiler box (then inside another spoiler box will be my spoilers, too).
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 15, 2018, 08:26:04 AM
In the comic (at least things I read),he has Batman-esque kevlar costume.And in the realm of fiction kevlar=magical force field.So there is that. :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 16, 2018, 10:48:40 PM
This will trigger some people but I cant help but notice...there is a lot of hype about Black Panther being the FIRST movie about a black superhero.Did Marvel forgot they mad 3 Blade movies,almost 20 years ago?
Only one was good,but thats neither here nor there.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on February 16, 2018, 11:45:25 PM
I have heard that pointed out elsewhere, actually. I wonder if it's supposed to be the first African superhero as opposed to African American. Even if you ignored Blade, there's also Catwoman (since it starred Halle Berry), Spawn (since Al Simmons was a black man before he became Spawn) and some other more obscure films such as Meteor Man and Blank Man (though both of those were comedies).

In any case, did you mean Blade 1 or Blade 2?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on February 17, 2018, 12:48:24 AM
Or the fact that Comet Man and Steel happened before then...

Or that Shaft (perhaps the first black "superhero" on screen) came even beforehand...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Panther_Gunn on February 17, 2018, 12:56:22 AM
Or the fact that Comet Man and Steel happened before then...

Or that Shaft (perhaps the first black "superhero" on screen) came even beforehand...

I think we're *all* trying to forget that Steel happened.....   :ooh
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on February 17, 2018, 12:59:31 AM
The other was Meteor Man...not Comet Man, my mistake.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on February 17, 2018, 06:19:13 AM
My thoughts:

First of all, three of the four of my most favorite things are social politics, boxing and comics and that's pretty much Ryan Coogler's entire film resume.  Now to be perfectly honest, I was pretty underwhelmed by his first few movies.  Fruitvale Station was okay, but it just seem really weirdly cut.  Creed was extra long and all over the place and I really wish it just did what Rocky did and "paint-by-the-numbers" but it didn't.  So I didn't have high expectations for him directing BP.  And as I suspected, I had some of the same problems here too.  Although I enjoyed every minute, it was still pretty long.  Some parts seemed a little too convenient.

That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie.  Killmonger was a great villain.  So was Klaue.  The Dora Milaje were awesome.  Shuri was ridiculously adorable!  And T'Challa of course was cast well and done right.  Visually, the movie was stunning.  The underlying message was pretty meaningful and I really dug it.  And from my side of the fence, you can see where his motivations are.  There are some plotholes that bug me, and like I said, there are parts that I definitely would have trimmed, but definitely worth to watch, whether your a fan of the genre or not, it holds up and is entertaining.

Now some of the spoiler stuff:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Again, it was an overall enjoyable film.  Really hope people don't elect to skip out on this one for whatever reason... particularly since... it's reasonable to want to watch this movie.  As a fan or not.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on February 18, 2018, 12:55:04 AM
So some of the numbers are in.  Sounds like it's now the 6th best movie for the opening 3 days of all time, and best pre-summer blockbuster period.  It's currently above Civil War and for four days will pass Age of Ultron.  To say it's a major success is putting it mildly.  It looks like some of the reviews put it as the second best of the Marvel films after Winter Soldier, although of course every individual will have very different opinions regarding that.

Still the people behind this film all deserve a huge congratulations.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on February 20, 2018, 06:14:21 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on February 21, 2018, 05:46:24 PM
No real spoilers, but just in case

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I know this isn't the music forum, but the Kendrick and pals soundtrack is so phenomenal. If you're into going hard af hip hop, you must listen. If not, it might get you into it. I have been playing it non-stop.

Man, what a great time to be alive.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: GhostMachine on February 21, 2018, 08:02:26 PM
I saw Black Panther yesterday, and it's definitely in my top 5 of MCU movies. But, I have two issues:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on February 22, 2018, 08:12:46 AM
We saw this on opening day and really enjoyed it. I'd say it's a top Marvel film for me. And, while not a laugh-a-minute kind of movie, I thought it had plenty of light moments that left me grinning.

I agree with others that it was long. But, for me, at least, it never really dragged.

Slight spoiler:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on February 22, 2018, 11:23:36 AM
Stumpy, regarding your point...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 23, 2018, 07:56:33 PM
More time has been devoted to discussing politics of the movie then the movie (kudos to everyone who worked in sh*tholegate into their reviews) and I have to say,its obvious that the politics came before entertaiment on the priority list.And everyone found something to prop up their own narratives.Kinda like with Hunger Games,I guess.
All in all,its a decent enough movie,but not the greatest superhero movie or a landmark achivment it was hyped up to be.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 02, 2018, 08:12:14 PM
More time has been devoted to discussing politics of the movie then the movie (kudos to everyone who worked in sh*tholegate into their reviews) and I have to say,its obvious that the politics came before entertaiment on the priority list.And everyone found something to prop up their own narratives.Kinda like with Hunger Games,I guess.
All in all,its a decent enough movie,but not the greatest superhero movie or a landmark achivment it was hyped up to be.

sh*tholegate... gotcha.  I see where you're going...

But I think a lot of the politics were unavoidable, particular from a certain point of view.  Not much contemporary, but the big debate in many of my FB groups is the opposing schools of thought between T'Challa and Killmonger had with black folks and ethnic Africans, taking on a similar theme that Magneto and Professor X have with mutants.  It's a sensible political argument.  Nothing obtrusive, but completely story driven.  But there were a number of narratives that could be played upon.  One of which is it's cultural significance.  I think this movie had an deeper meaning to some just as Wonder Woman did last year.  While each movie were completely entertaining, it was important to see the portrayals that we did.  Not just important for those who were represented, but important for those who don't see or think of seeing these roles filled.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 02, 2018, 10:48:49 PM
Im not going anywhere,New York Times actually worked in that in their review.Im not kidding.
Yeah,about Killmonger,hes not really Magneto,hes more...Hitler.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 03, 2018, 01:15:31 AM
There's also a T-shirt being sold somewhere with a slogan on the front referencing that. I would assume, not an official Marvel product.

Now as for the movie itself, I'd been meaning to say this:

Quote
First of all, three of the four of my most favorite things are social politics, boxing and comics and that's pretty much Ryan Coogler's entire film resume.  Now to be perfectly honest, I was pretty underwhelmed by his first few movies.  Fruitvale Station was okay, but it just seem really weirdly cut.  Creed was extra long and all over the place and I really wish it just did what Rocky did and "paint-by-the-numbers" but it didn't.  So I didn't have high expectations for him directing BP.  And as I suspected, I had some of the same problems here too.  Although I enjoyed every minute, it was still pretty long.  Some parts seemed a little too convenient.

I actually didn't even know he worked on all three of those movies. I guess I didn't really look into who made Creed or Black Panther (though it fits that they all have Micheal B. Jordan).  I myself really enjoyed Creed so it's entirely possible I'll like this more than you did. I can't say for sure until I watch the flick.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on March 10, 2018, 06:49:07 PM
In somewhat related news, pet shelters are starting to report that instead of being picked last as normal, black cats are actually being picked first(and named after characters from the movies) and cat adoptions in general are up since the movie came out.  This was not something that anyone was expecting, but considering that it normally very difficult to get someone to adopt a black cat, it's been seen a good thing.  As you may notice from my avatar, I am very much in favor of dark furred felines.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 11, 2018, 02:50:57 AM
Yay!

~SS, Cat Lover
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: cmdrkoenig67 on March 18, 2018, 05:55:42 PM
Stumpy, regarding your point...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

BTW, my sister took me to see BP and I loved it...One of the best Marvel movies made, IMHO.

Dana
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 21, 2018, 10:05:40 AM
BTW, there's a pretty MAJOR rumor that has started going around and with the rumors we've been hearing preceding it, it could be pretty meaning for for Avengers: Infinity War and even for ALL of Phase 4 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe thereafter. 

Again, this is a major spoiler so be warned about continued reading....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Again, keep in mind that last part is a lot of my own theory based on what could VERY POSSIBLY be a mistake or some sort of uninformed writer from Metacritic.  But if Metacritic did unveil something they shouldn't have and this is indeed true, they've might have given a tell for what's to come for Phase 4.  But I dunno.  I've looked online for someone to have put 2 and 2 together like I have and no one has, so I could be really, really wrong... or really, really right.  We'll see.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 21, 2018, 11:39:19 AM
I did hear that rumor, which would be pretty wild if it were true.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 21, 2018, 08:28:59 PM
Yeah, there's that...  But if that were the case, why wouldn't they just say?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But like I said, BECAUSE they flat out refuse to confirm it(maybe for good reason) it all could be speculation and a glaring mistake.  But at the same time, they're not denying it either.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 21, 2018, 08:44:19 PM
Also it should also be mentioned that back in Civil War, Spider-Man was not only left out of the first trailer he was erased out of much of where he would have been in the actual movie in both trailers.  Until the very end.  Marvel kept his inclusion equally tight-lipped.  Of course he didn't change the direction of the movie or the MCU at all, but it does show a history of them being covert with certain characters.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 21, 2018, 09:31:45 PM
Did Marvel officially announced the cameos such as the ones in Guardians of the Galaxy 2? Because if not, Pip could just be a post-credits gag or something. Marvel, in my experience, likes to keep the post-credit scene cameos a surprise even when they're just for a gag.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on March 21, 2018, 11:04:30 PM
Regarding this Dinklage speculation and the thematic tie to why Spidey wasn't in the early Civil War trailers... It's been noted on several fan sites that Marvel often does a pretty good job of keeping big movie reveals under wraps until release, particularly in comparison to DC. (I mean, sure, we all knew that Superman was coming back. But, at least have enough respect for suspense to not just show a nominally dead character as alive in the bleeping trailer!) Presumably, that's what happened with Spidey in CW and maybe that's the reason for the silence about Dinklage's role.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 26, 2018, 05:21:08 AM
Deadpool 2 is basicly Terminator (2).Which isnt so bad.
Cable seems spot on,everyone else...not so much.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on March 26, 2018, 08:01:16 PM
In other news, Black Panther just beat Avengers as the highest grossing superhero film of all time!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 24, 2018, 04:54:46 AM
http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/140489-sony-dumps-new-venom-trailer-after-leak.html (http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/140489-sony-dumps-new-venom-trailer-after-leak.html)
Here is the Venom trailer.With bery little Venom in it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 24, 2018, 05:18:23 AM
I mean, I feel like the placement on this one was deliberate, and it's not like the last teaser where there was NOTHING Venom related in the Venom trailer.

That said, PLEASE tell me the pronunciation of "sym-bye-oat" is just the british version or something... because it would be assenine if they truly did fruit up pronouncing "symbiote" in the GD Venom movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 26, 2018, 11:14:23 PM
Posted without comment:
http://textsfromsuperheroes.com/post/173308521566/symbiote

Also, what the heck is up with Hardy's Jerry Lewis-esq delivery of his lines?  Who thought that was a good idea?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 27, 2018, 05:35:49 PM
So I will give credit where it's due: the cgi for Venom looks good. It's got a nice, shiny, wet look that a certain... Other version did not. It looks like venom. Even the awkward bits (that bike scene is... Eh) are more coreography based then with the symbiote itself.

I'm sorry, but I STILL remember an early sm3 trailer which had Tobey awkwardly tearing off the rubber black suit... And it NEVER looked right to me. So it's worth noting that this model looks so much better. I just hope Hardy let's them USE it.

Still, the story side has me a bit nervous... The setup in the trailer feels like it could work with the villains being the third tier symbiotes from separation anxiety (Scream being mainstream would be cool) but I know the studio would REALLY be pushing for Carnage... And I just don't seem him fitting this film unless some nonsense happens. Like, the CEO becomes Carnage... Disregarding the fact that he'd be Carnage in name (and appearance) only.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly Carnage's biggest fan (eff everything to do with red goblin. It's so dumb) but if you're gonna play that card, it better be full on mass murdering Cletus Cassidy Carnage. Otherwise, save it for another film. You've got enough going on.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 27, 2018, 08:18:04 PM
Okay, turning to page to Infinity War, which I saw last night... First the non-spoiler thoughts:

Wasn't quite what I was expecting.  It was fun to see ALL these characters come together.  They weaved the storylines together as seemlessly as they did with the original Avengers blending the newer franchises(Black Panther, GOTG, Spider-Man) in.  The action scenes, I was originally told was fully of shaky cam CGI and I disagree.  They were fast-paced and a lot going on, but you can tell they stepped it up a level.  Naturally the movie had such an epic scale I jokingly told my friend they can't release this movie on DVD because it should only be seen on a big screen.

But unfortunately, the parts that drug it for me was some of the slower parts.  I don't know if it was because it was late, but it was painfully slow in spots and the main thing that bugged me was the ending.... that ending thou...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Take it for what you will.  Just my thoughts.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on April 28, 2018, 12:32:26 AM
...one name concerning who "may" take the gauntlet: Adam Warlock...just tossing out that potential...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on April 28, 2018, 05:13:09 PM
Just saw Infinity War with a bunch of friends this afternoon. We all loved it. Such a great cast that all hadd amazing chemistry together. Especially between the Chris's.
I laughed so often, and will probably be quoting from the movie for a long time to come.
Also something really unusual happened to us. Since we live in Korea, usually foreigners like me will laugh at references or sayings before Koreans get it(if they understand the humor at all) but in this movie there were a few instances where they were reading the subtitles faster than the actor saying the lines, and we couldnt even hear the line because the audience was laughing so hard. Im not even mad about it, actually pretty happy that so many people enjoyed the movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 28, 2018, 11:42:51 PM
It's sounding pretty great!  We're going to see it tomorrow, and I'm quite excited!  I may have to play some Marvel Adventures tonight to celebrate.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: spydermann93 on April 29, 2018, 12:36:07 AM
Holy COW! What an AMAZING movie! 10/10 for me!

SPOILERS
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on April 29, 2018, 02:53:37 AM
Spyder,
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 29, 2018, 07:08:42 AM
So I saw it, really enjoyed it. Not much to say other than it's a lot of fun, all the different personalities playing off each other was very entertaining, Thanos was really damn good,. James Gunn oversaw the Guardians scenes and it shows because the humor is on point. Mantis is still adorable, she and Drax are still adorable together, and Batista still has great comedic chops as Drax. And I have issues with the ending. I'm kinda with agreement with Shogunn about it. More in the spoilers:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 29, 2018, 06:47:41 PM
Wow. Silver Shocker... that was a Mouth. Full.  I think you about covered all your bases bruh. Lol. You said more than I did. More than I wanted but sheesh. Thanks for saying it and giving me cover.

Let me add some color:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Trust me there's a lot to like but I'm positive I'll like the whole thing more after Avengers 4.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 29, 2018, 07:02:45 PM
On a somewhat related note,so far Captain Marvel promises to be the most generic thing ever.
Also,I saw several articles along the line of "trend for female lead superhero movies to be set in the past", which is pretty funny considering we only have Wonder Woman so far.Or at least in the past 10 or so years,before somebody corrects me.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 30, 2018, 01:50:44 AM
HT, you've said many times you don't like origin stories in superhero movies and shows, and I normally don't have that problem, but with Captain Marvel I'm kinda weary of it. Add to that it's a period piece (taking place in the nineties. the 90's now classifies for a "period piece". Boy that makes me feel old) and the potential for tie-ins and cameos could be more limited. I think we've been spoiled by Spider-Man and Black Panther at this point. Though at least, unlike Spider-Man, noone knows who Captain Marvel is in the movie landscape so it's not like Spider-Man again, Batman again, Superman again.

Shogun:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 30, 2018, 02:54:36 AM
Well guys, I loved it. Unabashedly, unreservedly, I loved it. For those that are interested, I'll post a review and some reflections. Spoilers afterwards in their box. Be warned, I have plenty to say.

Shogunn, SS, I've got a response to your points in my first spoiler-y section as well.

This is, simply put, fantastic in every sense of the word.  Interestingly, the response seems to have been overwhelmingly positive from both critics and fans, but the few complaints I've seen tend to be posited on a rejection of the boisterous, imaginative nature of the Marvel Universe.  I feel like the people who complain about the lack of weight for dire events in a story with 'magic jewels that can do anything' have let the world beat too much of the imagination out of them.

It's worth noting that this film is the culmination (or the first half it), of a decade of storytelling and adventure, and it is a worthy ending. Think about that for a moment. Marvel began this journey in 2008 with Iron Man, and since then the universe has grown, the characters have evolved, and it all built towards this moment. That is an incredible feat.

This is a film that takes advantage of all of the sprawling world that has been created, that draws on long established characters and relationships, on a familiarity and an affection that can only be created piece by piece, as they did. And that gives it a power that is unprecedented. We are seeing in film the same thing that makes American superheroes unique, the power of collective storytelling, the power of many stories feeding into and informing those that follow, a shared universe creating magnified narrative impact and allowing for a shorthand of expression. That by itself is pretty amazing, but as I said, this is a film that is worthy to wield such power.

Infinity War is huge and sprawling and truly epic. It is a film about loss and heroism and desperate hope, yet it is fun and endlessly exciting, even funny. I imagine everyone who has seen it has described it as 'an emotional rollercoaster,' but though cliched, that is certainly apt. There are a lot of highs and a lot of lows, but it all has weight.

The movie is beautiful, in terms of its wondrous settings and its special effects, which are jaw-dropping and accompany amazing action scenes, but also in terms of the story it tells, which is all about the central conflict of humanity, that of selfishness and the consuming will against love and sacrifice. It's beautifully archetypal, yet the villain has some real personality and pathos to him, being almost sympathetic, despite his monstrousness. Impressively, this film, with so much going on and so many characters vying for space, manages to overcome the Marvel two-dimensional villain weakness. Thanos is memorable and a worthy foe for the gathered heroes from the first moment he appears on screen.

Throughout, the film successfully feels grand in scope and in stakes, with action that spans the universe, a truly creation-shaking plot, and a MASSIVE cast of characters. Yet, and this is perhaps the most impressive piece of the movie's success to me, that humongous cast is incredibly well balanced. Obviously there are characters with more or less screentime, and many of these characters play fairly small roles, but nonetheless, no-one feels shortchanged (among main characters from the movies), with everyone getting at least small and touching moments, as well as big hero moments.

One of the things that I really loved about this movie is that it feels 'right' for the Avengers. It is by no means a direct translation of the comics, and yet it is like all of the Marvel films when they are at their best, taking the source material and elevating, transfiguring it into something else, something even grander and even richer and even more powerful than the original. It also finally feels like the Marvel Universe, with events happening and characters just showing up because they inhabit the same world. The Fantastic Four are really the only ones missing (because the X-Men have always sort of felt like their own thing), but who could notice with everything going on?

So, if you haven't seen it, go. Go while it is in theaters, because if ever a film deserved a big screen viewing, it is certainly this one.

Spoilers below:

First, to SS and Shogunn-
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Second, other thoughts in no particular order.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Anyway, all-in-all, this is an exceptional film, close to a perfect movie. I can't wait to see it again.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 30, 2018, 04:08:47 AM
Saw it just a bit ago. Not going as in-depth rn because I'm still processing, but some spoilery thoughts.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

As for the next films...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 30, 2018, 07:19:54 AM
One thing I didn't even notice the first time I saw it that some random guy said towards the end...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 30, 2018, 07:56:37 AM
Benton:

Indeed, I so focused on the ending that I didn't really praise what an accomplishment this film is. But I knew a LOT of people, both professionally and simply as fans, were going to do that anyway that a lot of what I would say would be redundant. But yeah, that all-points-converging high you get from a movie like this, it could only work if you had a rich world full of incredibly likable compelling characters. Something I've said for years is the MCU recreates the Marvel/DC shared universe experience from the comics (so does DC in is current movies, though not nearly as well) and that's perhaps most true here.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Tom:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In general [SERIOUS SPOILERS for Avengers 4]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 30, 2018, 08:22:58 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


The funny thing about that is, I thought about this playing "Contest of Champions" last week.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Good catch Tomato.

Also, not to keep harping on the ending but, saw something in a article that kinda put in better words what I have a problem with:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 30, 2018, 08:54:14 AM
Speaking of the Black Order (as Shogunn mentions under the spoiler cut) I forgot to mention: Ebony Maw was great. The rest of the Black Order were as throwaway as throwaway gets, and weren't particularly true to their comics counterparts. But Maw was aces.  :thumbup:

Shogun:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 30, 2018, 09:12:23 AM
Actually that would have made a lot of sense, to do what Captain America did.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 30, 2018, 09:35:43 AM
Taking inspiration from Cap is always a good play. So much so, that the speech (the "River of Truth" speech paraphrased from Mark Twain, spoken by Sharon Carter in CA: Civil War) that sprang Cap to action, was spoken BY Cap in the comic book Civil War.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 30, 2018, 06:09:47 PM
I've lost count on how many times I've shared that speech on FB.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 01, 2018, 02:33:15 AM
Benton:

Indeed, I so focused on the ending that I didn't really praise what an accomplishment this film is. But I knew a LOT of people, both professionally and simply as fans, were going to do that anyway that a lot of what I would say would be redundant. But yeah, that all-points-converging high you get from a movie like this, it could only work if you had a rich world full of incredibly likable compelling characters. Something I've said for years is the MCU recreates the Marvel/DC shared universe experience from the comics (so does DC in is current movies, though not nearly as well) and that's perhaps most true here.
Yeah, it's pretty amazing, and this movie really is the payoff of pretty much everything that came before.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Ha!  Fair enough.  ;)  Yet, I still think there is some truth to the assertion in this context, on multiple levels.

SS, fascinating!  Very interesting!

On another note, the more I think about it, y'all are right about Hawkeye:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In terms of Thanos, this is sort of a minor thing, but why in the name of all that's good and holy did they end up going with that bald-headed look for him for the overwhelming majority of the film?  He looked perfect, intimidating, and straight out of the comics when he first showed up.  And he looked a lot more dignified than the look they went with.  What a weird choice!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 01, 2018, 03:57:29 AM
About Thanos' armor
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Also
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 01, 2018, 08:26:47 PM
Tomato:

Yeah, but you were still the one who pointed out here. I personally missed that visual detail. The next time I see the film I'll watch to watch carefully for that.

Quote from: Tomato
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

As for Thanos' armor, yeah, I prefer him wearing his full armor, but I got used to the bald-headed look by the time the film came out due to it being featured prominently in the trailers.

SS, fascinating!  Very interesting!

Are you referring to what I said about Cap's River of Truth speech or that Avengers 4 set photo I posted a link to?

If it's the speech, it was also used in the Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 video game in the form of an audio log, where it was said by Cap, as in the Civil War comic tie-in issues (the specific series was Amazing Spider-Man)

If it's the set photo:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 01, 2018, 08:50:22 PM
About Thanos' armor
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I understand that, 'Mato, and you're not wrong.  Still, as you indicate, it was only necessary for a fraction of the time it was used.  I think it would be a good deal more effective if:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

He just looks a tad silly.  It annoyed me that they would deliver the perfect look and then immediately discard it.  This is, of course, a very minor complaint.

SS, fascinating!  Very interesting!

Are you referring to what I said about Cap's River of Truth speech or that Avengers 4 set photo I posted a link to?

If it's the speech, it was also used in the Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 video game in the form of an audio log, where it was said by Cap, as in the Civil War comic tie-in issues (the specific series was Amazing Spider-Man)

If it's the set photo:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I was talking about the Avengers 4 observations:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'm glad that this cheered you up some, man!  :)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 01, 2018, 09:17:50 PM
On Thanos' Armor:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Avengers 4:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 01, 2018, 11:59:07 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 02, 2018, 12:20:45 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 02, 2018, 12:52:36 PM
Returning to something from earlier:

Shogunn:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In general:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on May 02, 2018, 04:22:36 PM
Another thing branching off about the theory of the Avengers team collected in Avengers 4...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Plus a group of YouTubers I follow decided to do a deep dive in speculation also had these theories..

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So much speculating will be done over the next year and each film to come next.. Antman 2 and Captain Marvel will add more teases to fuel the fire.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 02, 2018, 05:13:25 PM
Quill nice finds!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on May 03, 2018, 02:06:53 AM

In general:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Not sure if anyone's watching but I think all I've seen so far was to the effect "Hey you heard about what's going on in New York?  Pretty wild, right?"

And the reason that's not in spoiler tags because I think Agents of SHIELD was avoiding spoilers with such a vague reference too.  Like what's going on in New York?  They found Luke Cage?  Jessica Jones outed herself with powers?  Think it was purposely vague.  But I gotta imagine there's more to MAOS because they've always tied in the movies SOMEHOW like revealing it was Coulson who got Fury the Helicarriers in Age of Ultron or Asgardians showing up after Thor and of course the big Hydra reveal from Winter Soldier.  No way that can just let this go.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 03, 2018, 05:19:33 AM
Oh sure. "Heard what's going on in New York? Pretty Wild, right" could refer to "A big honking spaceship showed up" which you can clearly see in the trailers.

Yeah, those Shield tie-ins were great. I was a little let down by the Civil War One, and the Doctor Strange one was pretty underwhelming as a tie-in IMO.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 03, 2018, 05:29:07 PM
What was the Dr. Strange one?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 03, 2018, 10:15:55 PM
What was the Dr. Strange one?

None.  Dr. Strange happened behind the scenes, so nobody much even knew it was happening.  There was a vague thematic tie in with Ghost Rider and a magic book, but that was about it.

My guess is that Thanos will be involved with the alien alliance, possibly just chasing it away, but possible it's part of his forces all along and he invades when their quieter takeover fails.  I predict the season will end where Infinity War begins.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 04, 2018, 12:28:10 AM
That shadow dimension they went to was apparently considered a Dr. Strange tie-in, which I thought was a stretch.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: crimsonquill on May 04, 2018, 05:17:47 AM
AOS's Doctor Strange connection was mostly just the Darkholme being the missing book from Wong's library (it's very clearly framed in a shot that a book was missing and the chains were broken) and Ghost Rider having learned to use his chain like a slingring to create portals. Robbie also mentions that he got involved with huge conflict where he spent years outside of time (the mirror dimension?) learning how to control the supernatural powers that Rider gives him without letting the demon control him fully. Could this be a seed of his own spin-off show? Or a cameo in the next Doctor Strange (who better then to teach Robbie and maybe we get an appearance of Johnny Blaze and/or Blade as other soldiers).

The shadow dimension is connected to the Darkholme because it deals with Death Magic and how to weave spells between life and death (which I assume that AIDA used to build her body and other more advanced LMDs). It's a book that would be very very dangerous if it got into the hands of Mordo.

- CQ
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 04, 2018, 12:23:19 PM
Random thought,could we ever see Starfox in the MCU?
Probably not,since Dan Slott made him unusable.Not that it matters actually,since most of the audience never ever heard of him.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 04, 2018, 01:49:01 PM
To be fair, there's a lot of characters that most of the audience never heard of. That's a big part of the reason why Guardians was considered such an oddball wild card choice prior to release. They were a very niche property and now they're beloved movie characters that people expect to see appear in subsequent installments. I wouldn't be surprised if someone out there said about Infinity War "I'll watch it for the Guardians".

Now Starfox would have to be reworked from the ground up, but so were Yondu and Mantis (and Ego, kinda) , so it's really not outside the realm of possibility.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on May 04, 2018, 03:12:10 PM
Random thought,could we ever see Starfox in the MCU?
Probably not,since Dan Slott made him unusable.Not that it matters actually,since most of the audience never ever heard of him.

What the heck did Slott do to Starfox?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 04, 2018, 04:12:28 PM
In Slotts She-Hulk,several women sue Starfox because he,possibly,used his euphoria powers to date defile them.
Its never proven,but it kinda leaves a big Henry-Pym-sized mark on the character.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 05, 2018, 01:31:24 AM
I don't think Starfox would have been likely regardless, if for no other reason then he's a white dude whose brother is a giant purple alien. Yes, I know Thanos is supposed to be a freak of nature and it's part of his backstory, but it's something they'd have to waste time explaining and the film barely had time for the content it had.

I'd have been cool with Eros being a purple alien with stupid hair showing up for a flashback to Thanos' past though. Nod and wink and all that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 05, 2018, 05:07:14 AM
Yes,thats the part that really strains the suspension of disbelief.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 05, 2018, 10:41:22 AM
As much as I appreciate the sarcasm, I'm being serious. It's the same reason Drax went from "Zombie human brought back to kill Thanos by Thanos' cosmic entity grandpa" to "alien with a funny speech quirk." There's aliens all over the place in the GotG, the fact that there's a big Hulk looking purple dude doesn't even have to be mentioned, they can just show him in space and people unfamiliar with the comics will take him as just another type of alien.

Showing his white, human looking brother would raise questions, which the filmmakers can either not answer (in which case why include Eros and Thanos' race at all, since all they'll do is confuse audience members), give the explanation from the comics (which takes time away from the rest of the film as I said) or make him and the rest of Thanos' race "normal looking" purple dudes in contrast to Thanos' hulking appearance. The last option leaves no questions for audience members other then "who is that dude with the red hair?", leaves things open for Thanos to still be a freak due to his size, and even allows for a white Eros in later films, if the filmmakers choose, by having his appearance be somewhat tied to his powerset.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 05, 2018, 01:19:44 PM
Wait,aliens are belivable,but a white guy isnt?This a new level,even for you. :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 05, 2018, 07:23:03 PM
Consistency with the world established is what matters, and what differs from that gives an audience pause.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on May 05, 2018, 10:38:51 PM
Seems like I remember a point where Starfox and Mentor were purple.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BWPS on May 15, 2018, 06:33:25 PM
Quote
Consistency with the world established is what matters, and what differs from that gives an audience pause.

While I agree with that 100%, I think it's a matter of finding a way to make whatever you want to put in work for your world. MCU has added aliens and magic and completely different tones i'n their movies and it has always worked, even if a couple of the movies were below par. No offense to anyone here, but I remember a time when we were talking about Galactus and people said an audience couldn't suspend disbelief for a giant planet eating humanoid. But the MCU (who of course was not responsible for any of the horrible F4 movies) has taken us so far in so many wild directions and I've never once not been along for the ride. Good storytelling and filmmaking can and should break any "rule".


Infinity War was amazing, I won't say it's the best one, but it's definitely the biggest and most ambitious movie I've ever seen and while it was a rollercoaster of emotions, I never felt detached.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 16, 2018, 06:29:27 PM
So I watched Black Panther this week. Ever since it came out in theaters, I had a niggling worry it wouldn't live up to the massive amount of hype. Well, I don't know if it lived up to all of the hype, but it was really good. I didn't really dislike any of it and I was entertained and locked into the story for the full length of it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 31, 2018, 11:37:33 PM
New Venom trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLCn88bfW1o)

I still don't know if this movie has any reason to exist, but Venom himself does look pretty dang cool.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 01, 2018, 02:50:23 AM
It'd be nice if there was a bit more white in there, but given the lack of Spider-man it does make sense that he wouldn't have the insignia.

So the villain of the movie is, apparently, Riot. Which, on the one hand, I'm glad for, because it makes sense given what we know of the antagonist that they used one of the symbiotes from the Life Foundation in the comics for what appears to be the equivalent of it in the films... though I kinda wish they'd gone with something like Lasher or, better yet, Hybrid. Nothing against Riot, it's just that a symbiote fight between symbiotes that are Black and Dark Gray creates... problems from a visual perspective. Plus... I know I'm the same guy going "UGH they better not do Carnage" but Riot as the main antagonist feels... underwhelming. Hybrid would have fit within the narrative and having the "final boss" as it were have the power of four symbiotes combined would work better, IMHO.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on August 01, 2018, 10:18:22 AM
The second trailer does at least look better than the first one.  I am glad they are emphasizing that he's an anti-hero and not trying to make him out as a typical hero protagonist.  We'll see I guess.

Is this film part of the MCU at all or is it something entirely separate?  It just feels like it exists in this weird limbo.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 01, 2018, 06:05:39 PM
It is Canon to the homecoming series, but not really to the mcu. It's... Odd.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on December 05, 2018, 03:37:29 AM
Captain Marvel Trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LHxvxdRnYc):

I liked that we get a lot of footage of her flying around in the costume. I like how convincing the digitally de-aged Nick Fury. And of course, I like the cat. Other than that, we don't get much of a idea what the plot will be.

But none of that matters because CAAAAAAAT!!!!  ^_^

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 05, 2018, 10:01:43 AM
Since the cat took out his eye he nevet trusted anyone again.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on December 06, 2018, 01:33:34 AM
That's pretty funny. And almost certainly true.

We don't know how Fury lost his eye, do we? Maybe it happens in this film.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 06, 2018, 04:15:17 AM
Civil War tells us it was during the hostage crisis where he rescued Robert Redford's character at an embassy.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on December 06, 2018, 04:41:45 AM
...before that Marvel said it was during a CIA mission that went bad a few years before SHIELD formed (sometime in the 70s, I think)...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on December 06, 2018, 05:17:53 AM
Way, way back when I think it was a WW II wound (Sgt. Fury #27) that later gave him trouble. Thus, in FF #21 he has no eyepatch, but when SHIELD got its' own series he was given an eyepatch.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 07, 2018, 03:14:18 PM
Well, the first trailer for the last Avengers movie has dropped....it looks like it's going to be called Avengers: End Game.  It's interesting, but there's not too much to work with yet.  Needless to say, I'm excited, but this feels super early.  I guess this semester has just flown by for me.  :)

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/7/18130395/avengers-endgame-4-trailer-release-date-april-2019-infinity-war
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 07, 2018, 06:18:57 PM
It was probably something to do with Skrulls.
Which probably inspired to start the whole Avengers thing.
Im kinda dissapointed we will never see a Publisher/Fury team up.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on December 07, 2018, 07:23:46 PM
"last" avengers movie. Yeah, sure.

Honestly I'm surprised it took so long. Avengers 4 comes out only a month or so after Captain Marvel, which has had 2 trailers and most of the toy line revealed. This is the first time we've even had confirmation of the name, even if several people guessed months ago.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 13, 2018, 11:29:09 AM
Got around to Infinity Wars.A big round of IP bingo ending in a cgi clusterfunt of faceless armies.Its a lot like Ready Player One.Or any movie made in the last 10 years.
I didnt hate it,mind you.But I dont have any strong emotions towards it either way.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on December 13, 2018, 04:57:42 PM
Wow, HT, I think you must be dead inside.  Ha, IW was one of the most amazing experiences I've ever had in a theater.

'Mato, you're probably right.  Like I said, the semester has just flown by for me.  Seems early. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on December 13, 2018, 06:17:11 PM
I probably am. 😉
But in general Im tired of the final battle between two cgi mook armies.EVERY movie does that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on December 27, 2018, 01:14:20 PM
So I had been re-reading chunks of this thread re: Infinity War, and I realized there were a few things I meant to comment on that I apparently declined to, or just didn't have time to and/or forgot about.

First order of business, I found the Avengers 4 trailer profoundly disappointing. It's short, it tells us very little (and yes, I'm sure for many people that's precisely why it's a perfect teaser trailer) but after a half a gosh darn year and the most frustrating cliffhanger in the history of cinema, it left me severely wanting. And other than maybe the last scene of the trailer because spoilers, there's absolutely no reason this shouldn't have been the post credit scene for Infinity War.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Anyway, the other thing I wanted to talk about was Eros. I don't remember why I never bothered to comment on it beyond my initial comment, but I had two things to add.

Seems like I remember a point where Starfox and Mentor were purple.

They originally were, later stories and some reprints of the original story changed their skin color. The $1 reprint that came out around the time of Avengers: Infinity War, that I read back then, for example, kept the original coloring for posterity's sake. I could have sworn I responded to this back in the day. Maybe the board ate it while I was originally writing it.

Quote
As much as I appreciate the sarcasm, I'm being serious. It's the same reason Drax went from "Zombie human brought back to kill Thanos by Thanos' cosmic entity grandpa" to "alien with a funny speech quirk." There's aliens all over the place in the GotG, the fact that there's a big Hulk looking purple dude doesn't even have to be mentioned, they can just show him in space and people unfamiliar with the comics will take him as just another type of alien.

Showing his white, human looking brother would raise questions, which the filmmakers can either not answer (in which case why include Eros and Thanos' race at all, since all they'll do is confuse audience members), give the explanation from the comics (which takes time away from the rest of the film as I said) or make him and the rest of Thanos' race "normal looking" purple dudes in contrast to Thanos' hulking appearance. The last option leaves no questions for audience members other then "who is that dude with the red hair?", leaves things open for Thanos to still be a freak due to his size, and even allows for a white Eros in later films, if the filmmakers choose, by having his appearance be somewhat tied to his powerset.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sold on that assessment myself. Yes, people might wonder about it, but if  Gamora and Nebula, and every member of the Black Order can be referred to as Thanos' children while clearly not being his biological children, then I don't see where Eros couldn't just be his non-biological brother. Heck, if they wanted to they could even introduce Eros without actually having him be related to Thanos at all. I once argued that Lian Harper in the New 52 could have been introduced as unrelated biologically to Roy Harper. Same idea. Ego wasn't Star-Lord's father in the comics and Mantis wasn't his sister. Speaking of which, fun fact, in the mural of Ego's lovers, supposedly you can see a Mantis-like alien who may or may not be Mantis' mom, which would of course make Mantis literally Star Lord's sister. James Gunn said not to necessarily read too much into it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 09, 2019, 03:36:36 AM
Just watched Venom tonight. Not great, but not too bad really. There's not much to it. Throwaway badguy, meh plot, but Venom himself? Awesome. Looks great, looks even better in action, pretty effectively spooky voice, and has more of a sense of humor than I was expecting, Venom himself was kinda a snarky d*ck. Kinda reminded me of Venom from the 90's cartoon in that regard. Perfectly serviceable rental movie. Worth watching just for Venom himself if you're a fan of the character. It made money and they're talking sequel so hopefully they cobble together a more interesting story to stick Venom in.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on January 09, 2019, 03:54:14 AM
Yeah, I'd heard from a few people that Venom is one of those good "mind off, time wasting fun"/"so bad, it's good" type movies...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 09, 2019, 05:56:47 AM
Absolutely. It would be a great movie to just have on the tv in the background when it eventually comes to basic cable tv, while you're doing something else. Since I rented it to watch on the tv, that's pretty much what it is. Any time Venom itself isn't on screen, you can pretty much zone out and miss nothing of consequence.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on January 11, 2019, 04:00:12 AM
Wanted to respond to some minor things from SS' post.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

As for Eros... again, my biggest argument wasn't even necessarily his skin color, since you can just make him purple... while I leaned on the skintone thing as a barrier, my main point is WHY SHOW HIM AT ALL. The scene in question is THANOS using the Gauntlet to show his homeworld in it's former beauty. By all accounts, Thanos and Eros HATE each other. I cannot for the life of me see Thanos taking the time to include Eros in his recreation of his world's "paradise" when in the comics one of his first acts was to take off Eros' mouth. He would not be shown in Thanos' idea of paradise.

But let's set that aside, say for whatever reason Thanos included Eros. Be he purple or flesh tone, Eros is in the film. He exists. And... then what? Ok, some people will take it as just a cameo and a nod and wink to fans, but now you have those who don't speculating about this character. Who is he, why is he in this scene, does he factor into the film's resolution in some way. Including Eros in a scene where he has no logical reason for being there is a textbook Chekhov's gun (IE: something that grabs audience attention because the language of film has indicated it's important), and for them to include him and then not bring him back in later would be problematic, all for the sake of a character who has nothing to do with the story (and would in fact derail the whole "lose what I love most" theme we see with Gamora because why doesn't thanos love his brother etc.) and who is super problematic anyway given certain comic depictions of the character.

It's one thing to include cameos like Howard or like Stan Lee, but the way those scenes are presented is not the same as what you're describing with Eros: shoehorning a red-headed dude in the background of a scene he should not be in so that the general audience mistakes it for something potentially important. There is enough in IW without Eros, he isn't needed, and at best he'd warrant a "oh, that's neat" if he *was* included somehow. If we had an actual flashback, seeing Thanos' former home life or his confrontation with his world's leadership, something that has narrative purpose... I can see Eros showing up in the background of a scene like that. But IN INFINITY WAR Ero's inclusion would have been a distraction that served no other purpose than fanwankary, and I think they made the right call leaving him out.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on January 29, 2019, 07:23:48 PM
Oh, here's my late response to your late response:

I was being more hypothetical. When I talk about including Eros, I meant more in the nebulous sense of if the movie turned out a different way, or if Eros appeared in a later film. Not necessarily being included in the film we got.

Also, I once had a debate with a peer about whether non-comic fans would "accept" Vision. People seem chill with him In fact when Ultron came out it was literally the first thing I asked a buddy of mine:  "what did you think of Vision?" Turned out he was fine with it mostly because he likes Paul Bettany. I was happy with that answer. But of course YMMV.

Anyway, by stroke of luck and snap of finger, I ended up researching stuff about Avengers Endgame, and it has been confirmed - fake scenes are being filmed to keep people from figuring out the plot ahead of time. Oh ho ho - we're in the End Game now!

But, on a more concrete note, wait til you hear this crazyness.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In any case, 3 more months till it comes out people!!!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on January 30, 2019, 07:37:22 AM
Speaking of missing brothers,we never see Balder either.
And that one is a bit harder to handwave with skintone. 😉
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: UnkoMan on January 31, 2019, 06:36:21 AM
Also, I once had a debate with a peer about whether non-comic fans would "accept" Vision. People seem chill with him In fact when Ultron came out it was literally the first thing I asked a buddy of mine:  "what did you think of Vision?" Turned out he was fine with it mostly because he likes Paul Bettany. I was happy with that answer. But of course YMMV.

Wait, why wouldn't people like Vision? Vision rules.
(spoken as a big Vision fan)
Vision in the movie is... eh, good enough, because it's Vision. They obviously weren't going to use his comic origin.
Will be watching the Vision/Scarlet Witch series though.

I digress. I legit don't know what's not to accept about a robot ghost in the world of crazy junk that is Avengers?


EDIT: By the way, I heard about this Loki series an this Vision/Scarlet Witch series and I'm like what? But purposefully I try to not read too much of the info before the movies come out. The plots to these movies are pretty thin and predictable, so at least not knowing every character first is nice. Like when
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Does that even need to be a spoiler? Was it even a secret? But when I saw it I was like, "Oh, awesome."
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 24, 2019, 05:49:03 AM
Once upon a Deadpool.Added scenes are funny,but most of it we saw in the trailers.Actually the extended Nickleback joke from the trailer wasnt in the film.
-Wait,was that...Brad Pitt?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on February 24, 2019, 11:23:51 PM
Also, I once had a debate with a peer about whether non-comic fans would "accept" Vision. People seem chill with him In fact when Ultron came out it was literally the first thing I asked a buddy of mine:  "what did you think of Vision?" Turned out he was fine with it mostly because he likes Paul Bettany. I was happy with that answer. But of course YMMV.

Wait, why wouldn't people like Vision? Vision rules.

I digress. I legit don't know what's not to accept about a robot ghost in the world of crazy junk that is Avengers?

Yeah, the argument was that Vision was apparently too "out there". My response was "Iron Man has a robot suit, Vision is a robot man." It's not like the casual movie going audience isn't keen to the idea of robots in movies. They've had decades to get used to them.

Oh, speaking of weird stuff from the comics: The Kree Supreme Intelligence. I just saw the other day what they did for it in  the Captain Marvel movie. Wow, that might be the single biggest instance of the live action adaptations simplifying something comic book-esque from the source material. Though I did hear in an interview that they might do something a little more out there by the end of the movie that they didn't want to spoil.

Quote
Goliath is in Ant Man & Wasp.
Does that even need to be a spoiler? Was it even a secret? But when I saw it I was like, "Oh, awesome."

Bill Foster? Nah, his casting was announced a good year or so before the film came out, and he was introduced in one of the trailers. To the comic fans it's neat, but to the movie goers he's just some guy Hank used to work with, played by Laurence Fishbourne. It's kinda like asking "Hey is that Luis guy in the comics?" (he made a background cameo in the most recent Ant-Man comic when it showed Scott in prison) Not exactly Howard the Duck.

Quote
Once upon a Deadpool.Added scenes are funny,but most of it we saw in the trailers.Actually the extended Nickleback joke from the trailer wasnt in the film.
-Wait,was that...Brad Pitt?

Yep, I'm a little disappointed the Nickelback bit got trimmed down in the final film. It was funny.
I put it on the other day for a friend of mine and just fast forwarded to the Fred Savage scenes and they had him absolutely laughing out loud because of his familiarity with the Princess Bride, but honestly? There's some funny stuff in there. Poking fun at the plot and people's criticisms of it, joking about Cable's ridiculously elaborate comic book backstory. The whole bit about Brad Pitt and Matt Damon was way funnier than it had any right to be. Honestly, I know I'm not alone in wishing there was a lot more of the new material. I'd say I'd probably have gone for a whole movie of just that, but that might be pushing it.

I'd heard it might have been partially intended as a proof of concept in case Disney wanted to do a PG-13 Deadpool, but apparently Disney said they'd keep it R.

Oh, speaking of the Deadpool movies, I'm profoundly disappointed that the Blu-Ray releases for Deadpool and Deadpool 2 didn't include any of the many brilliant web promo videos that was a huge part of the franchise's marketing. It's especially frustrating when they used that awesome Bob Ross parody in the menu sequence for Deadpool 2: The Super Duper Cut but don't include it on the disc in its entirely. And also frustrating since the home releases for The Dark Knight, Serenity, Ant-Man and probably a bunch of other movies included their web promos (The Anchorman DVD included some similar skits) . I kinda wonder if it's a rights issues thing. But I would have really appreciated having all of those promos in one place alongside the films themselves.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 25, 2019, 05:07:00 AM
Fred: You got Cable? /Proceds to explain Cables backstory/
Deadpool: We... Got the time travel stuff.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 08, 2019, 06:54:32 AM
Alright. Just finished Captain Marvel. It was enjoyable. Actually threw me a few curveballs I didn't expect.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on March 08, 2019, 08:19:20 AM
Yeah, I really liked Captain Marvel, too. Here is some fan speculation about her powers.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 09, 2019, 12:19:51 AM
So I haven't seen it, but I have been following what's in the movie. So with that in mind...

Now that people are seeing the movie and talking about it....noone has anything to say about....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 09, 2019, 09:23:40 AM
So I haven't seen it, but I have been following what's in the movie. So with that in mind...

Now that people are seeing the movie and talking about it....noone has anything to say about....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah, it was kind of weak. Guess that's what makes it rather legendary.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 09, 2019, 09:47:00 AM
I actually guessed that one?  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 09, 2019, 10:35:11 AM
SN: One of the first things I remembered from a comic book was Monica Rambeau's Captain Marvel back in the 80s.  And the one thing about her that continued to stick out to my attention was her hair and I just thought it was even more endearing to see the girls they had in the role reflect that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on March 09, 2019, 03:46:05 PM
So I haven't seen it, but I have been following what's in the movie. So with that in mind...

Now that people are seeing the movie and talking about it....noone has anything to say about....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'm sorry, but considering Zemo, Strucker, Hitler, and all the other enemies Fury has had, this is stupid.

I know, this Fury didn't fight these characters, but still... it's like deciding that Orko from Masters of the Universe or Java from Metamorpho is an evil mastermind.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 09, 2019, 04:11:10 PM
Or revealing that Scrapy Doo is the villain of...Ok,Im not going there.

Oddly for this franchise,Nick Fury doesnt have an evil counterpart.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on March 09, 2019, 06:37:18 PM
Or revealing that Scrapy Doo is the villain of...Ok,Im not going there.

Oddly for this franchise,Nick Fury doesnt have an evil character.

Wait...you mean Scrappy Doo ISN'T a villain?!?!?!   :o
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 09, 2019, 08:21:03 PM
Hm,annoying sidekick turning into a villain...there has got to be more examples...I mean there are lists,but Im not going to click 16 times to see the whole list.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 10, 2019, 04:14:50 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Quote
Java from Metamorpho is an evil mastermind.

Did that one really happen?

Sadly, Sith Lord Jar Jar is not canon yet, last I checked.

Quote
Oddly for this franchise,Nick Fury doesnt have an evil counterpart.

Some could argue Robert Redford from Winter Soldier was one. Little mundane compared to the comics, but eh.

Quote
Hm,annoying sidekick turning into a villain...there has got to be more examples...

Does it have to be an change for an adaptation? Because otherwise I can think of a few more.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on March 10, 2019, 04:26:04 PM
Darth Jar-Jar... you have to wonder why that hasn't happened yet.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 10, 2019, 05:19:08 PM
Give Filoni a few years. It took him 3 seasons to get to Ahsoka as a Sith and 4 to get to Darth Maul with robot legs. The very last arc of Clone Wars featured a Sith version of Yoda.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 10, 2019, 05:59:27 PM
Well,there is a Young Avengers film in the works,so this might be related...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 10, 2019, 10:57:35 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 11, 2019, 01:55:02 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Quote
Well,there is a Young Avengers film in the works,so this might be related...

If all the information I've seen and heard pans out the way I'm expecting it to, I'm going to be giddy as a schoolgirl in about a month.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 13, 2019, 04:06:08 PM
Agent Coulson lashes against "dinosaurs" who dont like the movie.  :lol:
Holy funt,is Kathleen Kennedy your PR manager now?
You could have went with : Give the movie a chance,you might be surprised.Or anything else.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on March 13, 2019, 10:39:07 PM
This was something I was telling a friend of mine on his FB page about the movie. He made a few good points, but another thing that stuck out to me was this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 14, 2019, 12:21:06 AM
Quote
Agent Coulson lashes against "dinosaurs" who dont like the movie.  :lol:
Holy funt,is Kathleen Kennedy your PR manager now?
You could have went with : Give the movie a chance,you might be surprised.Or anything else.

Yeah, I've never understood why comic creators, people working on films, and people working on video games, these days (not to say it didn't happen in the past, I'm sure it did) can't just say "Give the movie a chance,you might be surprised." or "Sorry you're not enjoying the current run. If you stick with us, hopefully the upcoming issues will be more to your liking." That's money they could be making.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 14, 2019, 03:18:08 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 15, 2019, 09:00:08 PM
Guess who's back, back again, James Gunn's back, tell yo' friends!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 27, 2019, 09:07:03 AM
Its not really a new discovery for me,but people really hated Amazing Spiderman duology.
To each his own,but complaining about being unfaitful to the comics?Homecoming was even worst in that regard.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 27, 2019, 03:03:37 PM
Yeah, I never got that. One of the big gripes was he was a jerk when he first got his powers and used it to show up Flash at BBall... but like, OG Peter literally went on talk shows and did everything he could to cash in on his powers before Ben's death.

Really though, I think it mainly comes down to the personality of the actor and how close it "feels" to Spider-Man. For me, Maguire was an ok Peter, but an awful SM... people will defend the fact that he made quips, but the delivery is so bad and forced he might as well be silent the whole time. Garfield was the opposite end of the spectrum, where he often went too far on the arrogant to-talky end, but I was ok with it because he felt more real and less of a nerd caricature. But then, I'm also the crazy dude who hates SM2 more than SM3, and I do get that Garfield's SM tended to be grating for people.

Holland seems to fit in a nice sweet spot in the center, where he DOES talk a lot, but it's in the whole "I'm talking because I'm actually kinda freaking out and this is my coping mechanism" flavor that some of the best Spider-Man writing often has.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 27, 2019, 03:34:47 PM
ASM made Peter a sort of cool loser skater and he doesnt really get bulied.And makes his motivation revenge,so that changes the character.But at least its a motivation.As opposed to Homecoming which was Batman Beyond lite.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on March 27, 2019, 05:07:22 PM
Does Holland get bullied though? Like, yeah, we have weenie Flash, but you get the sense that no one else takes that seriously. Holland's Peter has a whole social circle: Dan... I mean, Ned, Michelle, Liz, etc. The biggest issue we see him deal with is the fallout from his constant absence.

For real though, Flash is 100% my biggest issue with the MCU version. Michelle is fun, Ned is fine even though I wish they'd have used Danke instead of Ned, etc. But Flash is just... A putz. They were trying to make him a more "modern" bully, but in an age where cyber bullying and abuse is SUCH a big deal, MCU Flash just calls Peter names sometimes.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 27, 2019, 08:43:53 PM
Principal problem there is Peter.Hes not Peter,hes not Spiderman,hes Tony Stark Jr.
Homecoming could even kill Uncle Ben.Hell,Uncle Ben is NEVER mentioned.
Also,for all that talk about consequences,he never suffers any consequences.Except when he loses the suit.But he gets it back.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: GhostMachine on March 28, 2019, 05:57:15 AM
Eh. Still a better Spider-Man than the two Andrew Garfield movies. Turning the Green Goblin into a hacker was lame, for one thing. (We still haven't had a proper onscreen GG; Dafoe's characterization was dead on, but the costume was Green Goblin as a bad Iron Man knockoff.....)

A perfect on-screen Peter would be a cross between the McGuire and Holland versions, with very little taken from Garfield.

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 28, 2019, 06:05:25 AM
 Ok,just for fun,outside of names,what does Homecoming share with comics?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on March 28, 2019, 02:09:43 PM
The same thing Fant4stic does? :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 28, 2019, 11:26:00 PM
He lifts a heavy thing!  :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on March 28, 2019, 11:28:58 PM
He shoots webs and sticks to walls?!?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 29, 2019, 05:51:54 AM
And hes a rich kid who goes to private school and nothing bad really happens to him.Parker luck,indeed.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 02, 2019, 10:11:47 PM
Avengers Endgame has been confirmed to be 3 hours long.

Lord help us all. We're all going to have to pee so bad when the movie's over.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 05, 2019, 11:09:03 PM
So the next franchise to be launched outside of the Infinity Saga has been announced to be THE ETERNALS.

Most casual fans won't recognize them, just like the Guardians of the Galaxy.

Readily I can recognize at least one, which was speculated and now announced to be the feature character, Angelina Jolie as Sersi.

Couple of other tidbits of news is Kumil Nanjani is in talks to also star, but the male lead is said to be Ikaris and rumor has it they are looking for an "openly gay actor" to play the character. Now, here's the rub. Couple of things actually. Are they looking for an openly gay actor to play a straight character, which I suppose is fairly normal at this point. Or are they looking for an openly gay actor to play an openly gay character, which if you ask me, would be kind of limiting.  If it's the character they want to be openly gay, do they really need an openly gay actor since... it's acting? But honestly, if they can find a suitable actor to portray a character that I know next to little about, what do I care.  And if I don't, I can't imagine general audiences would be that bothered about it. Comic fans however....

But then there's the basis of the character.  Apparently he got his name that he took after his son, Icarus who died.  And with that, he also had a wife, which would suggest the character is straight.

But then there's speculation that this gay character would be Hercules as well.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 06, 2019, 05:52:13 PM
Most casual fans didnt recognize Inhumans either...so it mostly depends on the execution.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Panther_Gunn on April 06, 2019, 07:54:30 PM
The Eternals?  Honestly........meh.  They must be aiming for the low-hanging fruit of "what's not tied up in licensed movie rights and what can we make the most changes to so that it will fit however we want with the least amount of people sceaming?".  By my quick count (via Wikipedia) there's been less than 50 issues of their title, total.

Movie franchise I'd like to see before we get down to the Eternals:

The Fantastic Four (if Disney would ever get their heads unlodged & figure out they would make way more in profits than it would cost to get the rights back)
Namor (tied up in above)
Silver Surfer (tied up in above)
The Defenders (seriously doubt that'll ever happen)
The Invaders (probably tied up enough in the FF rights)
The Inhumans (probably a dead property since they killed it on TV)
Daredevil (doubtful since it was "covered" on Netflix)
Powerman/Iron Fist (see Netflix reason)
Alpha Flight (probably tied up in the X-Men rights)
Excalibur (also tied up in X-Men rights ... Although, why can't we get a Capt Britain & Meggan movie ...... oh, yeah, because enough American audiences wouldn't care enough about a British hero)
Deathlok
Spider-Woman (Jessica Drew)
Moon Knight (wasn't that on Netflix also?)
Nova (Richard Rider)
She-Hulk (I think the Byrne title format could work well)
Power Pack (maybe)

Not really holding my breath for any of those, although from what I read/remember, Power Pack has the best chance out of all of them.

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 06, 2019, 08:21:46 PM
They got FF and X-men back.Namor...I think its with Universal,or did they got him back or its some weird deal like with Hulk solo movies...there is something.
Oh and you mentioned Alpha Flight and Excalibur...expect somebody to show up and explain how thats tottaly crazy.  :rolleyes:

I cant say if American audience would care for Captain Britain,but if you made is as bland and unoffensive as possible you could still make a killing in China.And you dont have Winnie the Pooh in the movie,thats the most important part. 🙂
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 06, 2019, 09:16:28 PM
They're also moving forward with a Black Widow movie. They've got screenwriters, a director, and some co-stars cast, so that's apparently happening.

They've also working on Shang-Chi. That one might be tricky... If Marvel's able to, I'd personally try to get Iron Fist, Colleen Wing, ect into that one because, well, that just seems like a good idea. On the other hand, it could work out in a similar way to Black Panther. Crazy Rich Asians with superheroes? Hmm...

I'd be interested in all of the ones Panther-Gunn mentioned....

Quote
Deathlok
Showed up in Agents of Shield quite a bit, so I'm not sure if they'd do it as a movie. They did create a new character to be Deathlok though, instead of the comic versions.

Quote
Moon Knight (wasn't that on Netflix also?)

I double checked this on Wikipedia: [EDIT] I originally said Netflix for some reason]

-Namedropped in Blade: The Series (I remembered that one)
-GotG's James Gunn has publicly said he pitched a Moon Knight to Marvel Studios.
-They had a few plans years ago for a Moon Knight tv series that fell through. I vaguely recall them talking about doing Moon Knight in the Netflix stuff. Apparently Marvel Studio's Kevin Feige said last year they plan to eventually have Moon Knight appear in the MCU.
-He's appeared in the current batch of cartoons, specifically Avengers Assemble. As a policy Marvel tends to avoid using characters in those shows that would be seen as "promoting" properties Fox owned the rights to (hence Wolverine and the Thing only appeared in early seasons....though Mesmero did appear much later). So they probably consider Moon Knight one of "their" characters. This policy, I imagine, will be reversed in the coming years now that Disney has bought the Fox stuff back.

Quote
Nova (Richard Rider)

I'm actually expecting Nova to make into the MCU in the future (as a actual superhero and not simply the Nova Corps)
I did have concerns about how they reconciled the comics version with the non-powered Space Cops from GotG but 1. We know from Infinity War that Thanos went down to Xander to curb-stomp them and get Ronan's Infinity Stone. I'm expecting us to learn more about that in a later film (or is it hoping?) and a superpowered Nova could spin out of the aftermath of that. And 2. The GotG cartoon reconciled the two versions by using a tweaked version of the backstory from the Sam Alexander version. Speaking of which, sorry to say, but I would guess it'd be Sam rather than Richie. I'm personally expecting that when we get the Young Avengers they'll be a combination of the Allen Heinberg/Jim Cheung lineup and the modern incarnation of the Champions. So you'll have say Hulkling, maybe the Teen Vision, but also Ms. Marvel, Sam, ect. Feige has said they plan to add Kamala Khan in the future and I'd guess (while you could add her to a Captain Marvel sequel) they'd probably consider a teen team movie less of a gamble than a solo outing (it's worked out elsewhere: Into the Spider-Verse, Runaways, Cloak and Dagger, ect)

Quote
She-Hulk (I think the Byrne title format could work well)

I've actually been saying for a while I'm surprised they haven't done She-Hulk. I know Marvel hates to have to pay Universal for Hulk stuff (side note - the two Hulk movies just came back to Netflix in some territories so maybe the Edward Norton Hulk leaving Netflix last year wasn't part of the Disney Purge, as I originally thought) but regardless She-Hulk kinda felt like a really obvious one to me. She's a pretty well known Marvel character who isn't tied up in the X-Men stuff, and you can have some fun with the character. I think they've have to figure out how to do the character (CGI like Hulk and Thanos? Green makeup like Drax and Gamorra? Partial CGI like Mantis?) And that might be what's held it back.

Quote
Power Pack (maybe)

Double checking Wikipedia, that one was talked about in 2017 as part of MCU and something similar to Spy Kids. I'd personally bet good money on that going the standalone animated movie route (like Big Hero Six and Into The Spider-Verse). Child actors aging too fast has always been a concern in the filmaking industries and child labor laws on how many hours you can make child actors work might be a concern with the conveyor belt well-oiled machine that is the MCU. Well that or they age the kids up to teenagers and have them played by 20-somethings (which admittedly, they are very much older in the 616 comics, but in an adaptation, it would kinda undercut the whole appeal of Power Pack)

Personally I'm still hoping for Thunderbolts in the future. Let's also not forgot Disney's really trying to make MCU spinoff shows on their streaming service a thing (and actual characters from the films at that: Falcon, Loki, Scarlet Witch, Vision...) so that opens a lot of opportunities.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: UnkoMan on April 19, 2019, 04:11:17 PM
They rushed and ruined Inhumans, so I guess Eternals is trying to make up for that? Sweep one under the rug, grab the other.
Is Sersi going to join the Avengers?
I liked the Inhumans a bit more, but whatever. I'm down for the ride to see what they do in the movies. Change them up, hit or miss, whatever.
(Though I'm still secretly hoping Dr. Strange becomes less "Tony Stark" and more "actually cool, powerful, master of the mystic arts." I would also be way down for an actual Defenders at some point [Why wasn't that Netflix show called Heroes for Hire??], especially if they brought in Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie.)


I really hope Black Widow is just a super dope spy movie. It could be so good.

Shang-Chi made as error correction to Iron Fist could be good too, I agree. Just make a cool Kung Fu movie.

I guess I've been repeating this sentiment. Just make cool movies, and don't worry about making "super hero movies" that tie in everywhere.

I would still totally watch a She Hulk show that was basically Ally McBeal with the occasional super fight.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 20, 2019, 03:40:23 PM
I don't think Eternals/Inhumans is a fair comparison. Eternals was apparently a choice made in house by Marvel Studios, and seems to fall into the same category as GotG... IE: characters fans kinda know about that have some history in the comics to draw from, but with a lack of hardcore fan attachment that allows filmmakers to do their own thing with the material. Inhumans... well, I had a whole rant written up about THAT mess, but I've expressed that frustration enough by now. In short it was the result of some executive meddling rather than creative desire, and boy did it show.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 20, 2019, 05:30:45 PM
Yeah...only Eternal are even more obscure then Inhumans.And nobody gave a cr@p about them.
It could work with a good execution,but its probably going to be another attempt at finding X-men replacements.

BTW,now that James Gunn is back,can we get that Thunderbolts movie he proposed?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: cranlox on April 24, 2019, 04:22:55 PM
Amazing, spectacular Endgame!
I could see the movie as always in avant and I thought it was the best!
Endgame♥x3000! :thumbup:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 25, 2019, 02:55:58 PM
I see it Sunday. That said, Given how fast tickets are sold out, I feel like spoilers should be used for at least a couple weeks. That said, I have a theory that I'm gonna spoiler JIC (since part of it is based on information not everyone is tied into) so.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: cranlox on April 26, 2019, 03:58:50 AM
All I get answer is spoiler or something very close.
Just go see it!

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 26, 2019, 08:53:12 AM
So I just saw it. And while I liked this VERY much more than Infinity War, thought this was quite the epic bow to put on the entire saga.

But...

I can't help but to have a TON of questions, since they decided to mess with the one thing that causes headaches in film history.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Jeez, the more I think about this the sillier it gets.  I mean, it was fun to watch, but it's making less and less sense to me.

Am I the only one? I gotta be missing something, right?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on April 27, 2019, 01:28:38 PM
Saw it. Not the best Marvel movie, but still pretty darn good.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 28, 2019, 02:10:01 AM
I saw it today. Quite the movie. It may have 3 hours long, but it didn't feel like it, it went by without me even noticing.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Oh, for those wondering about post credits scenes....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I definitely enjoyed it. One things for sure though, all eyes are Marvel Studios to see what they're going to do next.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: GhostMachine on April 29, 2019, 06:07:51 AM
My thoughts on Endgame:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 29, 2019, 10:52:18 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on April 29, 2019, 08:50:56 PM
I can't make no real argument against what either of you said. But to be honest, a lot of it might be how you like your kool-aid flavored.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on April 30, 2019, 02:32:19 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

https://sheepfulsheepyard.tumblr.com/post/184470533501/wow-the-fact-that-the-russo-brothers-hate-how
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on April 30, 2019, 03:52:11 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 30, 2019, 04:42:50 AM
KKhohoho:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on April 30, 2019, 05:38:46 PM
Okay guys, breaking my dissertation exile to add commentary here.  Several of y'all have noted the same things I have, and I get the impression that we seem to be generally viewing the film the same way.

So, non-spoilery overview first:

Endgame was good, almost great. It is a fair, if not a perfect, ending of this amazing project. I did not love it the way I did Infinity War, but this film, admittedly, had a harder job to do than even its predecessor, an incredibly hard job. There is no more after this. This is the end. There will be more movies, more individual stories, and maybe Marvel will even try to manufacture another miracle and create another interwoven, overarching, franchise-spanning saga, but this movie is, unquestionably, the end of the journey that began over a decade ago. To create a satisfying ending to twenty plus films and a decade of storytelling and universe-building is a very tough job indeed.

It did that job pretty well, and with a comprehensiveness that was impressive and awe-inspiring. But it does have significant flaws, both on the plot and the thematic level. It is by turns touching, heart-rending, inspiring, and beautiful. Unfortunately, it is also occasionally stupidly silly and in a few (though too many for a project like this) moments it undercuts its own emotional impact for a cheap joke. Still, on the whole, it succeeds on the emotional level quite magnificently.

On the plot level, it is often creative and surprising, but it is also downright sloppy to a degree that is rather astonishing given the importance of the film and the accomplishment of its creators. However, given the nature and complexity of the story being told, such sloppiness is neither entirely surprising nor as damaging as it might be in other contexts.

I suppose the great question for a film like this, though its like has never actually existed before, is 'does it create a satisfying conclusion?' The answer is, yes, emotionally. It does, and it does so in wonderful ways, with tragedy and triumph. It provides the hopeful, inspiring experience that a comicbook film should, while still feeling weighty and significant. I walked out of the theater feeling somberly elated. Intellectually, the conclusion is less satisfying for a number of reasons I'll outline below. Despite that failing, I walked away happy, if not perfectly so.

So, go see it. It is worth seeing solely on the merits of the uniqueness of its cultural import, in recognition of the grand experiment that it concludes, but it is also worth seeing AS that conclusion, and on its own merits as a very good adventure film full of wonder, hope, and redemption.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So yes, the several of y'all who made predictions about my reactions were correct.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 01, 2019, 03:07:20 AM
Yay, glad to see you pop up Benton! Really enjoyed hearing your thoughts!  :thumbup:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on May 01, 2019, 03:53:38 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 01, 2019, 05:06:32 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on May 01, 2019, 11:50:31 AM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on May 01, 2019, 11:57:31 AM
Okay, I think I kinda solved my major problem with the movie and honest with similar movies as well.  And it took a while, almost felt like I had to do a Matrix and do a data download of science and and research actual theories. But I'll break it down.  And it came to me while thinking about the latest Game of Thrones episode.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Anyway, that's what I got.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 01, 2019, 12:42:05 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 01, 2019, 01:27:09 PM
Okay, I think I kinda solved my major problem with the movie and honest with similar movies as well.  And it took a while, almost felt like I had to do a Matrix and do a data download of science and and research actual theories. But I'll break it down.  And it came to me while thinking about the latest Game of Thrones episode.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 01, 2019, 04:22:01 PM
Yay, glad to see you pop up Benton! Really enjoyed hearing your thoughts!  :thumbup:

Thanks SS!  That's a very nice welcome!  :D  Glad you enjoyed my ramblings!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Quote
comics are all about hope out of tragedy and finding the third way.

That's a very narrow-minded view of comics.

True.  It also happens to be the correct one.  ;)  Ha, seriously though, I am willing to defend that claim.  Superhero comics (which is what I mean, to be clear), grew out of the Great Depression, and they were all about finding hope in a more fantastic world than the grim reality folks faced every day (coincidentally, I am fairly certain this is why these movies are so popular in our own day and age).  That is the the through-line of superhero comics, though they can and do tackle other themes often enough.  The core elements in the conception of the superhero are power fantasies and hope.  We are not strong or tough enough to fight off danger or correct injustice, so we invent a Superman.  We lack the strength to turn tragedy into triumph, so we invent a Batman.  There is more to comics, but these ideas are in their DNA at the most basic level.

Shogunn, really interesting!  Also, I'm glad you enjoyed this one more than the last one.  I'm sorry you had so many problems with Infinity War (because tone is hard in text, to be clear, I mean this earnestly).

Further thoughts on plot holes:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I really want to watch the final act again...but I'm rather reluctant to go sit through the entire movie, including the bits I hated, again.  Ha.  :P  I wish:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on May 02, 2019, 02:23:13 AM
Shogunn, really interesting!  Also, I'm glad you enjoyed this one more than the last one.  I'm sorry you had so many problems with Infinity War (because tone is hard in text, to be clear, I mean this earnestly).

Lol, no worries, I gotcha, bro. But to be honest, at this point, it's hard for me to see them as separate movies, Infinity War and Endgame. I went back and reread my comments and I'm still just kinda confused why were they insisting they were to be two separate movie.  I mean I guess technically you can watch Avengers:AOA without having watched Avengers and you can watch Avengers: IW without having watched AOA or Avengers. But it's hard to imagine that someone can watch Endgame without having watched IW. But that's neither here nor there.

But I do have this question about what you said, Benton. If anyone else his following his logic, feel free to chip in... I suppose we're all still trying to figure this one out.

Quote
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Speaking of...

Quote
I really want to watch the final act again...but I'm rather reluctant to go sit through the entire movie, including the bits I hated, again.  Ha.  :P  I wish:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'm seriously thinking about buying a ticket... watching the first scene or two the leaving. Go home, go to the gym, get something to eat, or walk around the mall... come back a few hours later just for the last part!  :lol:

Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 02, 2019, 03:02:53 AM
Lol, no worries, I gotcha, bro. But to be honest, at this point, it's hard for me to see them as separate movies, Infinity War and Endgame. I went back and reread my comments and I'm still just kinda confused why were they insisting they were to be two separate movie.  I mean I guess technically you can watch Avengers:AOA without having watched Avengers and you can watch Avengers: IW without having watched AOA or Avengers. But it's hard to imagine that someone can watch Endgame without having watched IW. But that's neither here nor there.

Agreed.  That was more or less my take on IW to begin with, which is why, though I understood your reservations, I wasn't troubled by them.  I'm glad that this has helped.

But I do have this question about what you said, Benton. If anyone else his following his logic, feel free to chip in... I suppose we're all still trying to figure this one out.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ahh, see, that's the genius of this approach (however much we have to do the narrative work which the filmmakers should have done):
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Speaking of...

Quote
I really want to watch the final act again...but I'm rather reluctant to go sit through the entire movie, including the bits I hated, again.  Ha.  :P  I wish:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'm seriously thinking about buying a ticket... watching the first scene or two the leaving. Go home, go to the gym, get something to eat, or walk around the mall... come back a few hours later just for the last part!  :lol:

Haha!  I don't blame you!  I have considered the same thing!  :lol:  That may be my favorite Marvel movie moment to date.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 02, 2019, 07:37:22 PM
Time isnt a straight line,its more like a timey-wimey....okay,I cant do this... 🙂
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on May 05, 2019, 08:23:13 AM
BTW, word around the campfire has it that the first film of phase four will introduce a character we should have saw coming...

Phase 4 Spoiler:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Phase 3 Spoiler:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 05, 2019, 03:45:52 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 05, 2019, 07:38:33 PM
Shogunn:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

'Mato:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BRANDEN on May 06, 2019, 08:53:48 AM
There's eventually talk the Inhuman's film might be dropped, by virtue of noteworthy utilization of In people in Agents of SHIELD, despite the way in which that the TV and motion picture approach are at present obliged by completely various individuals
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 06, 2019, 01:32:22 PM
New, spoilerific Spider-Man trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt9L1jCKGnE)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Mysterio's looking pretty good. By which I mean, of course, his fishbowl.  ^_^
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 06, 2019, 02:40:11 PM
Wait,is that...Spoony?  :D
Okay,that kid at the end kinda looks like Spoony.

So Mysterio is now Abra Kadabra?And I guess Donnie Darko is now explained.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 06, 2019, 04:10:34 PM
Yeah...I don't know how I feel about that.  It looks like fun, but that seems like rather a big departure if, as SS says, they're telling the truth.  Hmm.  Also:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 06, 2019, 04:15:31 PM
Sort of how they made Tony into Uncle Ben?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 06, 2019, 11:59:15 PM
Benton:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Quote
Wait,is that...Spoony?  :D
Okay,that kid at the end kinda looks like Spoony.

Are you talking about Flash? Because I went back and checked the end of the trailer and if it's not Flash I'm not sure who you're talking about.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 07, 2019, 04:23:10 AM
Yes.And I have to get some new material. ☺
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 08, 2019, 01:29:04 PM
I just remembered something I'd forgotten for like two weeks since Avengers came out.

Thor really needs to stop doing that thing where he summons his weapon to his hand, indoors, several doors away. Seriously, Thor, it's a d*ck move. They made a joke out of it in Ragnarok but they do it again in Endgame (you can see it in some of the trailers) and the movie doesn't call attention to it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on May 12, 2019, 04:44:40 AM
SS, regarding Thor's weapon summoning: Agreed and that's bothered me for a while. Obviously, it is more than just rude to have Thor's gear destroying walls and so on as it answers his call. These are often occupied areas. The odds that someone gets smooshed by a flying hammer or axe get pretty high after a while. Maybe the idea is that these weapons are smart enough to do some path planning around obstacles, which I would find totally believable and which I think I have seen in the comics. But, I don't recall ever being shown that in the MCU, and it would have been easy (and kind of cool) to have shown.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: kkhohoho on May 12, 2019, 02:19:07 PM
Yeah...I don't know how I feel about that.  It looks like fun, but that seems like rather a big departure if, as SS says, they're telling the truth.  Hmm.  Also:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on May 12, 2019, 03:24:16 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 28, 2019, 10:14:56 AM
Well,I saw Captain Marvel.It was...a thing.Nick Fury was the highpoint as everyone said.Oh and Skrulls are a metaphor for illegal immigration.In case you missed that.Im not sure how you could,but thats the whole point.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 28, 2019, 06:08:57 PM
Ehh, I don't think it's nearly as hamfisted as all of that. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 28, 2019, 07:02:03 PM
Its not really subtle,either. ☺️
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on May 31, 2019, 03:19:46 AM
Well coming from someone who worked in politics for most of his adult life, I never picked up on it.

And as I think about it now....

I still don't see it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 31, 2019, 03:54:13 AM
Well, you can certainly make a case for it:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on May 31, 2019, 04:19:34 AM
I didn't have a problem with the lightly-drizzled-with-recent-headlines aspect of Captain Marvel, though I didn't think it was especially subtle, either. The story template that the-supposed-bad-guys-might-not-really-be-so-bad isn't that original, but it was a serviceable framework for a story. I just don't think they really took it very far.

If there was a problem with the script, it was that Captain Marvel herself doesn't seem very transformed by the events portrayed. I mean, for an origin story, she seems pretty much the same person at the end as at the start, just with a slightly better memory of how she got there. Of course, she ends up with less to limit the overpowered nature of the character, but that may not really be growth and I would argue that it makes it harder to fit the character into team-up movies. It also seemed like the acting from BL was a little on the wooden side. She's capable of better, so maybe that's another script or directing issue.

The movie is okay, but I don't see a persuasive case that it's among the top in the MCU.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on May 31, 2019, 04:59:13 AM
Well coming from someone who worked in politics for most of his adult life, I never picked up on it.

And as I think about it now....

I still don't see it.
Thats an appeal to authority.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 31, 2019, 10:38:02 PM
Different people get different things out of movies, tv shows, comic book storylines, ect. For example, I know someone who thinks Riri William's current armor doesn't look like Hornet. I went back and compared the two again, and was unsurprised to see that they looked even more similar than I first thought.

In terms of Captain Marvel, I've not seen the film, so I can't comment on that firsthand. Not that I really care to get into a political topic about it mind you.

Quote
If there was a problem with the script, it was that Captain Marvel herself doesn't seem very transformed by the events portrayed. I mean, for an origin story, she seems pretty much the same person at the end as at the start, just with a slightly better memory of how she got there. Of course, she ends up with less to limit the overpowered nature of the character, but that may not really be growth and I would argue that it makes it harder to fit the character into team-up movies. It also seemed like the acting from BL was a little on the wooden side. She's capable of better, so maybe that's another script or directing issue.

The movie is okay, but I don't see a persuasive case that it's among the top in the MCU.

I get the sense that is/will be a common opinion. The origin movies tend to be the lesser films in the MCU. Doctor Strange, I would say is about par with a Phase 1 MCU film. Ant-Man, which I really, really like, due to having a natural bias for the character/property, also would be on the lower run of MCU films IMO. Black Panther and Spider-Man I don't count in these because they were introduced in Civil War and the MCU skipped Spidey's origin entirely.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on May 31, 2019, 11:08:30 PM
Yeah Stumpy, I pretty much entirely agree.  It was a good, entertaining film, but I think Captain Marvel was, in many ways, one of the least interesting things about it.  Honestly, my only real complaint is that I felt she was rather badly cast.  I've heard that Larson is a good actress (and I thought she did a fine enough job), but she really seemed a poor fit in the roll to me.  She seemed far too 'normal' for the soldier/warrior bad-a that she is supposed to be in the film.  I just didn't really buy her in the role.  I feel like it would be the equivalent of casting Mark Ruffalo as Captain America.  And yeah, they've made her so powerful that I have no idea how in the world they'll fit her into any team movies.

Nonetheless, I enjoyed it, and Nick Fury steals every scene he's in, to no-one's surprise. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on May 31, 2019, 11:49:20 PM
I'll watch it eventually for Nick Fury and the cat. And Jude Law. And Ben Mendohlson. And Gemma Chan.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 01, 2019, 06:54:58 AM
Well coming from someone who worked in politics for most of his adult life, I never picked up on it.

And as I think about it now....

I still don't see it.
Thats an appeal to authority.

I don't even know what that means.

The thing is, I'll have to see it again, but the Skrulls weren't really about assimilation. They might have been refugees, but it ain't like Central American refugees are the only refugees in the history of refugees.  Of course there might be similarities, but Talos was all about finding his family and finding a home. Not about living the American Dream. The bigger theme was the Kree vs Skrulls.  There's no such war theme in the Immigration debate. And lastly, the Skrulls ultimately left Earth.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 01, 2019, 07:52:51 AM
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/244/Appeal-to-False-Authority (https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/244/Appeal-to-False-Authority)
And no offense,where you worked,has no connection to how other people view the movie.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 01, 2019, 07:07:42 PM
Why would I be offended? It's your opinion. So as mine. This is not based on a factual subject. It's a matter of perspective. So that link isn't at all relevant to what I was referring to when I stated my work history. I work in politics. I am very familiar with the immigration issue. I have worked with immigrants. I have had to educated the public on issues affecting immigrants and immigration, legal or otherwise. I say this to demonstrate my familiarity with the subject. I never said you are wrong. I never said you don't know what you're talking about or I know better than you or anyone. I'm just saying that looking through my lens, knowing what I have known, I do not see the connection you're alleging. And earlier I told you why.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 01, 2019, 07:55:16 PM
Which isnt really relevant,unless your trying to prove your the expert on alien immigration here.In which casr,cool I guess?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 01, 2019, 11:17:54 PM
What are you trying to be an arse for? I expressed an opinion. My opinion. Just like you did. Your opinion is not fact. Your opinion is not truth. It's your opinion. Of course if someone is more familiar with something they'd know what the hell they're talking about. If you said Captain Marvel looks like my mom, I'd say no she don't because I actually know what the frell my mom looks like. But you're talking about something COMPLETELY subjective. And trivial. You think there was some deeper meaning in the movie. Fine. I'm glad you have an opinion. I just don't share it.  What am I supposed to not talk? Am I supposed to agree with you or something? What?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 02, 2019, 02:50:47 AM
I'm going to make a comment about this appeal to authority claim, while at the same time making an appeal to authority.  Take that  :P :
(Puts on rhetoric teacher hat)

I feel like, in order for the statement to be fallacious, such an appeal to authority fallacy would have to be a bit more intentional and directed.  Shogunn's point seemed more about establishing his perspective than saying "I know everything about this subject." 

Remember folks, let's be more gracious to each other and not assume that every differing opinion is an attack.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 02, 2019, 07:55:37 AM
On an different note:

Now that Disney's bought Fox, lots of "what could have been" info has been coming out about Fox X-Men and FF movies. Unused scripts for Fan4stic, Matthew Vaughn's plans for X-Men if he were to continue with the sequels, Tom Hardy as a younger Wolverine, and most astonishing (pun not intended), a Fox movie featuring X-Men, Fantastic Four, Daredevil (who they had the rights to back then) and Deadpool (back before the Deadpool movies were made). Wow, Fox was trying to literally throw everything at the wall, weren't they? That sounds like it would have been a complete mess.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: HarryTrotter on June 02, 2019, 10:10:55 AM
What are you trying to be an arse for? I expressed an opinion. My opinion. Just like you did. Your opinion is not fact. Your opinion is not truth. It's your opinion. Of course if someone is more familiar with something they'd know what the hell they're talking about. If you said Captain Marvel looks like my mom, I'd say no she don't because I actually know what the frell my mom looks like. But you're talking about something COMPLETELY subjective. And trivial. You think there was some deeper meaning in the movie. Fine. I'm glad you have an opinion. I just don't share it.  What am I supposed to not talk? Am I supposed to agree with you or something? What?
Not disputing that,and I wasnt trying to antagonize you.Its just that I find the take of  "Im an IRL politician so" pretty funny. 😉
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 07, 2019, 08:24:17 AM
I'm still wondering if Wong eventually got a tuna sub.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 08, 2019, 05:34:19 PM
Take or leave it but I spent the hard earned dollar to see Dark Phoenix and, noting those who know me know I tend to find the positive side of comic media, was a complete let down and I want a refund. Just a warning for anyone toying with the idea that it may appeal to them coming from an 80's up X-Men fan. If you want to watch Sophie Turner pretty much full stop you won't be disappointed otherwise it failed to deliver in any sense. I had to watch DOFP after just to get the taste out of my mouth and that taste was pretty funky. Sorry, and I love X-Men as much as I love Ninja Turtles and even managed to find redeeming qualities in X3 but just saying save your dollar and see Endgame again and watch this one when it comes out on television.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 08, 2019, 05:40:26 PM
Well, I can't say that's surprising....at all....but that's still a shame.  This is pretty much what I've been hearing, and it is also what I expected after the disaster that was the last one.  Also...it doesn't take a genius to know that you can't adapt that amazing story without laying the groundwork for it, and seeing as we JUST meet their new Cyclops and Jean in the last movie and that they had pretty much zero personality, it wasn't a very good bet. :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 08, 2019, 08:37:52 PM
Well again even when it's a dud I can usually scrape something off and if nothing novelty. Not this one. First the plot...well just toss that out. I have no clue what they were thinking with that. So aliens...okay well just people that are supposed to be aliens with monotone behavior. So character development, I mean the past three films introduced a lot...well no. So and not a spoiler here because these are things that are not in the film: One of those cool Quicksilver scenes? Nope, in fact he doesn't star in it other than a cameo. So at the end I'm like well at least Stacy X is in it, that's sort of neat. At home I look online and it's Selene...somehow even though she appears to Stacy X. So that leave The Phoenix Force, who wouldn't pay to see that finally amiright? Well, how do you feel about comic book entities that are represented by clouds of space dust? Yeah...

Anyways big waste of time and it doesn't deliver anything even what it promised which was resolution for the fans. Just five or so actors showing some attitude but more that they're pretty much not into it and done with this franchise. And I mean I wish there was more to it, the franchise over all has given so much and this being the last one and all I would have thought they would want to do at least anything they never got to. Oh Dazzler is in it in her disco costume but again, cameo so you could just as well watch that on Youtube. Sigh. It's only competition is The Secret Life of Pets 2 and it's getting slaughtered by it if that says anything.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 11, 2019, 02:33:43 AM
Yep, it's a shame.  After the excellent course correction of Days of Future Past, it's amazing that they managed to squander that good will.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 11, 2019, 06:27:48 AM
Take or leave it but I spent the hard earned dollar to see Dark Phoenix and, noting those who know me know I tend to find the positive side of comic media, was a complete let down and I want a refund. Just a warning for anyone toying with the idea that it may appeal to them coming from an 80's up X-Men fan. If you want to watch Sophie Turner pretty much full stop you won't be disappointed otherwise it failed to deliver in any sense. I had to watch DOFP after just to get the taste out of my mouth and that taste was pretty funky. Sorry, and I love X-Men as much as I love Ninja Turtles and even managed to find redeeming qualities in X3 but just saying save your dollar and see Endgame again and watch this one when it comes out on television.

Sheesh, dude! Not sure if I'd go that hard! Ouch! Lol

Not gonna lie, I was disappointed with it too there were some entertaining parts..... but overall... that movie was nothing but a missed opportunity. I got one big question:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But yeah. SA youre right about a lot of what you said. Can't say I want my money back. Was going to go anyway and I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Which is kinda unfortunate because despute the bad reviews i really like the prior ones dor the most part. Was happy Phoenix showed up to kill Apocalypse at the end. It could ha e only been that. Which it makes it so aggrivating that they screw this up. Again! Like how?

And I'm not sure if this counts as a spoiler but making a X-Men movie that takes place in the 90s and you DON'T give Storm long hair and a white costume? That was a layup! And you missed!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 11, 2019, 03:19:11 PM
This made me laugh:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0s9mUXhHZ8
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 11, 2019, 04:46:44 PM
I'd go that hard, it's numbers speak for it here. In their defense I know they encountered every problem they could in making this film and I think they were just honoring their contract here. My work ethic says don't do a job if I'm going to do it halfway but I know when you're union it's a matter then of not getting paid and not getting the next job from your union. That's irony of course because it's what happened with X3 as well. In fact they lost what, six or more months of production was it on that one?

Here's a better question for you then the Phoenix/Apocalypse one, where did the mansion come from? And I mean it was there down to the very doors, trim boards, furniture and decorations on the desks. No explanation either it was just there. Anyways they screwed it up because it doesn't work in film, the Dark Phoenix story is what I mean. Like Apocalypse. I liked that one but wasn't very deep but that's because the source material wasn't. It's just Apocalypse is powerful as all get and whoops on everyone without breaking a sweat. So that movie delivered. This thing had the stuff the source material did it just doesn't look as good off paper. Personally I would have went with something inspired by Fatal Attractions. Big Xavier and his kids Vs. Magneto and his people showdown. To me that would wrap the storyline since the first. Have it be a confrontation of the various character developments.

I'm also not critically let down. We've been spoiled as comic fans and gotten pretty much everything we wished for in film and then some. The problem of course is in some cases we got what we wished for and found out it wasn't that good of a thing. Also this means moving on. I'm looking forward to New Mutants and what Disney has planned for all this. Looking forward to seeing something new with it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on June 11, 2019, 06:50:53 PM
I often pay to watch movies that differ from the source material, as I understand that there are limits to the format and things that work in comics that don't work in live action films. And, I often pay to watch movies that have some plot holes but are still mostly solid efforts and overall good entertainment. We were planning to see Dark Phoenix last weekend, but decided to put it off. I am now feeling lucky that we did. I am willing to wait (and pay less) to see a movie that is apparently thrown together, has massive plot holes, never decides what the actual challenge is, ignores things established just one movie ago, doesn't make use of things that made previous movies in the series fun, etc.

I mean, just as an example, why not have a Quicksilver scene? 1) They are fun to watch. 2) They lighten the mood. 3) It's fairly straightforward to waylay or dismiss the character somehow so that his obvious "win button" power isn't a factor in critical battles. 4) People have come to look forward to a slow-mo scene with him set to some classic music of the era. So, what the heck? Was it a decision specifically made to disappoint fans? "Here we have this thing that we have done in the last two movies and everyone loves it. Let's totally just drop it from our swan song."

Anyway, this whole thing is sort of a shame. Despite some shortcomings, I have generally enjoyed these X-Men movies. I know there is a pattern of making a series of movies and then rebooting them. But, if the movies are entertaining, I don't usually find myself waiting for the reboot while the last of the series is still in the theaters. I guess Fox has entered a new era of foreshadowing where they leave the fans longing for the reboot.  &lt;_&lt;

Benton, that link was hilarious and several of the "Pitch Meeting" series from that YouTuber have been a hoot to watch.  :lol:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 12, 2019, 03:56:06 AM
Just watched Captain Marvel.

I'd say I enjoyed it more than I expected, or perhaps the same amount? Not even really sure. It's a MCU origin story, it's alright. Brie Larson's Captain Marvel was kinda half and half for me. Sometimes she's kinda aloof and subdued, sometimes she's kinda snarky, kinda like, almost every character in the MCU (except Thanos, obviously). But it definitely did a better job of selling the character than Endgame did. I found she and the movie were at their best during the buddy-cop stuff with Fury. Sam Jackson definitely stole the movie for me. Any time he was on screen I was paying attention. The Kree stuff I kinda went in and out. I got a bit distracted during the final end near the end, so I lost track of some of the characters, so I may have to go back and watch that part again or at least look up online what happened to specific characters.

The cat was cute, but somewhat underplayed, I could have gone for more of the cat.

I liked Jude Law, but I've liked him in other stuff so that wasn't a surprise. I'd heard Ben Mendohlson was good in this and I was not disappointed. He was kinda great.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 12, 2019, 04:43:10 AM
I liked CM as well. It had a hard time I think because it had to follow Infinity War so the bar was high. But I thought it was a straightforward action sci-fi flick. I was also an alterna-teen so a bit of appeal there. I also liked that they patched the plot holes revolving around SHIELD before going to Endgame with this. And it a had a cat that looks like mine so yeah, lol. Should Google the cats red carpet premier, that's fun to watch. Yeah the cat got to be up there on the stage next to Brie and everything, it mostly slept the whole time ha!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 12, 2019, 06:15:36 AM
Yeah, I'm a cat person. I totally watched a few minutes of the "Goose the Cat" livestream tonight.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 12, 2019, 04:40:27 PM
My Peanut says hello!

(http://catman.freedomforceforever.com/temp/100_0514.jpg)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 12, 2019, 05:09:22 PM
Hello Peanut!  :lol:  He looks like our Fatty Bolger.  :)

Yeah, I liked the bits with the cat.  They were some of the more entertaining moments in the movie.  Of course, I'm also a cat person.  However, I'm also all that stands between my wife and her future as a crazy cat lady, so I fully expect that she will LOVE those bits when she sees the movie. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: daglob on June 12, 2019, 06:39:58 PM
Ah, now, that's a handsome cat.

I need to post a pic of Diego, now that his leg is healed up and he has filled out.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 12, 2019, 06:47:28 PM
Oh Peanut is obese or so the doctors say. He's just full I say.

I think the breakout performer in CM was Ben Mendelsohn. He brought all the charm to the film it needed. Just as I think Karen Gillan is the breakout in Endgame, award worthy and deserving of nothing but the big roles from here on out for Nebula if you ask me actually.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 15, 2019, 01:14:46 AM
This may be an unpopular opinion but I actually liked Captain Marvel better than Wonder Woman. I hate to have to compare the two but it's what it is. And as a movie, this just made more sense to me. The plotholes in WW were too glaring and they seemed to try to do too much. It was fine but I just found CM more satisfying ultimately.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 15, 2019, 04:02:05 AM
I still haven't seen WW, but CM was pretty sound, plot-wise, whatever is the case with the underwhelming portrayal of the main character. 

I thought the Honest Trailer was pretty much spot-on.  They even pointed out the cognitive dissonance I experienced between a de-aged Samuel L and watching him move.  :lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIvhu_YNCJg

SA, I agree.  Mendelsohn was very surprising and enjoyable in that role.  He's what made that whole twist work for me.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 15, 2019, 07:22:59 AM
I liked it better as well. WW was all over the place, like Speed it was like watching several short movies in a row and seemed to jump from one thing to the next. I also felt Wonder Woman wasn't tested enough. Like she just walked through any trials waving her hand and pushing past anything. I like a character struggle in a story and them having to overcome a battle internally as well externally, I think it defines a heroic moment.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on June 15, 2019, 11:03:52 AM
Interesting. I'd certainly agree that WW didn't really seem to meet her match in terms of opponents. But, she was challenged by circumstances and was unable to save the day on at least two significant occasions. Anyway, it's a fair criticism of WW that her actual combat opponents were not a match for her.

That said, if we are comparing, CM had that problem ten times over. She easily bowled over any opponent she came across, and that's before she "unlocked her true power". By the end of the movie, I was wondering whether any of the other Avengers would even be needed for End Game, since she could likely fight Thanos to a standstill on her own. And, apparently, I wasn't alone, since End Game arranged things so that Captain Win Button was conveniently absent for the vast majority of the movie's combat.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 16, 2019, 12:19:30 AM
I thought the Honest Trailer was pretty much spot-on.  They even pointed out the cognitive dissonance I experienced between a de-aged Samuel L and watching him move.  :lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIvhu_YNCJg

I saw that Honest Trailer too and I remember that bit with Samuel L. I watched reviews for the flick by a few other content creators I watched and couldn't remember who made that observation until now. Fortunately, I'm no expert at pointing out dodgy CGI so I never noticed that bit about Fury until they pointed it out. On the other hand, I could spot the shots where the cat was CGI like a champ.  :lol:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 16, 2019, 01:50:37 AM
Haha, SS, I saw it pretty immediately.  He LOOKED like a young man, but he MOVED like an old man.  It's just one of those things that we process subconsciously.

Stumpy, yeah, like I said before, CM's power level is a major problem for the MCU.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 16, 2019, 08:09:21 AM
Quote
It's just one of those things that we process subconsciously.

"We" meaning "us old men", Pops?  :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 16, 2019, 01:21:46 PM
.........maybe.  :lol:
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 17, 2019, 07:33:02 AM
@stumpy: No, I meant tested as a person, the traditional storytelling mechanism of introducing the conflict to make the protagonist work for it thus to the rising action into the climax. WW was pretty at the climax from the word go. I would have more enjoyed a film say just about her exploits on the island and struggle with being an individual among her people say. Or becoming immediately and completely nonplussed by the world of man to the point of existential crisis. CM had a bit more to work out here given her life and memories of it was a lie. Who are the good guys and the bad was the test and the result whom she would chose to be. WW didn't seem very involved in her environment, again I think more because it jumped from setting and story to setting and story. It's hard to get at the heart of a character when it's structured like that. I did like it though, good popcorn thrill ride movie and she looked awesome. But I didn't walk away contemplating what I watched. I ain't saying CM is Endgame either but scifi and grounded people stories just appeal to me more personally. It just had more character. Funny off topic bit, part of CM took place in view of my front yard but was actually filmed in California and I could see the differences in the fauna. 

And yeah, I'm projecting the mythology I know but what I described is the crux of the Greek pantheon and really would have made it more compelling and touching as a story. Big battle stories are fun mind you but I more read comics for the characters, not the wars.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 17, 2019, 07:46:41 AM
Okay add to fact I grew up an alterna-teen and own everything by Trent Reznor. Strawberry ice cream, mint chocolate chip. You know how it is.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 17, 2019, 01:51:19 PM
Not really familiar with Trent Reznor, but I do love mint chocolate chip. Always been a fan of mint flavored stuff.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on June 17, 2019, 02:59:38 PM
SS: Trent Reznor equals Nine Inch Nails post Cobain.

SA: Hell, you were normal for your time. Try being the only kid within thirty miles who listened to BB King and Charlie Parker while everyone else is listening to Primus, the Underground, or Garth Brooks while growing up. Heck, even on FR today I'm the oddball for music...
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 17, 2019, 03:18:06 PM
Well, that's one of the reasons you're an oddball....  ;)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on June 17, 2019, 03:32:26 PM
...and people wonder why I drink like ten fish....
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 17, 2019, 04:41:17 PM
10 fish, does that equal one drunk Aquaman?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0aDXbi8prk
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 17, 2019, 05:48:15 PM
@DJ: Claypool is top ten for me and I've always been an oddball, called that by name. I is what I is, expecting normalcy from me is only setting oneself up for disappointment.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on June 17, 2019, 10:04:09 PM
@DJ: Claypool is top ten for me and I've always been an oddball, called that by name. I is what I is, expecting normalcy from me is only setting oneself up for disappointment.

I'll give you Claypool then....but his recent one with Lennon's kid is...odd.  And I've never been called odd, usually more not so family friendly names that epitomize weird, odd, and strange.....


10 fish, does that equal one drunk Aquaman?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0aDXbi8prk

NO!  NO AQUAMAN!!!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 18, 2019, 01:01:57 AM
Haha!  Sorry DJ, it's official now.  You drink as much as one Aquaman.  :lol:

So guys, I know this is super out of date at this point, but I've been going through some of those Pitch Meeting videos, and I just watched the Thor: Ragnarok one.  It's hilariuos and a pretty much perfect send-up of everything wrong with that movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2kl4cVc5Dw

I feel somewhat vindicated. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on June 18, 2019, 03:24:37 PM
Benton: Aquaman doesn't drink so NOT equal to me.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 18, 2019, 03:34:46 PM
Haha!  :lol:  Or does he drink....like a fish?

This tickles me especially because Aquaman is my favorite character, and I don't drink myself.   :P
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on June 19, 2019, 07:04:46 AM
Because I'm a giant nerd, my response can only be one thing...

Whoah. Whoah, whoah, whoah, whoah......which version of Aquaman?  :lol:

[And yes, that's inspired by a vaguely similar joke from Friends.]
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on June 19, 2019, 08:43:26 AM
@DJ: Sort of around to the point that there is no normal thus everyone is in their own right. At best people either go with the social norm or against but that in itself is no more than an abstract concept and not real. Neither is wrong in my opinion, do what works for you I say. But the judgement is because we all know we're a bit weird when we look at our own thoughts. Speaking of weird and Claypool it was that Fungi or Foe one for me. I may have the title wrong but I disregarded it quickly. I love that he reinvents himself for the sake of art yet of course sometimes that leads to unspeakable valleys being entered. That one...it just made me literally physically uncomfortable to listen to. He made it up with the Chocolate Factory cover to me though so it all shakes out.

I'm an odd out here on the drinking thing. I used to be a 24 hours falling down drunk, high Southern was my choice but I would just as well pound a jug of Apple Blush, whatever kept me from remembering. I quit both because I had to physically and because I was breaking my moms heart, wasn't easy of course either. I had to go into the mountains in isolation. Yet I'm not for sobriety, it's a case by case basis I think. Another if it works for you. But if it doesn't or the amount doesn't then you got a habit you need to alter. Through all of it I was pretty good at not letting it overcome me either in relationships nor obligations. I met obligations, paid my bills on time and was rather quiet so I didn't cause a lot of problems. But I drank to much hard stuff with no buffer and wrecked my stomach more or less and there she went. Now I have to take prescription bills for the anxiety so still my liver is under fire. We're just creatures dependent on chemistry at the end of the day however we find and or take it.
 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on June 28, 2019, 02:11:56 AM
I just something fun about the new Far From Home

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on June 28, 2019, 04:13:46 AM
Hey, that's cool!  You're right, he was perfect.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on June 28, 2019, 05:12:09 AM
I just something fun about the new Far From Home

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

HAHAHAHAHA!!! Are you serious! That's dope!!!!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 04, 2019, 06:42:39 AM
I haven't seen it yet, not really in a rush to. Still full from Endgame. Did notice the stealth costume images online though and was wondering why he has open fingered gloves. Wouldn't that like leave his fingerprints everywhere and defeat the whole point of espionage?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: detourne_me on July 04, 2019, 03:10:11 PM
Just got back from watching it. It was really really good.
I'd put it in the top 10, not quite top 5 MCU movies. And probably 2nd or 3rd best Spider-Man movie after Raimi Spider-Man 2.

Stay after the credits!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 05, 2019, 02:18:56 AM
Yeah, I saw it last night too,  but unfortunately I gotta say I don't think I enjoyed it quite as much as you did, DM. I mean if you held a gun to my head and asked, I'd say yes it was good, but I don't think it held up well compared to the first. And in regard to Spider Man movies overall, I'd still put Raimi's first two ahead of this as well.

It was solid, but in many cases seemed to try to do too much.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Again, overall I liked it, but some of these inconsistencies stuck out to me. Just thought the first was a stronger entry.

Oh and also
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: stumpy on July 05, 2019, 05:41:55 AM
I saw it and enjoyed it. The whole balancing the potential responsibilities of Spider-Man as a hero with the more globe-trotting reach that SHIELD/Fury wants against the friendly, neighborhood Spidey that Peter envisions is still a compelling storyline, overall. Yes, it's been done before during Raimi's tenure on the series. But, I think it still works and is even more of a potential burden with Spidey as part of the larger MCU.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 07, 2019, 03:17:00 AM
Saw it today. I definitely enjoyed it. It went in some directions I was expecting (but still enjoyed) and some I was not expecting, which certainly kept things interesting. Ned probably stole the show for comedy IMO. It was neat to see this version of Betty Brant have a bigger role. It was nice to see Happy Hogan be nicer to Peter after brushing him off in Homecoming. Fury was....alright in this, but those expecting another team-up like in Captain Marvel might be disappointed. Though Nick Fury's car had "MTU" (Marvel Team-Up) written on its license plate (another car's license plate had ASM - Amazing Spider-Man)

Still not a big fan of Michelle, but she was certainly used better in this film than in Homecoming. I'm also still not sold on Flash. Don't really like the kind of humor he's used for, and he comes off as a missed opportunity given some of the more interesting developments with the character in other iterations.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 09, 2019, 07:18:46 AM
Arkham games.... I can see that. That's a fair comparison. Makes sense.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 14, 2019, 04:58:48 AM
Just saw it and caught up on spoiler tags.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 15, 2019, 12:02:03 AM
Had some time to think on it and...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 20, 2019, 04:02:14 AM
So, we just saw this, and everyone in my group liked it.  It was fun, enjoyable, but not REALLY a Spider-Man movie in setting or large-scale feel.  In themes, of course, it was.  The kid was born to play Spider-Man.  He's perfect.  The first one was better, but not massively so.  It was definitely funny and occasionally charming.  The humor did feel a bit forced in a few spots, though.

My previous issues with this version continue and are definitely a bit magnified in this outing, but I'm still enjoying this take for the moment, largely because of the very solid overall quality.  "Flash" bothered me more on this one, MJ probably a little bit less because they let her evolve beyond the obnoxiousness of the first one...though she has somehow turned into April Ludgate.  I still wish they had just given her a different name.  I'd be fine with Spidey having a different high school girlfriend, as MJ was always more of a college/adult character.

Mysterio was quite good, and I was very pleased on the whole with their take on him.

Spoilery thoughts, including my biggest criticism:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So, on the whole, it was good.  I'm glad I saw it, but I wasn't blown away by it. 
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 20, 2019, 04:32:37 PM
I liked it better than the first. Still had that fun the first did but they didn't take it so far as to make it ridiculous. More streamlined and it had better pacing as well was more intimate. I actually care about their MJ which I did not in the first movie. I tried to grant it the whole time that this film wasn't trying to live up to Homecoming but rather Endgame, or at least that was going to be the expectation so I flushed Endgame from my brain first as well I could. They should have done a later release that said, too close to the hype of Endgame. I would have went for a release right about when the Endgame DVD hits. That way they would ensure more people see Endgame and may have an interest in it's epilogue. In the same way then they would pretty much be able to own the action figure aisles this Christmas. Anyways Mysterio is hella awesome, this movie could have been a flop and it would of worth it for that.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Shogunn2517 on July 22, 2019, 04:20:53 AM
So...

Along with the new shows and movies announced at the SDCC... (I suppose I'll put it in spoilers, for now at least...)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 22, 2019, 05:07:36 AM
Not really new announcements all things considered sans giving titles to a few. I'm glad they're pushing it down a few years, I think if they get greedy and don't allow for a lapse they'll create an over-saturation lull.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: murs47 on July 23, 2019, 12:14:42 AM
Well...subscribing to Disney+ was going to be unlikely but after seeing this line-up, Disney can just take my money!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on July 23, 2019, 06:33:37 AM
Same, lol.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on July 24, 2019, 10:15:56 PM
So...

Along with the new shows and movies announced at the SDCC... (I suppose I'll put it in spoilers, for now at least...)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I wouldn't bet on it. I had a much longer post but the board ate it (grr) so I'll cut to the chase:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 25, 2019, 03:05:56 AM
Well, following in Marvel's intensely stupid footsteps, apparently Jane Foster is going to be taking over, not as the Goddess of Thunder, Thunderstrike, or any other appropriate name, but as "Thor," the personal name, the first name of Thor-freaking-Odinson.  It's so stupid that it makes my brain hurt.  So, I'm guessing that's going to put a different spin on things.  A female thunder goddess is fine, and given what they've done to Thor, I'd have no problem with that, but you can't name her Thor, because that's a name, not a title.  :banghead:

Sorry, this kind of stupidity gets under my skin.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 25, 2019, 03:27:39 PM
I'd say something about Benton's rant (?) on Jane Foster/Thor that might make some sense but I've got way, way too much on my plate and extremely little time or want to pontificate on it...so meh.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 25, 2019, 09:45:36 PM
It's not as simple as that in the comics, and I'll reserve judgement until I see the film. Frankly, I'm more concerned that they're using the same actress... No offense, she was ok in the first two films, but I don't see her pulling off the Amazonian looking Jane Foster Thor from the comics.

Back to the name... From what I understand, it was a dread pirate Roberts situation. When she did take up the name (because before that it was just what people were calling her and she didn't want to be called that) it was because Thor asked her to continue doing heroics in his name for reasons related to the story.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 25, 2019, 09:59:48 PM
Pontificate away if you want, DJ!  :)

'Mato, I am not judging the film itself and, in fact, given what they've done to Thor himself, replacing the character with pretty much anybody else makes me more receptive to them continuing the story.  I didn't know they tried to explain it in the comics, but that's still sorta' weaksauce.  It's just stupid for her to go by "Thor."  It's like Pepper taking over as Iron Man and going by Tony or Babs taking over the cowl and going by Bruce.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on July 26, 2019, 12:06:52 AM
It's like Pepper taking over as Iron Man and going by Tony or Babs taking over the cowl and going by Bruce.

I don't like her taking his name either, but you comparison makes zero sense. Thor's real name IS his hero name.  They are one and the same.  The example you gave are nothing like that.  The Iron Man identity and name and the Batman one as well are separate from the person names, so passing them down does not make it necessary to pass on the personal name too.  Thor's superhero name IS his personal name.  He can't pass on his heroic identity to someone else without them using it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Deaths Jester on July 26, 2019, 12:07:35 AM
<points Benton to the parts wherein he said he had way, way too much on his place nor the time> See my previous post, BG!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on July 26, 2019, 02:10:33 AM
See, I specifically used the Dread Pirate Roberts comparison because I felt it most appropriate in this instance. In the context of Princess Bride, there was very likely an original Dread Pirate Roberts, and Roberts was presumably his actual name. His successors took on the name because they realized that the name is what's important. "No one would surrender to the Dread Pirate Westley" and so too would no one surrender to the Mighty Jane, at least no one in Thor's general weight class. As cat correctly points out, the name is both his real name AND his superhero identity. And there have been other Thors before now: Beta Ray Bill WAS the main protagonist under the Thor title, as was Erik Masterson. And Erik was *absolutely* called Thor by the public (it's why he changes his costume to that 90s getup he had after Thor came back).

"Whosoever hold this hammer, if (s)he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor." -in the context of the original Lee comic, that meant Donald Blake becoming Thor Odinson. It may not be as literal now, but I don't see any difference between Jane doing good in Thor's name temporarily and Dick doing good in Batman's. Or, and I cannot stress this enough, Erik and Beta Ray Bill doing good in Thor's name with Thor's own powers.

And if it's about the fact that she didn't move on to a different identity after Thor inevitably returned like Beta Ray and Erik did... she has. She's become one of the Valkyrie. And with all but one being dead ATM due to what we learn in Ragnarok, I can see them going in that direction here as well.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on July 26, 2019, 02:46:41 PM
The thermian argument. Everything in a fictional universe CAN be changed,so it SHOULD be changed.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Kommando on July 26, 2019, 03:09:12 PM
The funny thing is, if say for instance a frog found Mjolnir and was found worthy, and became frog Thor, no one would have any issues. :D
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on July 26, 2019, 03:13:44 PM
The funny thing is, if say for instance a frog found Mjolnir and was found worthy, and became frog Thor, no one would have any issues. :D
ThorPepe...I like that. Its got potential. ☺️
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Kommando on July 26, 2019, 03:27:31 PM
The funny thing is, if say for instance a frog found Mjolnir and was found worthy, and became frog Thor, no one would have any issues. :D
ThorPepe...I like that. Its got potential. ☺️

Matt Furie might have an issue with that, but no one who uses Pepe's image cares about Intellectual Property rights.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on July 26, 2019, 03:43:29 PM
In that case the meme transcended the comic it was based on.Not that hard,since all of 3 people read the comic.
Even Family Guy had "Pepe the Alt-right frog".Which also means that meme has been dead for 2 years.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Kommando on July 26, 2019, 05:34:45 PM
In that case the meme transcended the comic it was based on.Not that hard,since all of 3 people read the comic.
Even Family Guy had "Pepe the Alt-right frog".Which also means that meme has been dead for 2 years.

Just because you feel "entitled" to use someone else's intellectual property, doesn't make it right. But right and wrong doesn't matter to those people, and you never see them trying the same stunt with Disney characters. 

For those of you who have not been radicalized by social media and feel the compulsion to make political references into every little thing, my reference to frog Thor was something that actually happened in the comics, back in the good ole days when you could just enjoy stuff without political taint being in every little thing.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on July 26, 2019, 05:58:55 PM
I was just joking,in case that wasnt obvious.And mentioning a dead meme isnt really a political statment.
Second thing,what happens when your creation takes a life of its own? Do you sue every $hitposter on the net? Or what if YOU become a meme,like Scumbag Steve or Annoying Girlfriend?
Saying "its morraly wrong" doesnt mean anything because thats not how internet works.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Kommando on July 26, 2019, 06:07:24 PM
I was just joking,in case that wasnt obvious.And mentioning a dead meme isnt really a political statment.
Second thing,what happens when your creation takes a life of its own? Do you sue every $hitposter on the net? Or what if YOU become a meme,like Scumbag Steve or Annoying Girlfriend?
Saying "its morraly wrong" doesnt mean anything because thats not how internet works.

Well simple answer. If you are a multi billion dollar corporation, then you can enforce the law on your own IP. If you are not, then you can't. Money can enforce respect, but no amount can buy it. Anyhow this is way off topic now. Semi related, I am friends with author Michael Moorcock, who is not a millionaire, and I watched for YEARS as his lawyers fought game company Chaosium to finally get them to cease and desist use of his Intellectual Property without compensation for DECADES. So it does happen to more famous people.

I liked Far From Home enough to see it in a theater twice, and I actually gave Avengers a miss mostly due to length and a medical condition which makes it hard for me to watch long movies in one go. Tom Holland is certainly my favorite iteration of Spider-Man, and though Far From Home was over the top, for not one moment did I not feel like I was watching a Spider-Man movie, which is good. Amusingly, I saw it the day before I watched Homecoming on Netflix. I wasn't worried about the Avenger spoilers as I am familiar with the source material.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on July 26, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
Yes,I know it happened in the comic,and again,it was a joke.
Im not familiar with the case in question,but I assume the company was making games based on Moorcocks books?Thats not really the same as if they posted memes.
But Furrie took it personally, which I can understand, and started a fight he just cant win. Nobody ever beat 4Chan,as far as I can tell.
Big companies do protect their IP, and they have to. But even they pick their battles. Is Disney going to sue St Louis PD for their use of Punisher logo?They could,but its probably not worth it.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: BentonGrey on July 26, 2019, 07:40:09 PM
<points Benton to the parts wherein he said he had way, way too much on his place nor the time> See my previous post, BG!
Darn, and here I was hoping to provoke DJ into getting back involved more!  :P  Glad to see you around nonetheless, you undead scoundrel. 

Cat, I disagree.  It's far from a perfect analogy, but I think the point is valid.  It's just clearer in their cases because, as you say, their nom de guerre is different from their personal name.  Yet, those are, effectively, their titles, and Thor also has a title, God of Thunder, though it is not his adventuring name.  It's the title, and powers, that a new character inherits, as it is the title that Dick inherits from Batman, etc.  'Mato points out that Erik Masterson went by Thor for a while, but wasn't he actually bonded WITH Thor during that time?  Jane should follow the example of that great amphibian hero, Throg, and be Jhor.  ;)
https://comicvine.gamespot.com/throg/4005-30596/

Also, I sorta' want to read some 'Frog of Thunder' stories now....

Anyway, the whole thing just seems intensely silly to me, whatever justification is used for it in universe. 

In terms of the movie itself, it's interesting that they're sticking with Natalie Portman in the next movie.  I sorta' thought she wasn't interested in doing more Marvel movies.  I suppose a chance to be the heroine instead of the love interest changes things some.  It's a crying shame they killed off Anthony Hopkins' Odin (for many reasons), but it would have been really cool to see him interact with her in light of their little mini-arc from Dark World.

Kommando, nice to see you around.  Glad you enjoyed Homecoming!  You didn't get the sense that it broke from the feel of a Spidey story during some of the big, globetrotting, jet-flying moments?  I enjoyed it plenty, but I definitely felt like it struck a note that didn't resonate with Spidey for me.  Holland, however, was very much Spider-Man, even in those scenes.

You're friends with Moorcock?  How cool!
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 09, 2019, 05:20:55 AM
Quote
So guys, I know this is super out of date at this point, but I've been going through some of those Pitch Meeting videos, and I just watched the Thor: Ragnarok one.  It's hilariuos and a pretty much perfect send-up of everything wrong with that movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2kl4cVc5Dw

I feel somewhat vindicated.

So Benton, I know this is super out of date at this point, but ended up in a sketch-comedy-on-Youtube mood tonight and I finally got around to watching the Pitch Meeting video for Thor: Ragnarok. Yep, you're right, it's pretty much a perfect send-up of everything wrong with that movie.

Letting Jeff Goldblum be Jeff Goldblum as a substitute for actually developing the Grandmaster as a character...yeah, pretty much. I mean, mind you, you could pretty much say the same thing about Grandmaster's fellow Elder of the Universe, The Collector, just being Benicio Del Toro in Guardians. Hmm, considering Thor:R seemed to take after Guardians for the comedy, maybe that's why they ended up going that route?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on August 10, 2019, 08:11:52 AM
I honestly haven't given much thought to Jane Thor movie. Too far in the horizon to think about it and I'm trying to just absorb what they had made so far and develop a sense of nostalgia towards it. I do give them credit if they are really giving Portman some ample screen time. Love her or loath her Disney does have a good takeaway from her two franchises over and sort of owes her the chance. "If" keyword. Could be a whole five minutes of the film, could be later things change even or she changes her mind about it, it's happened before, again who knows right now.

If they chose to franchise the comic idea I wouldn't blame them either. Stan Lee once said about Ben Reilly "The only thing that sells better than one Spider-man is two of them." which is more relevant in this era I think. Also I think the days of character stake claiming are long past regardless of any feels about it. If Bruce Wayne becomes Superman in canon next month I would raise an eyebrow but wouldn't think twice about it, switcheroo has just become as common in superhero comics as capes are now. I dunno, read the current comic issues? There was something like eight to ten different Thors happening there. And Jane is Valkerie now or something, got to switch your cosplay up every now and then don't ya know.

Either way the next Thor movie just isn't in my solar system right now so eh? I'm also too busy dreaming about a Captain Marvel 2 that takes place in the past after the first and deals with Carol meeting Jessica Jones as Jewel and such. I can dream and will continue to enjoy my headcanon over what ever they really make. Not to say I won't enjoy what they do but like anyone I have this pretty specific to me version of everything laid out in my imagination space and nothing in real life ever matches it.

"In death, a member of Project Thor has a name. His name is Robert Paulson."
Sorry I had to. I regret nothing. Well okay somethings. Everything mostly. I regret everything.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on August 10, 2019, 02:18:46 PM
If they are casting a female Thor (ok,whatever) they should have probably went with somebody younger and a bit more buffed.But thats just me.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: murs47 on August 12, 2019, 12:35:47 PM
I'm mostly just worried about Portman not being able to pull off comedy relief as well as Hemsworth.  I don't care who wields Mjolnir, just be as entertaining as Ragnarok por favor.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on August 22, 2019, 05:33:19 AM
Bye,bye Spiderman. Phase 4 looking more promising by the day.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 22, 2019, 01:51:58 PM
Don't believe everything you hear. The reported dispute was specifically about Kevin Feige producing the next film, with Disney trying to use that to extort a RIDICULOUS 50/50 split of all profits on the next film. Sony said no, and it's got everyone in a panic over the whole arrangement. However, there are some sources that claim the next Spider-Man film IS still part of the MCU (the contract stipulated it'd continue to a third film if the second made over a billion... it did), and even if it's not... right now, who cares? On the Marvel side, the next films are Black Widow, Eternals, Shang Chi, Dr Strange 2, and Thor 4. None of those films need or should have Spider-Man. And on the Sony front, they've got Morbius, Venom 2, and some other films coming right now. By all accounts negotiations are ongoing, so both sides have time to resolve this before the third SM (if they even need to do so, I'm not 100% on that source.) or Avengers 5 goes into production.

This whole thing, all of it, is a publicity stunt by Disney. They made an outrageous offer, it got rejected, and then leaked proceedings to the press to whip the fanbase into a frenzy and force Sony's hand.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on August 22, 2019, 02:55:15 PM
Eternals,your perspective example are Eternals? 😂
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 22, 2019, 03:44:24 PM
What? I don't... Spade, I listed all the upcoming MCU films for the next two years to demonstrate that SM isn't needed for any of them.  I didn't use Eternals as an example of anything else, nor was that film specifically singled out in any way. It's not even the first I listed.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on August 22, 2019, 04:29:51 PM
Who are you talking to?
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Tomato on August 23, 2019, 09:34:44 PM
Credit for kkhohoho on this one, he brought it to my attention.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ms-marvel-series-works-disney-1234216 -ms marvel show coming to Disney+
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: SickAlice on September 06, 2019, 09:17:07 PM
I'm with Tomato here. Things change fast for one and there's a difference between what is truth and what is presentation. Not that long ago we would have been on a comic forum saying Spider-man could never have been in a Disney film because of red tape yet it happened and almost overnight, thus can happen again. Mostly and the same goes for the Hulk it's a tug of war about more money but in reality Sony is no position to make demands, they're media outlet is hurting. But corporate types just don't think like that. When they were losing they made the deal but once Endgame came about they saw profit thus got demanding again. Same goes for Fox here as well. Any company really, it's the way stocks and shares actually work. Think like Ferengi and Rules Of Acquisition. And when it comes to worldwide household products art has less to do with it and the money people have the final say.

Add a pride issue. Toy's R Us is a great example, I used to work for that company. It's "went bankrupt" as anyone now knows but the truth is it was bankrupt two decades ago. They could have preserved it by being a distributor given the popularity of online ordering increasing rapidly or just for a large outlet like Wal-Mart yet they ran it all into the ground out of pride. In the end they tried having us set up kids barbers, no joke, just to try and make the ends meet. That's why they went out. Compare it to comics. Say Image folded, the market just got so bad and they couldn't afford their own overhead. The option would be to sell to a more stable and expansive entity, say DC Comics and Warner Bros. But you know well they would fight that tooth and nail even if it meant burning their own house to the ground because simply it is their child. They created this and it's hard not to have pride in that as much ones own achievements.

Anyways in short I have no doubt the MCU will have these characters in it but they just can't announce that legally right now lest the shareholders retaliate. It's just not profitable for any of these companies to refuse to play ball but it is a matter of a contract every team is satisfied with is all.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Mothgirl on October 02, 2019, 05:03:57 PM
They updated J Jonah Jameson. Now hes,well...based on a somewhat controversial internet personality.
Title: Re: Marvel Movies
Post by: Silver Shocker on November 10, 2019, 09:50:21 PM
It's an entire month and change too late, but the Jameson thing was discussed earlier in this thread prior to that above post. For those wondering, the reason why it's coming up again is Sony's been releasing some internet videos starring Jameson.

Who, by the way, supposedly is going to appear in Sony's Morbius the Living Vampire (starring Jared Leto as Morbius - yes this is a real movie) I'm like "sure, why not, I mean, I'm probably not even going to watch it until at least the On-Demand release, but whatever. It'll have at least thing going for it.

Also I saw Dark Phoenix a few months ago. It wasn't easy, because Disney blocked it from being released on the On-Demand, or the Playstation Store, after they got the distribution rights so I had to rent it for Youtube of all places, but I did see it.
I didn't think it was terrible (though I'm biased towards this series) but it certainly wasn't good. The word to describe it is "joyless." There are no jokes, no gags, no Quicksilver setpieces (Quicksilver is absent for about 80% of the film) and the traditional F-Bomb isn't even played for laughs this time. And the big surprise they left out of the trailers was supposedly neutered by behind the scenes issues. Of which this movie had a lot. Not surprisingly, but still heartbreaking. They took a loss on Apocalypse so they didn't have enough money, the Fox deal was going through so they had to wrap up the story fast, cut out and change a bunch of stuff so they could release it Justice League style. The one interesting new element we haven't seen before (outside of spoilers, and other than the brief outer space sequence) is lip service to the old "Professor Xavier is a jerk" angle that pops up in the comics from time to time.

For whatever it's worth, Chris Claremont praised the film on the merits that it put Scott and Jean to the forefront. Which, hey, if you leave out Wolverine, then yeah, that'll happen.

A list of things that tragically never came to pass:
-For starters, they were going to spend more than one movie telling the Phoenix Saga. And also way more outer space.
-A deleted appearance by original Colossus actor Daniel Cudmore (we apparently don't know who or what he was going to play)
-The ending would have been reshot to have more X-Men take part, but it was deemed too expensive (instead we got the train sequence, in which the mutants are being carried away by the Mutant Containment Unit (and yes, that does abbreviate to MCU and no, it's not a coincidence.)
-The original ending was scrapped because it was believed to be too similar to another recent superhero film (the popular guess was Captain Marvel, but Kinberg eventually said it was Civil War. Yep, we could have had X-Men: Civil War)
-Jessica Chastian was originally going to play a different character (I'm not going to say who since her role in the movie is spoiler, but if you're curious you can look it up).
-Jackman was supposed to be in it as Wolverine, but they opted not to do that because they didn't want him interacting with a teenage Jean Grey (even though that happened in Apocalypse, but whatever)
-Psylocke and Jubilee were supposed to appear but Olivia Munn was doing Predator and Lana Condor was doing a movie at the time. Lana did get a spiffy new comic book gig though: the short lived Sci-Fi Adaptation of "Deadly Class".

Truly, the Fox X-Men franchise went out with a whimper. Oh well, Legion was aces at least.  :thumbup:

Also, anyone hear heard the speculation about Wandavision? I'm going to put it in Spoiler Tags because even though I don't know 100% if it's gonna happen it's looking pretty likely and it's the kinda thing some people will probably enjoy being surprised by.

SERIOUSLY, IF HAVEN'T HEARD THE THEORY YET, AND YOU'RE DEAD SET ON BEING SURPRISED BY BIG MCU STUFF IN THE FUTURE DO NOT READ THIS!!!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)