My favorite part of this are the nerds in my facebook feed claiming that the "Marvel formula" has poisoned the well against "gritty, realistic" superhero movies and it's all a conspiracy to deny them their grown-up superheroes who murder bad guys
I absolutely agree that some of Marvel's films end up being "more of the same", because that stuff worked in the past. There's plenty of room for criticism there. Ant-Man made a real effort to step back into something original with its heist theme but it was far more restrained than I would've expected given the writers behind it, and I think that's because Marvel is hedging rather than taking risks.
They went into Phase 1 knowing it was a gamble and it paid off big time, but instead of playing around with the model, they're stuck in status quo maintenance.
My disappointment in the casting of Benedict Cumberbatch aside, I'm hopeful that Dr Strange will actually achieve something new and different. Like, market it as a superhero movie, sure. Tie it into MCU, sure. But the internal themes of the movie can be something else! Fantasy horror, maybe. I don't know. Split the superhero genre into different sub-genres, for instance. But that's just me, I can't claim that this is what would work for all audiences or is even achievable by Disney/Marvel.
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
Regarding BvS, and the significant spoilers therein:
Since they were actually willing to kill Superman in the second DCCU movie, it makes me wonder if they'll go all the way and do Reign of the Supermen to resurrect him. Because it seems like this crazy train never stops. And hell, from there, it's only a hop, skip and a jump to the destruction of Coast City, an enraged Hal Jordan killing the GL Corps, and ultimately, becoming Parallax and nearly resetting the universe in Zero Hour. It just seems like the perfect love letter to the 90s, and right up Snyder and Goyer's alley. Our doom stretches before us.
The end of the movie is apparently him busting out of his grave, so he was never dead
that's not at all how it ends
some dirt starts levitating over his coffin and it cuts to black. that's it
Oh dear. That sounds like it could be the Eradicator taking Superman's body. Yeah, I could totally see them doubling down and doing Reign of the Supermen. Jesus H. Christ.
Pros and Cons of Reign of the Supermen:
Pros:
Superboy is rad.
Steel is rad.
Cons:
Eradicator is dumb.
Cyborg Superman is terrible.
You've got to take another look at that pro/con list through the eyes of Snyder-vision.
Now tell me, what do you see?
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Has Affleck ever directed a big action movie before?
Isn't he signed on to direct a Batman reboot? I thought he was. Either way, I think he'd be good at it, I was quite impressed by Argo and The Town, though I'd love to see him direct a movie that he's also not starring in (for no reason other than I wanna see if that changes his style at all).
I haven't seen The Town, but I guess that's close? Ish? for action movie credit. I really liked Argo, but it's an antithesis of an action movie. But hell, I would love to see a Batman movie that is just about the investigations and being a thriller instead of action
Please, please give us this.
Begin the letter writing campaign now, Zonugal.
I'd rather make a short video which where it isn't revealed that the primary character is Bruce/Batman till the end.
Regarding BvS, and the significant spoilers therein:
Since they were actually willing to kill Superman in the second DCCU movie, it makes me wonder if they'll go all the way and do Reign of the Supermen to resurrect him. Because it seems like this crazy train never stops. And hell, from there, it's only a hop, skip and a jump to the destruction of Coast City, an enraged Hal Jordan killing the GL Corps, and ultimately, becoming Parallax and nearly resetting the universe in Zero Hour. It just seems like the perfect love letter to the 90s, and right up Snyder and Goyer's alley. Our doom stretches before us.
The end of the movie is apparently him busting out of his grave, so he was never dead
that's not at all how it ends
some dirt starts levitating over his coffin and it cuts to black. that's it
Oh dear. That sounds like it could be the Eradicator taking Superman's body. Yeah, I could totally see them doubling down and doing Reign of the Supermen. Jesus H. Christ.
Pros and Cons of Reign of the Supermen:
Pros:
Superboy is rad.
Steel is rad.
Cons:
Eradicator is dumb.
Cyborg Superman is terrible.
I actually love Steel and Superboy, I even followed their original on-goings when I was big into comics back in the 90s. But I don't trust anyone at WB/DC to do right by them nowadays.
My favorite part of this are the nerds in my facebook feed claiming that the "Marvel formula" has poisoned the well against "gritty, realistic" superhero movies and it's all a conspiracy to deny them their grown-up superheroes who murder bad guys
I absolutely agree that some of Marvel's films end up being "more of the same", because that stuff worked in the past. There's plenty of room for criticism there. Ant-Man made a real effort to step back into something original with its heist theme but it was far more restrained than I would've expected given the writers behind it, and I think that's because Marvel is hedging rather than taking risks.
They went into Phase 1 knowing it was a gamble and it paid off big time, but instead of playing around with the model, they're stuck in status quo maintenance.
My disappointment in the casting of Benedict Cumberbatch aside, I'm hopeful that Dr Strange will actually achieve something new and different. Like, market it as a superhero movie, sure. Tie it into MCU, sure. But the internal themes of the movie can be something else! Fantasy horror, maybe. I don't know. Split the superhero genre into different sub-genres, for instance. But that's just me, I can't claim that this is what would work for all audiences or is even achievable by Disney/Marvel.
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
I don't know how it all works behind the scenes, but I thought those two Punisher movies weren't actually intended to be part of the MCU canon? They definitely didn't link in with the Avengers or into the Infinity stuff and was not marketed as MCU. I could be wrong, though. I really want to see MCU canon movies with different thematic elements. They've done SOME of that, sure.
So like, GotG is our space opera, which was probably the biggest gamble in phase 2. Captain America: TFA was a war movie (kind of). Iron Man was pretty much action. The Incredible Hulk could've been an action thriller? And Thor as high fantasy. Ant-Man as heist, I guess. I have no idea if this works AT ALL from a business standpoint but it'd be kinda fun to see for me, anyway. And an ensemble cast with characters from all these different themes sounds way more interesting than if they're all the same.
Like honestly based on BvS reviews, I wonder if JL isn't just going to be 5 grimdark superheroes brooding, punching, then brooding about punching. But as a group.
My favorite part of this are the nerds in my facebook feed claiming that the "Marvel formula" has poisoned the well against "gritty, realistic" superhero movies and it's all a conspiracy to deny them their grown-up superheroes who murder bad guys
I absolutely agree that some of Marvel's films end up being "more of the same", because that stuff worked in the past. There's plenty of room for criticism there. Ant-Man made a real effort to step back into something original with its heist theme but it was far more restrained than I would've expected given the writers behind it, and I think that's because Marvel is hedging rather than taking risks.
They went into Phase 1 knowing it was a gamble and it paid off big time, but instead of playing around with the model, they're stuck in status quo maintenance.
My disappointment in the casting of Benedict Cumberbatch aside, I'm hopeful that Dr Strange will actually achieve something new and different. Like, market it as a superhero movie, sure. Tie it into MCU, sure. But the internal themes of the movie can be something else! Fantasy horror, maybe. I don't know. Split the superhero genre into different sub-genres, for instance. But that's just me, I can't claim that this is what would work for all audiences or is even achievable by Disney/Marvel.
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
Those both predate the MCU, and I'm fairly sure Marvel Knights has never been used in marketing or branding any of the films
Edit: I'm wrong on one point, War Zone and Spirit of Vengeance were under a Marvel Knights thing, but they were never intended or allowed to be part of the MCU
I hated Man of Steel so much and I was positive this was gonna suck and I can't even enjoy that. I was ready to eat humble pie and love this movie if it was any good.
I just want them to make good Superman movies.
Superman Returns was sort of a big nothing but it least it wasn't offensive.
+2
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
goddammit I was right when my gut told me that the Punisher movies predated the MCU
but my brain was all NO MAYBE HIPPOFANT IS RIGHT AND YOUR TIMELINE IS OFF
I think BvS would have been better received before the MCU. Superhero films were in a dire state before Iron Man. I think that the pre-MCU superhero films were 'good for their time' but they were not good movies.
My favorite part of this are the nerds in my facebook feed claiming that the "Marvel formula" has poisoned the well against "gritty, realistic" superhero movies and it's all a conspiracy to deny them their grown-up superheroes who murder bad guys
I absolutely agree that some of Marvel's films end up being "more of the same", because that stuff worked in the past. There's plenty of room for criticism there. Ant-Man made a real effort to step back into something original with its heist theme but it was far more restrained than I would've expected given the writers behind it, and I think that's because Marvel is hedging rather than taking risks.
They went into Phase 1 knowing it was a gamble and it paid off big time, but instead of playing around with the model, they're stuck in status quo maintenance.
My disappointment in the casting of Benedict Cumberbatch aside, I'm hopeful that Dr Strange will actually achieve something new and different. Like, market it as a superhero movie, sure. Tie it into MCU, sure. But the internal themes of the movie can be something else! Fantasy horror, maybe. I don't know. Split the superhero genre into different sub-genres, for instance. But that's just me, I can't claim that this is what would work for all audiences or is even achievable by Disney/Marvel.
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
Those both predate the MCU, and I'm fairly sure Marvel Knights has never been used in marketing or branding any of the films
Edit: I'm wrong on one point, War Zone and Spirit of Vengeance were under a Marvel Knights thing, but they were never intended or allowed to be part of the MCU
marvel knights was the imprint for the latter lionsgate marvel movies like war zone and ghost rider 2. i guess feasbily those two could have crossed over
My favorite part of this are the nerds in my facebook feed claiming that the "Marvel formula" has poisoned the well against "gritty, realistic" superhero movies and it's all a conspiracy to deny them their grown-up superheroes who murder bad guys
I absolutely agree that some of Marvel's films end up being "more of the same", because that stuff worked in the past. There's plenty of room for criticism there. Ant-Man made a real effort to step back into something original with its heist theme but it was far more restrained than I would've expected given the writers behind it, and I think that's because Marvel is hedging rather than taking risks.
They went into Phase 1 knowing it was a gamble and it paid off big time, but instead of playing around with the model, they're stuck in status quo maintenance.
My disappointment in the casting of Benedict Cumberbatch aside, I'm hopeful that Dr Strange will actually achieve something new and different. Like, market it as a superhero movie, sure. Tie it into MCU, sure. But the internal themes of the movie can be something else! Fantasy horror, maybe. I don't know. Split the superhero genre into different sub-genres, for instance. But that's just me, I can't claim that this is what would work for all audiences or is even achievable by Disney/Marvel.
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
Those both predate the MCU, and I'm fairly sure Marvel Knights has never been used in marketing or branding any of the films
Edit: I'm wrong on one point, War Zone and Spirit of Vengeance were under a Marvel Knights thing, but they were never intended or allowed to be part of the MCU
marvel knights was the imprint for the latter lionsgate marvel movies like war zone and ghost rider 2
My favorite part of this are the nerds in my facebook feed claiming that the "Marvel formula" has poisoned the well against "gritty, realistic" superhero movies and it's all a conspiracy to deny them their grown-up superheroes who murder bad guys
I absolutely agree that some of Marvel's films end up being "more of the same", because that stuff worked in the past. There's plenty of room for criticism there. Ant-Man made a real effort to step back into something original with its heist theme but it was far more restrained than I would've expected given the writers behind it, and I think that's because Marvel is hedging rather than taking risks.
They went into Phase 1 knowing it was a gamble and it paid off big time, but instead of playing around with the model, they're stuck in status quo maintenance.
My disappointment in the casting of Benedict Cumberbatch aside, I'm hopeful that Dr Strange will actually achieve something new and different. Like, market it as a superhero movie, sure. Tie it into MCU, sure. But the internal themes of the movie can be something else! Fantasy horror, maybe. I don't know. Split the superhero genre into different sub-genres, for instance. But that's just me, I can't claim that this is what would work for all audiences or is even achievable by Disney/Marvel.
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
Those both predate the MCU, and I'm fairly sure Marvel Knights has never been used in marketing or branding any of the films
Edit: I'm wrong on one point, War Zone and Spirit of Vengeance were under a Marvel Knights thing, but they were never intended or allowed to be part of the MCU
marvel knights was the imprint for the latter lionsgate marvel movies like war zone and ghost rider 2
what you think i'm gonna read like some kinda asshole
Well
Yeah
well strap in for disappointment, baby
I already do every time I talk to you, friend
0
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
welp
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
WELP.
You told them to go fuck themselves right?
It'd be a bit pointless, they're already going to see BvS.
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
WELP.
It is insane how much like the 90's comic scene the movies audience is becoming.
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
WELP.
It is insane how much like the 90's comic scene the movies audience is becoming.
My point really was just that Marvel's movies aren't all of the current MCU "formula". I'm not entirely sure how the division of labour was for stuff like Punisher: War Zone, but I'm pretty sure Marvel had a hand in it.
Prior to Marvel Studios, there were also a bunch of Marvel property licensed movies that did grimdark-serious-superheroes, like Daredevil, Blade, the first Punisher, the first Hulk, and some of the X-Men movies. Some of them met with success, but a whole bunch of them didn't and were criticized for being too dark and serious and unfun. It makes a lot of sense that Marvel Studios has taken their movies in another direction, notwithstanding the issue of just saturating the theatres with all the same sort of superhero movie.
TL;DR: whichever brand of assholes we were talking about initially should extra-super-hard shut up, because they don't know wtf they're even talking about, because people made those movies and people are still making those movies. The next X-Men movie is going to be called Apocalypse; you don't even need to be a comics fan to realise that that's going to be a pretty dark and gritty movie!
hippofant on
0
Options
TrippyJingMoses supposes his toeses are roses.But Moses supposes erroneously.Registered Userregular
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
WELP.
You told them to go fuck themselves right?
to be totally fair I didn't have a leg to stand on since I haven't seen BvS, but I did show him that Tom Taylor image from this thread with the lamentations of Superman being angry all the time
his response was that that's just one writer's opinion and I finished off with "Snyder is the guy who thinks Darth Vader is the same as Superman" and walked off cuz my phone started ringing
My point really was just that Marvel's movies aren't all of the current MCU "formula". I'm not entirely sure how the division of labour was for stuff like Punisher: War Zone, but I'm pretty sure Marvel had a hand in it.
Prior to Marvel Studios, there were also a bunch of Marvel property licensed movies that did grimdark-serious-superheroes, like Daredevil, Blade, the first Punisher, the first Hulk, and some of the X-Men movies. Some of them met with success, but a whole bunch of them didn't and were criticized for being too dark and serious and unfun. It makes a lot of sense that Marvel Studios has taken their movies in another direction, notwithstanding the issue of just saturating the theatres with all the same sort of superhero movie.
ah well in the context of my posts on the matter, I was speaking specifically about the MCU movies all being (rightly) accused of following the same formula
Posts
Marvel has had distinct movies that aren't part of the Marvel formula, like the two Punisher movies. They weren't particularly well-received, and are sidelined out of the MCU under the Marvel Knights banner.
Now tell me, what do you see?
I'd rather make a short video which where it isn't revealed that the primary character is Bruce/Batman till the end.
Just a hardcore noir-thriller.
Are they?
still hyped
running on peak spite at this point, though
I don't know how it all works behind the scenes, but I thought those two Punisher movies weren't actually intended to be part of the MCU canon? They definitely didn't link in with the Avengers or into the Infinity stuff and was not marketed as MCU. I could be wrong, though. I really want to see MCU canon movies with different thematic elements. They've done SOME of that, sure.
So like, GotG is our space opera, which was probably the biggest gamble in phase 2. Captain America: TFA was a war movie (kind of). Iron Man was pretty much action. The Incredible Hulk could've been an action thriller? And Thor as high fantasy. Ant-Man as heist, I guess. I have no idea if this works AT ALL from a business standpoint but it'd be kinda fun to see for me, anyway. And an ensemble cast with characters from all these different themes sounds way more interesting than if they're all the same.
Like honestly based on BvS reviews, I wonder if JL isn't just going to be 5 grimdark superheroes brooding, punching, then brooding about punching. But as a group.
marvel didn't get the rights to the punisher until well after war zone flopped
Those both predate the MCU, and I'm fairly sure Marvel Knights has never been used in marketing or branding any of the films
Edit: I'm wrong on one point, War Zone and Spirit of Vengeance were under a Marvel Knights thing, but they were never intended or allowed to be part of the MCU
yeah this is what I thought and assumed I was mistaken
and fwiw I really like MCU Punisher in Daredevil, though I have never ever been a comics Punisher fan unless he's interacting with Daredevil
I just want them to make good Superman movies.
Superman Returns was sort of a big nothing but it least it wasn't offensive.
but my brain was all NO MAYBE HIPPOFANT IS RIGHT AND YOUR TIMELINE IS OFF
stupid jerk brain
marvel knights was the imprint for the latter lionsgate marvel movies like war zone and ghost rider 2. i guess feasbily those two could have crossed over
DID YOU SEE WHERE I EDITED MY POST, RORSCHACH
Yeah
punisher war zone is actually marvel studios' first movie
it just has nothing to do with the MCU
reverse ghosted
well strap in for disappointment, baby
which, yes, is also the name of my sex tape
I was just told that if I was a *real* comic book nerd then I'd appreciate what Zack Snyder is trying to "achieve" with MoS and BvS and understand that these are more mature, more grounded interpretations of these characters. Maybe if I wasn't such a die-hard Marvel movie fangirl then I'd understand that.
WELP.
You told them to go fuck themselves right?
It is insane how much like the 90's comic scene the movies audience is becoming.
it's always been that way
Prior to Marvel Studios, there were also a bunch of Marvel property licensed movies that did grimdark-serious-superheroes, like Daredevil, Blade, the first Punisher, the first Hulk, and some of the X-Men movies. Some of them met with success, but a whole bunch of them didn't and were criticized for being too dark and serious and unfun. It makes a lot of sense that Marvel Studios has taken their movies in another direction, notwithstanding the issue of just saturating the theatres with all the same sort of superhero movie.
TL;DR: whichever brand of assholes we were talking about initially should extra-super-hard shut up, because they don't know wtf they're even talking about, because people made those movies and people are still making those movies. The next X-Men movie is going to be called Apocalypse; you don't even need to be a comics fan to realise that that's going to be a pretty dark and gritty movie!
I mean, if this actually happened, would he be self-conscious enough to think, "Was I the problem the whole time?"
You can buy plush Batarangs to throw at friends and loved ones
to be totally fair I didn't have a leg to stand on since I haven't seen BvS, but I did show him that Tom Taylor image from this thread with the lamentations of Superman being angry all the time
his response was that that's just one writer's opinion and I finished off with "Snyder is the guy who thinks Darth Vader is the same as Superman" and walked off cuz my phone started ringing
ah well in the context of my posts on the matter, I was speaking specifically about the MCU movies all being (rightly) accused of following the same formula
Cap 2 and GotG both came out to claims that they had broken the marvel formula and now people are making the same claim for Antman.
There was one movie between those three movies.
Further Iron man 3 is hardly like every other movie.
It's a bummer to hear that BvS is apparently bad, but I heard that about Man of Steel as well and didn't agree, so I'm still gonna see it this weekend
But it's not like I think of Snyder as a flawless director or anything, I like most of his stuff but I really hate 300 holy shit
(That said I would totally like a Power Girl movie directed by...somebody)
This is essentially what Sucker Punch is already