I do not like MCU films

[dahj]

I think there's a lesson here somewhere about Marvel and DC getting along:
http://comicbook.com/2016/08/24/man-dressed-in-batman-suit-and-captain-america-mask-steals-beer/

So c'mon folks, just bury the hatchet and steal some beer together

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

The big four are relatively closed off people as characters go (Cap, Tony, Thor. Hulk), but if you honestly think there was no emotion in GotG, Ant-Man or Age of Ultron, then personally I think you must be dead inside.

I think there's a lesson here somewhere about Marvel and DC getting along:
http://comicbook.com/2016/08/24/man-dressed-in-batman-suit-and-captain-america-mask-steals-beer/

So c'mon folks, just bury the hatchet and steal some beer together

I followed your link dodge and read that funny story about a man in a Batman costume and a Captain America mask stealing beer. And then another title below the article caught my eye and I clicked.

These Three Comic Book Movies Are Among the 100 Best Movies of the Century
You see, BBC made a poll asking 177 film critics from 36 countries to come up with a list of the hundred greatest films of the 21st Century so far. Only three comic book movies made the list:
#59 A History of Violence
#45 Blue is the Warmest Colour
#33 The Dark Knight

I was surprised of course! What? No GotG, Ant-Man or AoU? Are these people just dead inside?

 

[Anwar]

Duh! Of course wikis can be edited, that's their whole point. But what a great idea you have here. Every time someone proves you wrong (and from what I've seen that happens a lot) and quotes Wikipedia, Memory Alpha, or any other wiki you just say "it's edited"! At the same time you fail to produce any shred of evidence or source other than "it's implied". Well it's only implied to you because only you heard "teens" instead of "twins".

Actually, it's more because Hawkeye mentioned Wanda was the right age to be in High School.

Any if Wanda is a teen (and clearly she is not) that makes even worst because both Rogers and Stark brought teenagers in battle. At least Batman and Superman went at it alone.

Batman is the poster boy for child endangerment.

BS. Batman has been around for 77 years. He has been in more comics than any other comic book character (even more than Superman). The best writers have written Batman, Frank Miller, Alan Moore, Grant Morrison, Scott Snyder, Jeph Loeb, Chuck Dixon, Dennis O’Neil, Ed Brubaker, Paul Dini, Steve Englehart, Bill Finger, just to name a few. I could go and on. The best artists have drawn Batman. The best American comics and graphic novels of all time are Batman's, The Dark Knight Returns, Year One, The Killing Joke, Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth. Batman has had more graphic novels, movies, novels, cartoons, books, games, TV series and video games than most. If there is one comic book character that's clearly defined (and clearly exciting) that's Batman.

Nope. He's always been more archetype than character. What made him last long is how easy it is to write for him and the greater effort put into his villains than him.

It's funny that you mention Spider-Man because that's a great example of a character that's only defined (and constantly overshadowed) by his villains. Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Sandman, Venom, Lizard, Electro, Rhino, Vulture, Mysterio, Hobgoblin, Carnage, Black Cat, Kingpin, Chameleon, Shocker, Scorpion, Jackal, etc. I could go and on. Without these characters Peter Parker is just a boring high-school kid (or an even more boring adult failed photographer).

Opposite. Peter redefined what a Superhero was as his stories were driven by internal flaws and real-life issues instead of the usual bland stuff like being a billionaire. He was basically the first superhero deconstruction.

Or if you only go for that spineless cartoony kiddie unconvincing lame shallow trivial unemotional superficial brainless stuff like Bay's Transformers, Power Rangers and Disney's Marvel movies.

Calm down Francis, you're going to give yourself skin failure.

As for Dark Knight making that list...I don't want to be THAT GUY, but there's a special reason that film got such attention. And it wasn't due to the plot.

 

[Marsden]

The idea that all the MCU are quippy and light hearted and decrying their lack of consequences seem to indicate that going in the opposite extreme is the way to go. I always thought that the MCU had its sober moments and could then move on.

I find the notion that quippy and light-hearted is a complaint hard to understand. The whole Marvel Universe from it's beginning in 1962 to around the early 90s (when it turned to shit) was quippy and light-hearted! That's why it was popular, that's what made it IT. When kids/people bought the books they enjoyed them. I don't imagine a lot of people getting a comic and reading it and saying "that's so depressing, let's get more!" But, whatever.

There certainly is a place for serious drama, but not everywhere all the time.

Why is it so important that we decide whether the Marvel films or the DC Comics films are better? What's the point in arguing our case, when none of us can come to an agreement? Isn't it all subjective in the end?

Like button was not enough. Agree 100%. It's fun to compare and contrast, but why does on have to be better?

Also, as for Daredevil, he seems more focused on Hell's Kitchen, rather than the larger world. Whenever he gets pushed in to a larger conflict he works to push those forces out of "his city" and keeps his battle local. So, even if Stark attempted to recruit him, I doubt Murdock would be interested. Given the fallout of the Battle of New York, Murdock might seem them as part of the problem.

I think this a very good assessment.

Also, why Spider-Man? Beside studio stuff and what not, in universe, why him?

My thoughts are, Tony needs help. He needs it now and he's a bit desperate. But even more than those things, he needs someone that's strong and non-lethal. I can't emphasize that enough, non-lethal. Who would be better at capturing someone then a guy that can web them into a bag and literally carry them to jail?


Also,

It's funny that you mention Spider-Man because that's a great example of a character that's only defined (and constantly overshadowed) by his villains. Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Sandman, Venom, Lizard, Electro, Rhino, Vulture, Mysterio, Hobgoblin, Carnage, Black Cat, Kingpin, Chameleon, Shocker, Scorpion, Jackal, etc. I could go and on. Without these characters Peter Parker is just a boring high-school kid (or an even more boring adult failed photographer).

I don't think you understand Spider-Man at all.

What was his mother's profession?

I thought you had heard, her profession was, having the name Martha.


And another thing....

In a discussion of comic book movies, I want to mention that 3 of my favorite "comic book movies" are neither DC or Marvel, namely Flash Gordon, Hellboy, and Dredd. The big two are not all that's out there.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Batman is the poster boy for child endangerment.

So when Batman drags along Robin in the comics it's wrong. But when Iron Man (and now by your own admission Captain America) do it in the movies it's right? Disney/Marvel fanboy much?

He's always been more archetype than character. What made him last long is how easy it is to write for him and the greater effort put into his villains than him.

First of all you say archetype like it's something bad. It's Greek and the definition of archetype is "the original pattern or model from which all things of the same kind are copied or on which they are based; a model or first form; prototype." So by definition everything that comes after the archetype is a copy. Whole religions and mythologies are based on archetypes! Our heroes and our literature are based on archetypes!
Secondly, "easy writing"? You call some of the best comic book writers lazy? Writers like Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Grant Morrison, Scott Snyder, Jeph Loeb, Chuck Dixon, Goeff Johns, Ed Brubaker, Dennis O’Neil, Steve Englehart, Paul Dini, Bruce Timm, Alex Ross, Bill Finger are lazy? You call some of the comic book medium's finest stories (The Dark Knight Returns, Year One, The Killing Joke, Arkham Asylum, A Death in the Family, The Long Halloween, Hush to name a few) "easy writing"? What literary masterpieces have you written? A couple of pages ago you also called Ed Brubaker's entire Captain America comic run lazy and spineless. Admit it, you don't read many comic books do you? I'm beginning to think you don't even like comics.

Peter redefined what a Superhero was as his stories were driven by internal flaws and real-life issues instead of the usual bland stuff like being a billionaire. He was basically the first superhero deconstruction.

Wrong again. If he is the "first superhero deconstruction" wouldn't that make him an archetype? Here's that word you hate again! Peter was relevant back in the 60's/70's his reading audience was in junior high-school and had the same problems as him. "Oh I can't find the nerves to speak to Gwen Stacy/Mary Jane. Oh, Flash Thompson pushed me again. Oh, Jonah Jameson yelled at me again".

Let's face it, Peter Parker is a stale character. "Superior" Doc Ock is more interesting than Peter Parker, Miles Morales is more interesting than Peter Parker, Miguel O'Hara is more interesting than Peter Parker, Jessica Drew is more interesting than Peter Parker, heck, even Ben Reilly is more interesting than Peter Parker! And if you don't know who's they I'll be happy to provide links.

Calm down Francis, you're going to give yourself skin failure.

What's the matter? Why don't you use your usual talking point? You know, the one about you not liking grownup stuff, oh sorry "grounded stuff" I mean! You've only said it about half a dozen times.

As for Dark Knight making that list...I don't want to be THAT GUY, but there's a special reason that film got such attention. And it wasn't due to the plot.

You don't have to worry about that. You're already THAT GUY and whatever despicable thing you have to say won't change that. TDK's credits is only due to the amazing direction, cinematography, story, script, characters, actors, performances, music, production design, art direction, special effects, stunts, etc. You know, everything Disney/Marvel movies lack of.

Actually, it's more because Hawkeye mentioned Wanda was the right age to be in High School..

That's your whole reasoning? Burton's joke? HAHAHA! I knew you didn't get it! Read this paragraph:
"After the Sokovia Accords are in effect, we check in with Wanda under house arrest and essentially being treated like a grounded teenager — how many times do they refer to her as "kid" in this movie? — until Hawkeye helps her break out, but even he can't resists making a joke about her going to high school. Not only that, but she gets lectured about using her powers more than once throughout the movie. Wanda is a woman being treated like a girl and worse, she's not sure that the Avengers are wrong in how they're acting toward her".
It's from here by the way:
http://moviepilot.com/posts/3902455
Oh, I know, it was probably "edited" as well!

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I followed your link dodge and read that funny story about a man in a Batman costume and a Captain America mask stealing beer. And then another title below the article caught my eye and I clicked.

These Three Comic Book Movies Are Among the 100 Best Movies of the Century
You see, BBC made a poll asking 177 film critics from 36 countries to come up with a list of the hundred greatest films of the 21st Century so far. Only three comic book movies made the list:
#59 A History of Violence
#45 Blue is the Warmest Colour
#33 The Dark Knight

I was surprised of course! What? No GotG, Ant-Man or AoU? Are these people just dead inside?

Yes, I'm sure that every emotional movie from the last 16 years made that list, therefore no movie that didn't make the list could possibly have real emotion in it...

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Yes, I'm sure that every emotional movie from the last 16 years made that list...

I don't know about you, but yes, I'm sure. I read the list. Did you? Here's the list if you want to check it out:

The 100 Greatest Films of the 21st Century:
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160819-the-21st-centurys-100-greatest-films

As to who finds what emotional, no I don't find dancing trees, swearing raccoons and talking ducks very emotional, sorry. To each their own.

 

[fireproof78]

Interestingly enough, two of the films on that list involve talking animals,

To each their own, indeed.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Interestingly enough, two of the films on that list involve talking animals,

To each their own, indeed.

Yup! Stanton's Finding Nemo and Bird's Ratatouille (and also Stanton's WALL-E). Great directors both of them. Great movies both (all of) them.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I don't know about you, but yes, I'm sure. I read the list. Did you? Here's the list if you want to check it out:

The 100 Greatest Films of the 21st Century:
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160819-the-21st-centurys-100-greatest-films

As to who finds what emotional, no I don't find dancing trees, swearing raccoons and talking ducks very emotional, sorry. To each their own.

I see. You've never actually watched gotg. Carry on with your random nonsense.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

I see. You've never actually watched gotg. Carry on with your random nonsense.

Why do you do that man? So far we disagreed but at least we had a civilized argument. Why do you have to troll like that?

You leave me no choice. Dance Off Bro. Me and you.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Oh yeah, I'm crying with all the emotions right now!

 

[Grendelsbayne]

He touched the butt!

Fish are friends, not food!

Mine!

Because emotional movies aren't allowed to have any humor or non emotional scenes. Unless you back yourself into a corner by holding up a completely unrelated list as the arbiter of all truth.

 

[crookeddy]

How did this thread not end on page 1?

 

[cylkoth]

^^ Where would be the fun in that??

 

[JD]

...I think I need to call my mum. Like, right now.

I think you just scarred me for life, making me relive all of those scenes at the same time.

I don't know about you, but yes, I'm sure. I read the list. Did you? Here's the list if you want to check it out:

The 100 Greatest Films of the 21st Century:
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160819-the-21st-centurys-100-greatest-films

As to who finds what emotional, no I don't find dancing trees, swearing raccoons and talking ducks very emotional, sorry. To each their own.

I thought Rocket's backstory and the death of Groot were very emotional. Plenty of movies with humor in them can also have emotional moments in them.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

I thought Rocket's backstory and the death of Groot were very emotional. Plenty of movies with humor in them can also have emotional moments in them.

He touched the butt!

Fish are friends, not food!

Mine!

Because emotional movies aren't allowed to have any humor or non emotional scenes. Unless you back yourself into a corner by holding up a completely unrelated list as the arbiter of all truth.

Just keep swimming!

Oh, I am sorry, I thought we were playing the Finding-Nemo-quote-game.

I never said or implied that emotional movies aren't allowed to have any humor or non emotional scenes. All I've said is that GotG is not that great of a movie. It's not as good as Finding Nemo as you keep suggesting and certainly not good enough to be included in the 100 Greatest Movies list™.
You probable find it a great, amazing, emotional, funny joyride. Which is fine. But for me, with the exception of Peter's mother's death (which was in the first 5 or 10 minutes) the rest was (again to me) a nitwitted Star Wars wannabe rip-off full of imbecilic jokes. Groot's death was emotional until (they couldn't help themselves) they turned it into an infantine gag. Maybe it's because I grew up reading Jim Starlin's Captain Marvel and Warlock comics. (Have you read anything from these?) For instance Drax the Destroyer has such a great and tragic origin story there.
It's obvious by now that whatever you say won't make me change my mind on GotG and whatever I say won't make you change your mind on GotG. Can we just move on without insulting each other?

How did this thread not end on page 1?

Because we argued if page 1 or page 2 was a better page to end this thread. Neither side won.

 

[dahj]

Batman is an archetype, not a whole character. He needed his stories to really be about his villains and not him. Other characters who are actually characters do not require a villain to have any point to their existence.

Have you ever read a single Batman book in your life?

 

[Anwar]

So when Batman drags along Robin in the comics it's wrong. But when Iron Man (and now by your own admission Captain America) do it in the movies it's right? Disney/Marvel fanboy much?

Did I say Tony was right for doing that? Ever?

First of all you say archetype like it's something bad.

It is if you're trying to make a story that's driven by the protagonist instead of the antagonist.

So by definition everything that comes after the archetype is a copy.

It really just means that the archetype is very very bare bones, character-wise.

Secondly, "easy writing"? You call some of the best comic book writers lazy? Writers like Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Grant Morrison, Scott Snyder, Jeph Loeb, Chuck Dixon, Goeff Johns, Ed Brubaker, Dennis O’Neil, Steve Englehart, Paul Dini, Bruce Timm, Alex Ross, Bill Finger are lazy?

Sometimes, yes.

Wrong again. If he is the "first superhero deconstruction" wouldn't that make him an archetype?

No. Otherwise his stories wouldn't have been driven by internal character flaws rather than take the lazy way out and make the stories really be about the villains.

You know, the one about you not liking grownup stuff, oh sorry "grounded stuff" I mean!

"Grounded" is for people who are ashamed of the wondrous.

TDK's credits is only due to the amazing direction, cinematography, story, script, characters, actors, performances, music, production design, art direction, special effects, stunts, etc.

Fine, I'll say it. Ledger dying boosted the film and made it near-immune to criticism.

That's your whole reasoning? Burton's joke?

It fits everything else seen, unless you need to be spoonfed.

Have you ever read a single Batman book in your life?

Yes, and until the 1970s (when DC finally realized what Marvel was doing) his stories were more about his villains than him. That's an archetype, not a character.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yes, and until the 1970s (when DC finally realized what Marvel was doing) his stories were more about his villains than him. That's an archetype, not a character.

What? How do stories focused on his villains make Batman an archetype? How does being an archetype make Batman "not a character"? You're using "archetype" in a way I'm unfamiliar with

 

[EnderAKH]

I thought Rocket's backstory and the death of Groot were very emotional. Plenty of movies with humor in them can also have emotional moments in them.

Or what about 10ish year old Peter watching his Mom die of cancer in the first 10 minutes? I was in tears.