I know I shouldn't, really this should be in the Justice League movie thread... and this is my last response to the subject in this thread...
You mean movies AREN'T just what we see on the surface? There's MORE?
Of COURSE it was about family, that's the heart of the story, and in the context of a superhero movie. But how does that change my point in ANY way? It still had to introduce the world, it still had to introduce the characters and how their powers worked, it still had to introduce the conflicts, etc, etc. Just as any other movie, including a Justice League movie.
How come because it's a movie about "family" it doesn't need movies to set it up?
Hint: because they did a good job at the exposition.
Deeper backgrounds are for the comic book fans. Decades long history is for comic book fans. They give filmmakers lots of choices to ADAPT into a movie for a general audience, but they aren't going to make it so you need to be familiar with Superman Red and Blue in order to get the movie.
Again: it's called exposition.
All that set up: was in the first 15 minutes of the movie. We watched how his choices to do something played out. But all of that... the egotistm, the drinking, that's in the first SCENE in the truck with the soldiers.
Except they did. In the first Iron Man.
And I think it's also curious you never responded to The Incredibles example. Why doesn't that move require, NAY, DEMAND four movies to set it up? Where was the mass confusion?
The Incredibles wasn't a movie about the superheroes using the superpowers but about the family, they just happened to have super powers which were easily shown to fit in either certain hero archetypes or just simply what they were. (Stretchiness, fast, made invisible.)
You mean movies AREN'T just what we see on the surface? There's MORE?

Of COURSE it was about family, that's the heart of the story, and in the context of a superhero movie. But how does that change my point in ANY way? It still had to introduce the world, it still had to introduce the characters and how their powers worked, it still had to introduce the conflicts, etc, etc. Just as any other movie, including a Justice League movie.
How come because it's a movie about "family" it doesn't need movies to set it up?
Hint: because they did a good job at the exposition.
This is different with characters who have decades long histories and a lot deeper backgrounds to them than "Wants to be a superhero, can't because of easily explained reasons."
Deeper backgrounds are for the comic book fans. Decades long history is for comic book fans. They give filmmakers lots of choices to ADAPT into a movie for a general audience, but they aren't going to make it so you need to be familiar with Superman Red and Blue in order to get the movie.
Again: it's called exposition.
Tony Stark: Realizing his weapons created a worse world, turning to heroics and developing a personalized weapon in order to make the world safer. Suffers from egotisim, alcoholism, and is a playboy. Again, it took most of an entire movie to set him up as a character.
All that set up: was in the first 15 minutes of the movie. We watched how his choices to do something played out. But all of that... the egotistm, the drinking, that's in the first SCENE in the truck with the soldiers.
Something you couldn't easily do with a few minutes of exposition in a movie.
Except they did. In the first Iron Man.