• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

I do not like MCU films

Because sometimes it's about being touched deeply. Other times, you want a corny bad guy to be touched deeply. In the face. With a mystic hammer wielded by a blond god.

Thank you for that! :lol: That gave me a good laugh. :techman:
 
I'm pretty sure a movie has to be enjoyed by more than just children for it to make $774,176,600US worldwide.
I've never understood why some people seem to have such a problem with some movies just being light hearted fun.
What's so horrible about that? I'm asking this as a serious question, and I want a real answer. Is there a rule that says that every movie has to be some deep dark drama? Isn't there room for all different kinds of movies? Again, I want real serious answers here.


My real answer?

I know a few cinema buffs. And they really take it to serious. Like how some foodies will look down at anything the see as pre-made or junkfood. I'm a foodie, and I admit I kinda do that, but I had a supermarket pizza yesterday and go to a snackbar sometimes.

Cinemabuffs like that.... they NEED every movie to be deep. Strong developed characters. Mega deep mind blowing plots. Hella hardcore acting. Anything that doesn't do that, is beneath them.

So yeah, I love movies. I love almost all kind of movies. I loved watching Pride And Prejudice a few weeks ago with my girlfriend. But we can watch Iron Man right after that if we feel like it. Because sometimes it's about being touched deeply. Other times, you want a corny bad guy to be touched deeply. In the face. With a mystic hammer wielded by a blond god.
I guess I can kind of see that, but I just don't take movies that seriously. I just go in looking to have a good time. Sometimes that good time comes because of a deep plot, or exceptional characterizations, other times it comes because the movie is fun.

That was basicly my point, that I also don't take movies that seriously.
 
I thought movie Scarecrow was shortchanged and none of them are great villains but I think some are more interesting than the MCU villains;

You think Joker is not a great villain? :eek:
I agree Scarecrow was not well used, but I am not a Nolan fan anyway. If DC is really committed to going dark with stuff like BvS and Suicide Squad, then maybe they will commit to a movie of Batman vs Scarecrow and no-one else. Wouldn't have to be totally bleak; could be based in the idea that it's important to choose light over darkness. Might be touching in a way the MCU movies haven't been.

What's kind of sad is that DC fans I talk to say stuff like how Captain America is just a propaganda piece character

The character is called Captain America. That issue is never going away.
 
I was underwhelmed by The Joker, but I think I can blame that on seeing the movie when it came to DVD and well after the months of hype about him being the best thing since sliced bread. With that sort of expectations, I was bound to be let down. Catwoman from Batman Returns is still my favourite Batman movie 'villain.'

I did like how the Cap movie kept his origins as a piece of propaganda. His character arc over the two movies kind-of echoes how the writers of the comics dealt with him. From flat-out propaganda, to a patriot made up of 'American' values, to scrapping the more blind patriotism (my country right or wrong) and having him being loyal to what he sees as the ultimate ideals of (Marvel) America (tolerant, brave, selfless etc,) even if it's people and leaders sometimes fuck up.

I remember a time (before they killed him off) when the Marvel company itself tried to posit him as an outdated and a naive relic of a long-gone age. Unfortunately, a big part of their reasoning was 'You're out of touch and no longer represent America...because you don't have a MySpace or watch American Idol' No exaggeration - Cap hung his head in shame and was so cut-down that he didn't argue with that.

Unsurprisingly, that phase didn't last.
 
I was underwhelmed by The Joker, but I think I can blame that on seeing the movie when it came to DVD and well after the months of hype about him being the best thing since sliced bread. With that sort of expectations, I was bound to be let down.

I was talking about the Joker as a character, not the specific movie iterations. Was not hugely impressed by Ledger.
 
I was underwhelmed by The Joker, but I think I can blame that on seeing the movie when it came to DVD and well after the months of hype about him being the best thing since sliced bread. With that sort of expectations, I was bound to be let down.

I was talking about the Joker as a character, not the specific movie iterations. Was not hugely impressed by Ledger.

His is the only Batman movie I like and much of that is down to Ledger.
 
The character is called Captain America. That issue is never going away.

Yeah, and? I mean really, how is "Captain America" so much more of a propaganda thing than "Superman"? People should be willing to look past the skin to see the real character.
 
Because his entire existence is owed to formerly being a piece of wartime propaganda, whereas Superman doesn't?

And yes, I am aware that they did end up using Suoerman (and every other piece of available pop culture) for propaganda purposes.

Of course, The Last Son of Krypton is really a piece Kryptonian propaganda...and on other days, a walking advertisement for American steel.:)
 
Because his entire existence is owed to formerly being a piece of wartime propaganda, whereas Superman doesn't?

Indeed. I like Captain America more than Superman and I don't consider myself patriotic, but yeah, there's that teeny tiny bit about how propaganda was essential to Cap's origins. So much so that his real life origins and his comic book origins closely match together -- it's about sending a message.

If we want to delve deeper into his character, American ideals are still very much at the heart of the matter. Some of his most remembered storylines, like Secret Empire, Man out of Time, even a couple speeches in Civil War, were directly about America itself. He's even waxed poetic a few times about the power of symbolism, which itself is part of propaganda (and thus his acknowledgement of himself as a symbol).
 
Because his entire existence is owed to formerly being a piece of wartime propaganda, whereas Superman doesn't?

Indeed. I like Captain America more than Superman and I don't consider myself patriotic, but yeah, there's that teeny tiny bit about how propaganda was essential to Cap's origins. So much so that his real life origins and his comic book origins closely match together -- it's about sending a message.

If we want to delve deeper into his character, American ideals are still very much at the heart of the matter. Some of his most remembered storylines, like Secret Empire, Man out of Time, even a couple speeches in Civil War, were directly about America itself. He's even waxed poetic a few times about the power of symbolism, which itself is part of propaganda (and thus his acknowledgement of himself as a symbol).

Cap's acknowledgement of himself as a symbol is one of the more endearing aspects of his character. Steve Rogers doesn't consider himself important, but recognizes the power that he wields, both physically and symbolically. His self-awareness and humility, even in the face of his power, is quite enjoyable for me.

Patriotism aside, I think Rogers' sense of loyalty, and commitment to his values makes him a great heroic character. Did he start out as a propaganda piece? Yep. Is the character in the films far more than that? I think so, absolutely.
 
Because his entire existence is owed to formerly being a piece of wartime propaganda, whereas Superman doesn't?

And yes, I am aware that they did end up using Suoerman (and every other piece of available pop culture) for propaganda purposes.

Of course, The Last Son of Krypton is really a piece Kryptonian propaganda...and on other days, a walking advertisement for American steel.:)

Actually, wasn't Superman deliberately created (by his Jewish creators) as a deliberate mockery of the Ubermensch concept the Nazis had been spouting for years? He's the "Superman" they talk about (though he's more in common character-wise with Nietzsche's idea of the Last Man) but he fights Nazis.

Just like how Steve was deliberately given the ideal Aryan appearance.

Steve's whole thing about being a "symbol of America" is also delved into more deeply than most other "Icon" characters. He's fully aware of how he's not on the same page as the Government and a lot of his story is about his struggle with that, especially given the transient nature of what Present-Day America really is.

I thought the "Captain America no more!" storyline was really good at showing this.
 
Considering he originated as a villainous character (before being remodelled), was created in 1933 and first appeared in his classic form in 1938, I doubt it had anything to do with WW2.
 
Because his entire existence is owed to formerly being a piece of wartime propaganda, whereas Superman doesn't?

Indeed. I like Captain America more than Superman and I don't consider myself patriotic, but yeah, there's that teeny tiny bit about how propaganda was essential to Cap's origins. So much so that his real life origins and his comic book origins closely match together -- it's about sending a message.

If we want to delve deeper into his character, American ideals are still very much at the heart of the matter. Some of his most remembered storylines, like Secret Empire, Man out of Time, even a couple speeches in Civil War, were directly about America itself. He's even waxed poetic a few times about the power of symbolism, which itself is part of propaganda (and thus his acknowledgement of himself as a symbol).

Cap's acknowledgement of himself as a symbol is one of the more endearing aspects of his character. Steve Rogers doesn't consider himself important, but recognizes the power that he wields, both physically and symbolically. His self-awareness and humility, even in the face of his power, is quite enjoyable for me.

Patriotism aside, I think Rogers' sense of loyalty, and commitment to his values makes him a great heroic character. Did he start out as a propaganda piece? Yep. Is the character in the films far more than that? I think so, absolutely.

Well, there's the idea that propaganda is inherently bad, when really it's neutral -- the message is what's good or bad. With that said, Cap's always tried to use American ideals to guide himself to be his optimistic best, which I find so much more refreshing than other types of manipulative propaganda ("You're either with us or against us" or "Country first" or "War on [insert abstract concept here]"). He knows when propaganda is being used for selfish reasons and so he won't mindlessly tow the line; on the same token, when propaganda is used for more positive reasons, or to carry out what he feels is justice (which can get complicated at times), he'll participate, which is also fine.
 
DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

how true do you think that statement is, I think it is more true than a lie because Disney has power and influence over marvel and disney first and foremost is about kid friendly films. while dc has said they will go dark and marvel have said they won't.

Kevin Feige said this about the future of marvel:
:
There is no dark turn in the MCU. He says every year fans come up to him and ask him if this movie is when the MCU goes “dark” or takes a “dark” turn. He said while the trailers may seem ominous or have a sense of impending doom, the movies do not have that feel, and will not. He said he ‘Hoped people would catch on by now’ – there will be no giant dark turns in the MCU where it then continues to head in that direction. The humor is in the DNA of the movies, there are no plans to change that.

http://screenrant.com/marvel-vs-dc-m...rk-tone-humor/


DC President has said this about marvel and dc and wy they differ.

“The worlds of DC are very different. They’re steeped in realism, and they’re a little bit edgier than Marvel’s movies.”

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/03/06/wb-


How much do you believe that DC films are more mature and marvel films are for kiddies. I think this is true to an extent seeing how dc and marvel are approaching their films. dc is dark and serious and marvel is light hearted and kid friendly
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top