• 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!

Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

What grade would you give the Marvel Cinematic Universe? (Ever-Changing Question)

  • Total voters
    185
Turtletrekker said:
This is why I have come to dislike the word "cartoon". No matter what the subject matter, that word makes it sound like for kids. I prefer "animated programming".
Click to expand...

I tried doing that years ago, referring to comics as "graphic novels". Over the years, I grew to realize how useless and nerdy it made me sound. Graphic novels are just long comic books. You can label it whatever you want, it is not going to change someone's preconceptions and, with respect, it sounds pretentious. Just embrace the terms cartoons/animation/anime and to hell with what other people think.
 
theenglish said:
I tried doing that years ago, referring to comics as "graphic novels". Over the years, I grew to realize how useless and nerdy it made me sound. Graphic novels are just long comic books. You can label it whatever you want, it is not going to change someone's preconceptions and, with respect, it sounds pretentious. Just embrace the terms cartoons/animation/anime and to hell with what other people think.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on this. The problem isn't the word, the problem is the attitude people have toward it. Trying to use euphemisms to sound classier is just legitimizing other people's prejudices. Those attitudes should be stood up to, not bowed to.

(And while we're at it, the term "graphic novel" was coined to refer to a specific format of comic publication, and it was always erroneous to use it for all comics.)

"Cartoon" just means a drawing, especially one in a simplified or caricatured style rather than a realistic, detailed style. It's from the same root as "card" and "carton," referring to heavy paper, originally in reference to the preliminary sketches made by artists. That's all. There's nothing intrinsically negative about the term.
 
theenglish said:
I tried doing that years ago, referring to comics as "graphic novels". Over the years, I grew to realize how useless and nerdy it made me sound. Graphic novels are just long comic books. You can label it whatever you want, it is not going to change someone's preconceptions and, with respect, it sounds pretentious. Just embrace the terms cartoons/animation/anime and to hell with what other people think.
Click to expand...
Embrace your inner nerd! That's what I've done and I have no problem with using those phrases no matter who I'm talking to.
 
Christopher said:
I never said it did. But not liking something is not an excuse to be unfair to it. And it is unfair to animation to stereotype it as less intelligent, less believable, or less worthwhile than live action.
Click to expand...
I'd say there's probably more "art" in a well animated production than the average live action one. Fantastic directing and cinematography notwithstanding. You can't just busk it by pointing a camera at the subject. I don't think it's inherently inferior. Probably the opposite.

There's going to be good and bad in all things. I struggle with some animation. It drives my son batty - he can't understand it either. When we went to see Spiderverse we both enjoyed it. It knowingly played with being animated in a very self aware manner. I still had reservations (despite which I liked it). It is rather obviously really well done.

I think "personal quirk" plays a big part of it. I don't have the warm and fuzzy feeling a lot of people do from watching saturday morning animated series as a child. I didn't like them then. l did, however, enjoy Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry, but that's overtly cartoony and makes no attempt at representing anything very realistically.

Which, having considered it, leads me to think I may have something like an "uncanny valley-ish" over sensitivity to semi-realistic animation.

Jr. tried to interest me in The Wind Rises, which I sat through and Cowboy Bebop, which I didn't, nor the Blade Runner shorts. I don't recall the bits I saw having issues with portraying unrealistic physical abilities - I just didn't like them.

Perhaps uncommonly, I also prefer telesnaps to the Doctor Who animated reconstructions.

It's just me I think.
 
So there are variants and now deviants? This all getting really confusing.
What if it’s a deviant variant? Who has jurisdiction there?
 
I like that new trailer a lot more. The big change is the Celestials didn't modify the humans to create Eternals back in the day (7000 years isn't all that long ago either relatively speaking). This should, theoretically, put an end to the idea that the Eternals is leading to mutants since there's no connection here. Still, the movie will hopefully be a lot of fun. I'm definitely getting Henry Cavill Superman vibes from Ikaris, though.
 
Oh, man, I was just saying yesterday to a friend that the first trailer hadn't given much sense of the plot of the film or even hinted at the Deviants.

It's like Marvel heard me. :lol:

This trailer is far grander than the first one and I love it! I really can't wait to watch this film and hopefully on the big screen.

Timelord Victorious said:
If I got that correctly, then the blip has another unintended consequence of creating some sort of universal energy surge threatening to destroy the planet?
Click to expand...
That's the impression I got, too.
 
Last edited:
The Nth Doctor said:
Oh, man, I was just saying yesterday to a friend that the first trailer hadn't given much sense of the plot of the film or even hinted at the Deviants.
Click to expand...

Not unusual for teaser trailers. The typical trailer formula these days is to save the plot specifics for the second trailer. Also, teaser trailers usually come out before most of the visual effects work is done, so that limits what they can show.
 
Christopher said:
Not unusual for teaser trailers. The typical trailer formula these days is to save the plot specifics for the second trailer. Also, teaser trailers usually come out before most of the visual effects work is done, so that limits what they can show.
Click to expand...
Oh, I'm so glad you explained to me what I already knew. What would I ever do without you?
 
It's interesting that Marvel has become large enough to have started to delve into the cosmic and more obscure titles. I'm curious if the audiences will come along, I suspect it's going to be smaller than the first wave.
 
I'm not sold on the "We didn't intervene with Thanos because we were instructed not to get involved except with Deviants" thing. I mean, it's half the life in the universe disappearing. That's important enough to make an exception for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top