So.... you might alter your opinion about a set of movies... based on OTHER peoples opinions about a completely different set of movies.... I see.
Thor: Ragnarok
- Thread starter Skywalker
- Start date
Just because critics have different opinions than yours doesn't mean they're being paid off. At the risk of getting political for a moment, that's the same "paid protester" bullshit certain politicians dish out when they want to dismiss the concerns of citizens who disagree with them. Why don't we do critics the courtesy of assuming that they mean what they say--and not jump to the conclusion that they must be being bribed if we don't like what they're saying.
And I'm saying that as somebody who has novelized both Marvel and DC movies.
Last edited:
No, nobody was paid off or anything, the DCEU movies are simply pretty bad. Entertaining, for sure. But bad. Weird writing and character motivations, sloppy editing. Mostly the really sloppy editing. They're basicly cool scenes slapped together. It took BvS more than half its runtime to finally get to a plot.
And before you acure me of anything, like I said, they're entertaining movies. I watched BvS a week ago, and was still entertained. But the flaws are just way to big.
Why can't you just accept that people might just not like the DCEU movies?
I liked all three of them, but I'm more than willing to admit that the aren't perfect, and that other people are just as likely to not like them as I was to like them. There doesn't have to be some big conspiracy for people to disagree with you.
What Marvel movies did you novelize?
Anyone who actually believes that studios can be bothered to pay people to bad-mouth other studios movies are frankly so divorced from reality that I'm amazed that there isn't some level of alimony involved.
THANK YOU for saying that! I wa sgoing to do the same, but didn't get a chance to.
Here's my take on it... I am somebody who grew up preferring DC comics to Marvel. I LOVE the DC TV from CW...I feel like they really "get" the comics I grew up on, and have adapted appropriately for 2017.
I feel like Marvel movies, just about every one of them, have had some element that says to me that they get comics.
Bringing it back to Thor...
Also, I think Darcy was good comic relief (and getting an intern for an intern...
). I'll miss her, but she's not a deal breaker. In regard to the DC FU, they could use a Darcy character...or at least someone who can provide some decent comic relief, at least sparingly (whether it's Happy or the Son of Coul). They don't need to be as snarky as Darcy, but could provide what might not come naturally for the main characters.
One other thing about the Thor movies...something I didn't realize until just now...I guess all of them have some scene that feels a bit over the top. Not so much to derail the movie, but that , if I think about too much, could "ruin" the movie for me...
so whether it's Dr. Selvig running around naked at Stonehenge (why did that happen again), or the line from the new movie "I know him from work!"..if I don't just go with the flow, I won't enjoy it.
I am looking more forward to this than Justice League, and if I had to choose between just one movie for November, definitely Thor.
I'm sorry but I find the excessive criticism of all three DCEU films so far rather odd. And yes, there are film critics who are not above being bribed to write a certain kind of opinion for newly released films. So yeah, I'm still suspicious. No wonder I have no faith in movie critics.
I'm happy for you that you have written novelizations of both Marvel and DC Comics films, but that doesn't mean anything to me. The only opinion I'm going to pay attention to is my own.
I wasn't saying that to pull rank, just to point out that I have no dog in this race and no reason to play favorites. Marvel . . . DC . . . I've got a foot in both camps.
That should have been the case from day one, really.
2 Broke Girls is in it's SIXTH season.
...which can be argued to have much to do with the other actors and bottom-scraping "humor" than Kat Dennings.
The only thing I can point to is her one-note, nasal/grating voice and overusing the "odd-woman out" type of character seen on her TV series sans the "humor" from the gutter.
Agreed. The Thor comics had a rich, off-earth history, and it should have been the focus starting with #2 (understanding that #1 was merely an extended set up for The Avengers)
I could generally care less what other people (critics, friends, endless beaters-of-the-same-drum here) think about a film once I've seen it. Unless they raise points I hadn't thought about. And then I'm very happy to read, engage, dissect and digest those opinions and critiques. If I still think they're wrong, so be it and I'll continue to enjoy thinking of, and rewatching that film. But if they make me look at something from a different angle, then fantastic. And, frankly, that's what most decent professional critics do. They look at media from an analytical standpoint, but promulgated by the love for the medium. Many people write off professional critics based on the 500-word columns they get in the ever-shrinking publications. Many of those critics have written theses, books and taught about film. Sure, in the age of the internet where anyone with a webpage can pop-up a review and label themselves a "reviewer" or "critic", the notion of the Film Critic has been terribly watered down, and I understand people's reticence to homogeneously accept the blanket view.
I think the notion that genuine film critics would be bought off to help discredit a film laughable. The fact that this is targeting a minor subset of films and allegedly wrangled by a competitor that, frankly, makes so much money from its properties and ancillaries anyway, is again, laughable.
Marvel make competent and mostly enjoyable fluff. Only one film has really taken a stride to make something that has a real message or anything particularly knowing, but that doesn't stop the fact that many of the films are well made, well thought out, engaging entertainment, easily consumed and enjoyed. I'd love to see them take more risks, but that's not wholly likely and I've accepted that.
DC has attempted to try to add weight, conflicted drama and a harder tone to its efforts. I applaud the notion, but the execution has been woeful because the people they hire to make the films have no idea what dramatic weight or real emotion are. Further to this, they are encumbering themselves with nonsensical, contrived and ill-conceived plots and characters, leaving many people (myself included) little to grasp onto. Leaving only the visuals. It's like they took the comic book pages, saw Greg Capullo's, Jim Lee's, Jock's artwork, copied them for the screen, but forgot that the panels also include dialogue and characters and plots.
I want DC to work. I have no animus towards them, and I very much doubt the critics do either. I just want a well told story with some characters that make sense. Thus far they have failed miserably on these key fronts and until they accept that spectacle alone will not support a film, then fan and critical backlash will continue. Many of the Marvel films are simple 1-2-3 plots, but they have at least paid attention to what makes their characters work, honing them from film to film. For all its flimsiness, at least I walked out of Ant Man thinking, "I wouldn't say no to seeing more of that Scott Lang.
WW looks to have a strong chance of bucking their recent trend, and I hope that the company accepts and feeds in the prior negative response. Critical self reflection of yourself is the only way to improve.
Hugo - trying to improve, day by day
I think the notion that genuine film critics would be bought off to help discredit a film laughable. The fact that this is targeting a minor subset of films and allegedly wrangled by a competitor that, frankly, makes so much money from its properties and ancillaries anyway, is again, laughable.
Marvel make competent and mostly enjoyable fluff. Only one film has really taken a stride to make something that has a real message or anything particularly knowing, but that doesn't stop the fact that many of the films are well made, well thought out, engaging entertainment, easily consumed and enjoyed. I'd love to see them take more risks, but that's not wholly likely and I've accepted that.
DC has attempted to try to add weight, conflicted drama and a harder tone to its efforts. I applaud the notion, but the execution has been woeful because the people they hire to make the films have no idea what dramatic weight or real emotion are. Further to this, they are encumbering themselves with nonsensical, contrived and ill-conceived plots and characters, leaving many people (myself included) little to grasp onto. Leaving only the visuals. It's like they took the comic book pages, saw Greg Capullo's, Jim Lee's, Jock's artwork, copied them for the screen, but forgot that the panels also include dialogue and characters and plots.
I want DC to work. I have no animus towards them, and I very much doubt the critics do either. I just want a well told story with some characters that make sense. Thus far they have failed miserably on these key fronts and until they accept that spectacle alone will not support a film, then fan and critical backlash will continue. Many of the Marvel films are simple 1-2-3 plots, but they have at least paid attention to what makes their characters work, honing them from film to film. For all its flimsiness, at least I walked out of Ant Man thinking, "I wouldn't say no to seeing more of that Scott Lang.
WW looks to have a strong chance of bucking their recent trend, and I hope that the company accepts and feeds in the prior negative response. Critical self reflection of yourself is the only way to improve.
I've not read any of your work @Greg Cox , but having read the scripts for those films I'd say you had an uphill challenge. Kudos to you.
Hugo - trying to improve, day by day
Just to belabor the point, if I was an evil film studio that was going to bribe critics, I'd do so to hype artsier, more serious fare that depend far more on critical acclaim than big summer blockbusters, which are often largely critic-proof. You'd want to spend your bribe money on potential Oscar winners, not superhero action movies.
As for Daredevil . . . that was my very first movie novelization, so I remember it fondly. I recall being very excited by the opportunity, which came my way after I'd written a few IRON MAN and X-MEN novels for Marvel. I still have the original script and pre-production art tucked away in my attic.
And, yes, I'd love to novelize a THOR movie someday.
As for Daredevil . . . that was my very first movie novelization, so I remember it fondly. I recall being very excited by the opportunity, which came my way after I'd written a few IRON MAN and X-MEN novels for Marvel. I still have the original script and pre-production art tucked away in my attic.
And, yes, I'd love to novelize a THOR movie someday.
Last edited:
On other fronts, we only get a glimpse of Karl Urban in the trailer, but I'm intrigued by the idea of him playing the Executioner. He's been good in most everything I've seen him in, going all the way back to XENA and HERCULES, and now here he is playing a Marvel super-villain . . ..
Not yet. Need to catch up with that someday.
Not convinced he's playing a supervillain. The only thing we see in the trailer looks like it's taken directly from his stand at the bridge of Gjallerbru where:
He dies a hero
