[URL="http://variety.com/2016/film/box-office/captain-america-civil-war-box-office-billion-worldwide-1201779661/"]Civil War has passed $1 Billion worldwide[/URL]
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50361739][url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Spiderman/comments/4jxbll/spoilers_spiderman_homecoming_plot_leaks/[/url]
Plot leaks a few days ago syncing up with news now[/QUOTE]
If this does turn out to be real, I'm actually okay with it. It sounds reminiscent of Sam Raimi's first two Spider-Man films. Which is good.
[QUOTE=Y U NO OBJECT;50364243][URL="http://variety.com/2016/film/box-office/captain-america-civil-war-box-office-billion-worldwide-1201779661/"]Civil War has passed $1 Billion worldwide[/URL][/QUOTE]
Captain America movie with an Ironman photo for the article
:suicide:
To be fair, it's a scene from the movie.
I also quite like that alleged leaked script. Taking cues from spider-man 2 to handle the antagonist
You know, I just watched the civil war movie, and while I know that sometimes the movies take some liberties with the story, I didn´t like how they chnaged the premise so much. Sure, instead of the Nitro explosion it was another event of similar caliber, but how they threw out of the window all of the spiderman real involvement just bothers me.
I HOPE the 'leaked' Homecoming plot is true. It sounds legitimately amazing and everything I want from a Spider-Man film. Peter being torn between school and Spider-Man, properly.
EDIT: basically I want them to adapt the Ultimate Spider-Man series to screen. It'd be dope.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50362038]Can we just have even a little break without Tony Stark in another damn MCU film?[/QUOTE]
After Civil War, [sp]it'd be weird for Tony Stark not to be in Homecoming. He's obviously a huge mentor to Peter right now.[/sp]
Also about Venomous Beetle thinking the Homecoming title was a reference to the comic book; I'm pretty sure that's just a coincidence. I heard a rumour that Sony was going to make an Agent Venom film (and that it was going to be completely unrelated to Spider-Man), so no way are they going anywhere near Venom with this film.
The 'homecoming' title seems like a clear reference to cinematic Spider-Man rejoining the Marvel Universe so to speak. There is also relevance with this new Peter Parker still being in high school, and he's obviously coming home after the battle in Civil War.
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366271]You know, I just watched the civil war movie, and while I know that sometimes the movies take some liberties with the story, I didn´t like how they chnaged the premise so much. Sure, instead of the Nitro explosion it was another event of similar caliber, but how they threw out of the window all of the spiderman real involvement just bothers me.[/QUOTE]
But the comic was shit.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50366566]But the comic was shit.[/QUOTE]
Welp, you got your opinion and I got mine, I respect yours and I expect you to do the same for me.
All I want from a Spiderman film is the Spectacular Spiderman series condensed into two and a bit hours. Because god damn that show was fantastic.
I don't care if the comic was good or not, "they didn't do it like the comics" is always a bad argument
Unless you're saying it in reference to a strong plot point or underlying message from the comic that the movie missed or watered down, it's a non-argument. It means nothing, it says nothing. These movies are meant to work on their own, and they certainly achieve that. It's about time comic fans stopped thinking any deviation from the original work is an instant negative.
[editline]21st May 2016[/editline]
It's ok to have preferences, just don't word them as criticisms because that's not what they are
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50366613]I don't care if the comic was good or not, "they didn't do it like the comics" is always a bad argument
Unless you're saying it in reference to a strong plot point or underlying message from the comic that the movie missed or watered down, it's a non-argument. It means nothing, it says nothing. These movies are meant to work on their own, and they certainly achieve that. It's about time comic fans stopped thinking any deviation from the original work is an instant negative.
[editline]21st May 2016[/editline]
It's ok to have preferences, just don't word them as criticisms because that's not what they are[/QUOTE]
There's a difference between reworking it for the big screen and writing an entirely different story and slapping the name on it.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50366641]There's a difference between reworking it for the big screen and writing an entirely different story and slapping the name on it.[/QUOTE]
Age of Ultron was so last year.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50366613]I don't care if the comic was good or not, "they didn't do it like the comics" is always a bad argument
Unless you're saying it in reference to a strong plot point or underlying message from the comic that the movie missed or watered down, it's a non-argument. It means nothing, it says nothing. These movies are meant to work on their own, and they certainly achieve that. It's about time comic fans stopped thinking any deviation from the original work is an instant negative.
[editline]21st May 2016[/editline]
It's ok to have preferences, just don't word them as criticisms because that's not what they are[/QUOTE]
Look, when in Iron man 1 they revealed Iron man was Tony way too early, it was fine by me, I also didn´t say a word, when in Guardians of the galaxy Ronan died too soon compared to the comics; but like Scorpious says, you can´t just write a completely new stories with 3 or 4 minor elements of the comic and say it´s the same thing. Im not picky with the movie adaptations, but what the movie did was too distorted, the movie was good, but it had way too little to do with the source.
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366681]Look, when in Iron man 1 they revealed Iron man was Tony way too early, it was fine by me, I also didn´t say a word, when in Guardians of the galaxy Ronan died too soon compared to the comics; but like Scorpious says, you can´t just write a completely new stories with 3 or 4 minor elements of the comic and say it´s the smae thing. Im not picky with the movie adaptations, but what the movie did was too distorted.[/QUOTE]
I havent seen the movie yet, unfortunately, but why would you want the movie to be closer to the comic version?
The comic version completely obliterated the characters on the pro-reg side and turned them all into fascist villain monsters who broke into peoples homes and abducted children.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50366641]There's a difference between reworking it for the big screen and writing an entirely different story and slapping the name on it.[/QUOTE]
Really? An entirely different story?
Did a superhero mistake not kickstart the argument? Was the central point of the story not regulation vs no regulation? Was government overreach not the dividing line between the two sides? Were the characters not deeply affected by the escalating conflict - afraid, in fact, it would escalate too far? Did Cap not hold on to the same beliefs? What about Iron Man?
Take out all of the fluff and, at it's core, it's disingenuous to say it's an entirely different story
[editline]21st May 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366681]Look, when in Iron man 1 they revealed Iron man was Tony way too early, it was fine by me, I also didn´t say a word, when in Guardians of the galaxy Ronan died too soon compared to the comics; but like Scorpious says, you can´t just write a completely new stories with 3 or 4 minor elements of the comic and say it´s the same thing. Im not picky with the movie adaptations, but what the movie did was too distorted, the movie was good, but it had way too little to do with the source.[/QUOTE]
They're not saying it's the same thing though. They never committed to a 1:1 adaptation, and you're not entitled to one unless they do
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50366694]I havent seen the movie yet, unfortunately, but why would you want the movie to be closer to the comic version?
The comic version completely obliterated the characters on the pro-reg side and turned them all into fascist villain monsters who broke into peoples homes and abducted children.[/QUOTE]
It´s not about the pro-registration portrayal, the problem is the whole backstory that they skipped in comparison to the comic universe. If you have not seen the movie, go watch it and you'll see what I'm talking about, but what's not acceptable, is giving an opinion without even having seenthe film.
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366749]It´s not about the pro-registration portrayal, the problem is the whole backstory that they skipped in comparison to the comic universe..[/QUOTE]
How so?
Its the "Sokovia Accords". Tony Stark accidentally destroying a country makes just as much sense as the reason behind wanting Superhero accountability as a group of idiots antagonizing a villain who blows up a couple hundred small children.
Maybe moreso.
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366749] but what's not acceptable, is giving an opinion without even having seenthe film.[/QUOTE]
Excuse me?
Dont tell me what i can and cannot do. I can say whatever i damn well please, especially when it relates to the comic more than the movie.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50366708]Really? An entirely different story?
Did a superhero mistake not kickstart the argument? Was the central point of the story not regulation vs no regulation? Was government overreach not the dividing line between the two sides? Were the characters not deeply affected by the escalating conflict - afraid, in fact, it would escalate too far? Did Cap not hold on to the same beliefs? What about Iron Man?
Take out all of the fluff and, at it's core, it's disingenuous to say it's an entirely different story
[editline]21st May 2016[/editline]
They're not saying it's the same thing though. They never committed to a 1:1 adaptation, and you're not entitled to one unless they do[/QUOTE]
What are you even talking about? It was not the same core, the registration act got forgotten halfway trough the film and instead the focal point went over to Bucky, and It was not about pro or againts act, but about which side wanted Bucky free and which one tough he was a danger.
In the comic, the core was superheroes not wanting to have to give their private life information to the government, here, the core was Bucky here, Bucky there, etc...
[sp]And they ended up trying to kill each other not because of the act, but because a guy wanted them to fight and Bucky killed Tony´s parents.[/sp]
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50366769]
Excuse me?
Dont tell me what i can and cannot do. I can say whatever i damn well please, especially when it relates to the comic more than the movie.[/QUOTE]
So you´re saying you can talk about something that you have not even seen like if you had? One thing is liking more the movies or the comics, another different thing is giving an opinion without having any idea, which is frankly, quite idiotic.
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366776]
So you´re saying you can talk about something that you have not even seen like if you had? One thing is liking more the movies or the comics, another different thing is giving an opinion without having any idea, which is frankly, quite idiotic.[/QUOTE]
How?
I know the gist of the movie because i kept up with it since it was announed like most people in this thread, i know how its different, i know how the comic went, and i know why the comic shouldnt've been 1:1 adapted.
Would you have loved to seen Ant-Man get executed by a cyborg clone of Thor? Would that make it better because its more authentic?
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50366819]How?
I know the gist of the movie because i kept up with it since it was announed like most people in this thread, i know how its different, i know how the comic went, and i know why the comic shouldnt've been 1:1 adapted.
Would you have loved to seen Ant-Man get executed by a cyborg clone of Thor? Would that make it better because its more authentic?[/QUOTE]
Like I said above, the movies don´t have to be a 1:1 adaptation of the comics, the problem is distorting something so much to the point where it's not an adaptation anymore but a completely new story that has little to do with the comic it's supposed to come from.
Saw X-Men Apocalypse today and yeah it isn't very good. Very rushed and all over the place. Apocalypse was a very weak villain, even Trask felt more threatening than him. Eveything felt lifeless and samey
For those wondering, there's a post-credit scene which I think it's related of the villains of the new Wolverine movie: [sp]We see some people cleaning up the mess left at Stryker's facility, then some suited men enter the Weapon X room where Wolverine was being held. They pick up a bottle with Wolverine's blood and put in a briefcase that also contains two other bottles with some colored stuff in it. When they close it we see the logo of Essex Corp (Mr. Sinister). And I think it's very likely that they are going to use X-23 as well.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366833]Like I said above, the movies don´t have to be a 1:1 adaptation of the comics, the problem is distorting something so much to the point where it's not an adaptation anymore but a completely new story that has little to do with the comic it's supposed to come from.[/QUOTE]
But you're wrong. It uses the same premise, but with a different execution.
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366776]What are you even talking about? It was not the same core, the registration act got forgotten halfway trough the film and instead the focal point went over to Bucky, and It was not about pro or againts act, but about which side wanted Bucky free and which one tough he was a danger.
In the comic, the core was superheroes not wanting to have to give their private life information to the government, here, the core was Bucky here, Bucky there, etc...
[sp]And they ended up trying to kill each other not because of the act, but because a guy wanted them to fight and Bucky killed Tony´s parents.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Then you missed the core message of the comic book if you thought that's what it was about. The registration sets the groundwork for the conflict, but the conflict is the real point. The movie nailed the characters and their motivations (except for Black Panther, though both he and Spidey didn't have 50 years of backstory to work with in film format), as well as the themes of guilt and government oversight. The precise workings of what created the conflict weren't the same, but the conflict itself was, and again, that's the real core of the story.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50366842]But you're wrong. It uses the same premise, but with a different execution.[/QUOTE]
Ehhh.. Sure, but the premise is used partialy,even if the execution is different, it´'s ok as long as the premise is the same, but for this movie, the registration act was more of an excuse to start the movie and attract public to it while the premise is Bucky.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50366853]Then you missed the core message of the comic book if you thought that's what it was about. The registration sets the groundwork for the conflict, but the conflict is the real point. The movie nailed the characters and their motivations (except for Black Panther, though both he and Spidey didn't have 50 years of backstory to work with in film format), as well as the themes of guilt and government oversight. The precise workings of what created the conflict weren't the same, but the conflict itself was, and again, that's the real core of the story.[/QUOTE]
I know the conflict is the focal point, but the conflict should have revolved around heroes that don't want to be controled as they know they are doing the right thing, and those who think freedom to act should not exist. The problem is making the conflict all about Bucky and some guy's revenge against the heroes.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50366708]Really? An entirely different story?
Did a superhero mistake not kickstart the argument? Was the central point of the story not regulation vs no regulation? Was government overreach not the dividing line between the two sides? Were the characters not deeply affected by the escalating conflict - afraid, in fact, it would escalate too far? Did Cap not hold on to the same beliefs? What about Iron Man?
Take out all of the fluff and, at it's core, it's disingenuous to say it's an entirely different story
[/QUOTE]
No, the central point of the story was Cap finding and helping Bucky before Ironman or Black Panther capture/killed him.
The end fight [sp]had absolutely nothing to do with the Sokovia Accords, who was right or who was wrong. It was about Ironman wanting to kill Bucky because had killed his parents. Literally has nothing to do with the 'civil war', both in the comics or the rest of the film. It could have done without, easily.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50366873]No, the central point of the story was Cap finding and helping Bucky before Ironman or Black Panther capture/killed him.
The end fight [sp]had absolutely nothing to do with the Sokovia Accords, who was right or who was wrong. It was about Ironman wanting to kill Bucky because had killed his parents. Literally has nothing to do with the 'civil war', both in the comics or the rest of the film. It could have done without, easily.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Read my other post
You're seeing the text and forgetting the subtext
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50366873]No, the central point of the story was Cap finding and helping Bucky before Ironman or Black Panther capture/killed him.
The end fight [sp]had absolutely nothing to do with the Sokovia Accords, who was right or who was wrong. It was about Ironman wanting to kill Bucky because had killed his parents. Literally has nothing to do with the 'civil war', both in the comics or the rest of the film. It could have done without, easily.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Exacly.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50366888]Read my other post
You're seeing the text and forgetting the subtext[/QUOTE]
Read my other one at the bottom of the page.
Someone earlier mentioned the [sp]Spiderman not knowing what Empire Strikes Back was because in a world of superheroes, Star Wars isn't that impressive - just remember in Winter Soldier it's on Cap's list of must see things[/sp]
[QUOTE=Ctrl;50366869]I know the conflict is the focal point, but [B]the conflict should have revolved around heroes that don't want to be controled as they know they are doing the right thing, and those who think freedom to act should not exist.[/B] The problem is making the conflict all about Bucky and some guy's revenge against the heroes.[/QUOTE]
You're wrong in saying they [I]should[/I] have revolved around that and not that they [I]could[/I] have revolved around that. Quality of the comic book aside, I don't think there's anything about the movie that makes it a bad adaptation, but if I had to pinpoint something it certainly wouldn't be that. The shift in focus was so minor [sp]since the regulation argument had been connected to the Bucky one quite a bit anyway[/sp]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
