[url]http://observationdeck.io9.com/captain-america-the-winter-soldier-and-the-secrets-of-1558072929/1559129940/+rtgonzalez/+rtgonzalez[/url]
article that seems to point out a lot of things from the film
most of it i caught on as it came by but there were a few things i did not know, which is cool.
of course, don't click if you haven't seen winter soldier yet.
ok so, according to that article, the [spoilers to other marvel movies, not specifically cap2] [sp]thing at the end of loki's staff is the mind gem. we already know the tesseract is the space gem, and the aether is the power gem. how would they even portray the other gems, i wonder? especially the soul gem, since they haven't exactly mentioned any sort of afterlife except for in that one AoS episode[/sp]
[sp] Soul gem will prolly be what SL is trying to steal at the beginning of GotG [/sp]
[QUOTE=DrPyspy;44473701]I want a doctor strange movie[/QUOTE]
I think it's going to be the unannounced movie in 2016!
I was surprised how empty the 2D showing of CA2 was yesterday, I thought it would be packed considering 1. It was opening weekend 2. there was only 4 2D showings (2 Sat, 2 Sun) the entire weekend.
but it was only about 1/2 full.
Guess everyone went to the 3D version.
I hope Marvel will get eaten by hubris, and Superman vs Batman will crush them in the boxoffice, just for sake of the competition: [url=http://variety.com/2014/film/news/captain-america-3-set-for-may-6-2016-1201153550/]Now, officially - Captain America 3 set for May 6, 2016, the same date as next movie about Superman[/url]
[QUOTE=Joz;44478691]I hope Marvel will get eaten by hubris, and Superman vs Batman will crush them in the boxoffice, just for sake of the competition: [url=http://variety.com/2014/film/news/captain-america-3-set-for-may-6-2016-1201153550/]Now, officially - Captain America 3 set for May 6, 2016, the same date as next movie about Superman[/url][/QUOTE]
But why? Marvel at least tried to do something new with assembling a universe and it really paid off. They are just doing it better than DC, so they are allowed to be successful like this.
[QUOTE=Joz;44478691]I hope Marvel will get eaten by hubris, and Superman vs Batman will crush them in the boxoffice, just for sake of the competition: [url=http://variety.com/2014/film/news/captain-america-3-set-for-may-6-2016-1201153550/]Now, officially - Captain America 3 set for May 6, 2016, the same date as next movie about Superman[/url][/QUOTE]
It's more likely DC will change their date for Batman vs Superman.
I have to admit, I haven't even seen CA2 and I'd watch CA3 instead of Batman vs Superman, especially because TDKR and MoS weren't good.
[QUOTE=Zuimzado;44478733]It's more likely DC will change their date for Batman vs Superman.
I have to admit, I haven't even seen CA2 and I'd watch CA3 instead of Batman vs Superman, especially because TDKR and MoS weren't good.[/QUOTE]
TDKR was pretty good.
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;44478889]TDKR was pretty good.[/QUOTE]
[sp]UUUU[/sp]
Even as a massive Batman and Superman fan, I'm not even remotely interested in Batman vs Superman. I rank mischaracterising Superman as one of the top biggest sins someone can commit next to spoiling Silent Hill games.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;44479450]Even as a massive Batman and Superman fan, I'm not even remotely interested in Batman vs Superman. I rank mischaracterising Superman as one of the top biggest sins someone can commit next to spoiling Silent Hill games.[/QUOTE]
After Man of Steel, I have pretty much no faith in Batman Vs. Superman. DC/Warner Bros. just isn't good at this.
[QUOTE=Whatsinaname;44479586]After Man of Steel, I have pretty much no faith in Batman Vs. Superman. DC/Warner Bros. just isn't good at this.[/QUOTE]
I think Superman is hard to write for modern audiences, some people seem to be just too jaded for good guys. I don't know.
[QUOTE=Pops;44478897][sp]UUUU[/sp][/QUOTE]
It works well as a comedy:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20K6Tq3Q3W0[/media]
[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;44479450]Even as a massive Batman and Superman fan, I'm not even remotely interested in Batman vs Superman. I rank mischaracterising Superman as one of the top biggest sins someone can commit next to spoiling Silent Hill games.[/QUOTE]
Define "mischaracterising" without using "muh no-killing rule" as an argument.
[QUOTE=Joz;44478691]I hope Marvel will get eaten by hubris, and Superman vs Batman will crush them in the boxoffice, just for sake of the competition[/QUOTE]
pls no
the whole "dark and gritty" (aka bland and generic) thing is EVERYWHERE, i'd rather have batman vs superman be a disaster so that dc finally realizes that isn't the way to go
[QUOTE=Joz;44479633]Define "mischaracterising" without using "muh no-killing rule" as an argument.[/QUOTE]
Might as well ask someone to draw a circle without using curved lines.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;44479701]Might as well ask someone to draw a circle without using curved lines.[/QUOTE]
Superman has killed before, he wasn't mischaracterised.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;44479701]Might as well ask someone to draw a circle without using curved lines.[/QUOTE]If Superman, from the very beginning would be all like "I have very strong moral compass and scout's honor I'll never do harm to any living human being", the main complaint would be that he's old-fashioned and totally unfitted to the current times. Because why would he be like that? Because he's good inside? Sorry, it's not the sixties, nobody's gonna buy that crap. So when instead writers give us a solid foundation to believe that yeah, he has a reason to not kill anybody - he did once, had no choice, felt awful afterwards, end of story, then people like you refuse seeing the bigger picture and complain "But he doesn't kill, end of story". Think about it like about Batman - his character would be rather confusing and messed up without the story about killing his parents in the back alley. Fuck, even complaining that they stole this plotline from Batman makes more sense than such whining.
I said it before - Man of Steel is a faulty film. Generally it doesn't even qualify as a decent film. It has plenty of mistakes, and wrongdoings, but for certain, Superman killing anyone is not one of them.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;44479701]Might as well ask someone to draw a circle without using curved lines.[/QUOTE]
Supermans killed the fuck out of Zod like 5 times in the comics.
[QUOTE=Joz;44479633]
Define "mischaracterising" without using "muh no-killing rule" as an argument.[/QUOTE]
How about gigantic, destruction-porn battles where Superman most likely kills more people just so we can have him and his enemies go boom boom and have the people with short attention span go yay yay?
How about the movie trying to make us feel for Superman finally kissing Lois... in the middle of a completely destroyed Metropolis?
And the "muh no-killing rule" thing is stupid, because that's what Superman is about. There was a Superman comic released last week- [I]last week[/I]- where Superman finally faced against someone who tried to kill Wonder Woman, destroyed an entire race of underground creatures, tried to kill him, forcefully raised the dead against their own will to fight for her, and when he could have easily killed her, he just didn't.
Perhaps with Batman this would have been more accepted, but Superman is a character who should exhale and mean hope in a thousand different languages. He's the person we should strive to be, someone who keeps up his morals even in the face of tragedy. And are you seriously telling me that he couldn't have done anything else to save those [I]three people?[/I]
Oh, and you know what? Maybe that bullshit scene would have gone down a little better... if he didn't get over it [I]five seconds later.[/I]
I remember, specficially, there was a comic where he was forced to ice Zod and two other kryptonians because they destroyed an entire alternate earth and were going to do the same to the regular DC earth.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;44480196]I remember, specficially, there was a comic where he was forced to ice Zod and two other kryptonians because they destroyed an entire alternate earth and were going to do the same to the regular DC earth.[/QUOTE]
You're comparing a Superman who was faced Zod thousands of times to one that should be just beginning.
Realistically, the next thing the Man of Steel Superman should do was go "huh, that was easy" and just start killing any bad guys that show up. We see no reason for him to be crying and sobbing (not that he does that) because he hasn't been a hero apart from defeating the evil Hans Zimmer machines, and even then, a heck of a lot of people died. So why doesn't he feel bad about that? What morals does this new Superman have, who hasn't had any real forays into superheroism, compared to the Superman of the comics, who has saved the Earth a bajillion of times, and who has a set of morals so strong, is so beloved by the people of Earth as a paragon of justice, that when he kills someone we truly understand that this is something he would never want to do?
Like, seriously, who's going to look at him somberly and go "what have you done?" His crazy, wack-ass dad? Lois Lane? Lawrence Fishburne? The people of Earth should be like "oh shit, he killed that guy, he's a killer".
Just look at another DC property, the TV show Arrow. For most of Season 1, Green Arrow kills people, and is referred to as the Vigilante. People see him as a threat. But a big event changes his viewpoint in the Season 1 finale. He wants to be something else; a hero. And to do that, he can't kill anymore. People call out on him, some say he's weak now, and some say it's a matter of time before he kills again. But he doesn't, and then people start calling him Arrow, and people start believing in him as a hero.
The only good thing I can say about Man of Steel was how "welcome to the planet" was the most amazing line it could have possibly ended on. Even if the movie was good, that's something that would have to stay.
Man of Steel was pretty bad. That's one of the reasons why I'm not really thrilled about SvsB or whatever it's going to be called. Plus we have very little info so far.
But DC needs to step it up. One thing I have to give Marvel (besides how to make entertaining movies most of the time) is they embrace a lot from the comics. They aren't afraid to go super sci-fi/fantasy instead of dark and realistic. Nolan had an interesting vision for Batman but now I fear every DC movie will follow that formula (and will probably fail and be another boring film).
I wonder if we ever get a Batman movie that looks like the Arkham games. They are also dark and serious but they aren't ashamed to use all sorts of weird, unrealistic but awesome shit to paint their world.
Anyway, enough about DC. I'm surprised Marvel has plans for so many movies. Hollywood found their new source of money. At this rate I could see people getting tired of all these superhero movies.
[QUOTE=Marden;44480653]
I wonder if we ever get a Batman movie that looks like the Arkham games. They are also dark and serious but they aren't ashamed to use all sorts of weird, unrealistic but awesome shit to paint their world.[/QUOTE]
This, exactly this.
If you stop and think about it, Marvel movies are stupid. I think someone said it best when they mentioned how the recent Marvel movies are the original comics run of these characters in film form. I mean, look at the Avengers: some guy invents an improbable suit, a super-soldier from World War II, a guy who gets green and big when he gets angry, a Nordic god, some guy who's really good with arrows, a super-spy, and a leader with an eyepatch join up to fight an evil Nordic god and evil aliens with space worms.
Do you realize how dumb that sounds? Yet the Marvel movies go "yeah, it's dumb, but that doesn't mean we can't tell good stories with good characters" and that's just what they do.
The Nolan movies felt like they were ashamed at the Batman legacy, like how they transformed Bane from a bad-ass mercenary to... whatever the bane in the movie was. The Batman franchise is one where a guy wearing a pig costume goes around with a guy wearing a frog costume and beat up people in the name of the environment. The Batman franchise is one where we have a dude stuck inside an ice suit with an ice gun. But the Nolan movies turned their back to that in the idea of being dark and gritty because that's what people want.
Maybe that's what we wanted after Batman and Robin, but, you know what? It's not what we need now. We need movies that accept how cheesy and dumb the ideas behind them are but still treat it with enough respect to craft good stories.
[QUOTE=Whatsinaname;44480624]The only good thing I can say about Man of Steel was how "welcome to the planet" was the most amazing line it could have possibly ended on. Even if the movie was good, that's something that would have to stay.[/QUOTE]
I'll give it that the trailers were brilliant, the first ones I mean with either Jonathan Kent or Jor-El (with a speech taken from All-Star Superman) narrating.
[QUOTE=Zuimzado;44480194]And the "muh no-killing rule" thing is stupid, because that's what Superman is about. There was a Superman comic released last week- [I]last week[/I]- where Superman finally faced against someone who tried to kill Wonder Woman, destroyed an entire race of underground creatures, tried to kill him, forcefully raised the dead against their own will to fight for her, and when he could have easily killed her, he just didn't. [/QUOTE]
Once again, you fail to see the bigger picture.
Man of Steel serves as an origin story, and they are defined by different set of rules. In here we have a young Clark Kent, who knows shit about being a superhero. He has it in his bones when he's young and subconsciously uses his powers to "do the right thing" (as seen with the bus). The problem is, that he doesn't know what to do, because who was supposed to teach him this? His father Jonathan Kent, that was butchered in this film: "Stop my invincible son, I'll gladly sacrifice myself because I have a wrong feeling about humanity" (his character in the film was atrocious, but that's for another discussion. He was presented as a good father to Clark, but absolutely awful mentor to Superman). He doesn't know anything, he cannot tame his powers. Everything he wants is to find out about who he really is and what is the meaning of this. And when he does, he [i]accidentally[/i] makes Earth the target of ultimate annihilation. That's the first time when he launches his moral compass (shown in a cheesy and forced scene in a church). He believes that if that if there's a chance to avoid this, maybe he should take it and go into unknown - because albeit he's an alien, it's his mother's home, his father's home, that qt3.14 from Daily Planet's home and deeply in his heart - his own.
And later everything he does, is for sake of saving the Earth, holding to that first, primitive thought. This [b]includes[/b] what you called a "destruction-porn battles". You forgot that a) at this point he's new to this superhero crap and he's a shit superhero; b) his enemy is a guy not only strong as himself, but trained his entire life to be a warrior, it's his destiny. And it makes sense, because as said in the beginning - it's an origin story, and they are defined by different sets of rules. It's not like Superman is destroying everything on purpose. If you'll look closely (or just pay attention to the film) you'll notice that most of the damage is done by Zod, or by Superman [b]trying to drag Zod away from the Metropolis.[/b] Would like a cheesy narrative by Clark "I need to prevent Zod from destroying the city any means possible" to explain that? I certainly wouldn't, this film had enough of cheesy lines.
What's more important, the entire destruction wasn't just for sake of cool effects and pouring more than a half of the budget into the CGI department. What in my opinion was obvious, it was to have something to work with in the sequel. We've seen absolutely zero reaction from so called people going "yay yay". Nothing. And here comes Lex Luthor that will try for certain villainify Superman, because that's his role. And people will believe it - because he wrecked entire town. Because his powers are seemingly unlimited, because he killed with cold blood the only other guy from his kind. It's irrelevant what was the truth, people will believe what they are told to believe. But will Superman stop being Superman just because someone will start talking shit about him? Nope, he will keep fighting, because he's beneath all of this. He wants to "exhale and mean hope in a thousand different languages". And eventually he will. And that's a great foundation for next film.
[QUOTE=Zuimzado;44480194]Perhaps with Batman this would have been more accepted, but Superman is a character who should exhale and mean hope in a thousand different languages. He's the person we should strive to be, someone who keeps up his morals even in the face of tragedy. And are you seriously telling me that he couldn't have done anything else to save those [I]three people?[/I][/quote]No, it wouldn't. It's Batman's role to always coming out of the situation his way. He can create the most incredible stuff just to not break his one rule and it works, because he's super smart, his brain is his biggest power.
Superman is essentially this ultra good guy, who is supposed to do only good things. And because of that, he can be easily exploited. I will take a Superman who makes mistakes but afterwards learns from them everyday over a Superman who waves to everybody and his main function is to help grannies with their groceries and saves stranded kitties. Mostly because I wasn't born in the 40s, and I don't need overly idealistic superhero to keep my patriotic spirit and belief about American dream still going.
i liked man of steel, sue me.
i think it serves as a pretty great basis for the dccu, think of it as issue #0. the world has never seen anything on the scale of this before, there are no superheroes, there are no supervillains. superman is both new to the extent of his own powers, as well as new to the world.
[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;44482413]the world has never seen anything on the scale of this before, there are no superheroes, there are no supervillains. superman is both new to the extent of his own powers, as well as new to the world.[/QUOTE]
hmm yes really original, we've never seen that before (except for every other superhero movie out there)
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;44482598]hmm yes really original, we've never seen that before (except for every other superhero movie out there)[/QUOTE]
wow it's almost like every other superhero movie out there is in their own universe and not a part of a larger scheme like the mcu or the dccu.
weird huh?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
