+ Reply to Thread
Page 593 of 593 FirstFirst ... 93 493 543 583 591 592 593
Results 11,841 to 11,853 of 11853

Thread: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

  1. #11841

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Mario View Post
    I like the Morbius trailer's Fur Elise remix music and design, but that's it. The trailer itself is cliche and it's obvious Sony is being really sleazy in baiting MCU fans to see it when it probably isn't in the MCU at all until further retcon notice like with Venom. Although Spider-Man being shown as a wall mural with murderer spray painted on it is daring and might indicate that there is a valid connection. Who knows. Regardless, this movie's existence is still dumb unless they make it like an actual horror film, which would be ironic because of Doctor Strange 2's development.
    I keep seeing this confusion over what is MCU and what isn't. For context, Sony's been trying to establish a universe since Spiderman 3. Kraven, Mysterio, Morbius, Venom, Vulture etc have all been in development as not only part of Spidey flicks, but their own solo films as well. This universe, that started with Homecoming, has been made for Spidey and his supporting figures. They are further etablishing that this is Spidey's universe. There has been this whole race for Spidey and it played out after FFH dropped.

    So, how could you bait an audience into your own universe? Spidey is in the MCU just as much as he is in his own universe. The truth is that Sony is responsible for Homecoming and FFH, just as much as Disney is. Some of the audience have this way of thinking where everything they like about any of the Spidey films has to be due to Disney. "Disney did this scene or hired this director, writer, actor etc". It has been a collaborative effort and when people admit that they are brainwashed and conditioned by Disney at some capacity, then real conversations can take place. How would someone feel if they found out certain hiring were done by Sony in the collaboration.

    I agree about Red Skull, but this discussion has made me think about the Cap trilogy and in all honesty...

    I like Captain America: The First Avenger the best.Primarily because it doesn't try to frame itself as being anything deeper than a scrawny good-willed kid from Brooklyn signing up for war, getting superpowers, and beating up Nazis with a cute romance to boot. Whereas the sequels try to sound deep but keep pulling half measures to stick with black-and-white conflicts that don't make people think too hard about why they like people in costumes beating people up. Red Skull's lameness is really the only critique I have for First Avenger until I rewatch it.

    I know how much people love MCU Cap and the sequel movies directed by the Russo Brothers, but Cap in those movies always feels like he's on an arrogant convenient pedestal. Always immediately knows what's right and hardly ever wavers in pursuing a naive black-and-white sense of justice even though his modus operandi is reckless as hell. And in all normal circumstances his decisions would be biased and easily backfire like we see with Spider-Man, which would make him a more interesting character if that happened at least once to show how things work differently in present day than the 1940s. But he always manages to be right only because the opposition keeps turning out to be cartoonishly corrupt.



    Winter Soldier Cap: "I don't like the ethically grey stuff SHIELD seems to be doing with secret public surveillance."

    You think that would lead into a movie exploring the ethics of a government using public surveillance technology and other controversial security methods.

    But nope, the government's secretly controlled by Nazis. And not even in an interesting modern far right critique way, but a literal World War II Nazi legacy conspiracy. Because that's not how a real American government would act, but a bunch of bad eggs ruining things for everyone else. And fun fact, the military revoked their funding for Avengers 1 because of that scene where Fury criticizes his political superiors for wanting to bomb New York, but still funded Winter Soldier, a movie that is supposedly about American government critique according to how most people seem to praise it.




    Civil War Cap: "I don't like the government conscripting superheroes according to the whims of political authority and imprisoning those who don't agree, along with pursuing my old best friend who has been brainwashed and reported be a terrorist now."

    You would think that this story would gauge the merits and disadvantages of government-sanctioned heroism and individual vigilantism side-by-side. Especially with the debates amongst the Avengers in the opening scenes. Not to mention making Bucky either an interesting morally ambiguous character with his own destructive sense of justice or see Cap grapple with how Bucky's brainwashing and PTSD might be so severe and easily provoked that maybe the government is justified in wanting to arrest him for public safety even if it's technically unfair. Thus resulting in a film analyzing the full extent of free will and accountability.

    But nope, Scarlet Witch is put under house arrest right before Steve gives Tony's perspective a chance and halfway through the movie we find out that Bucky's terrorism and most of the conflict between the pro-registration and anti-registration sides just happens to be manipulated by a mastermind with a Nazi brainwash codeword handbook. And the story shifts from deconstructing superhero accountability and responsibility to... revenge is bad. And the pro-registration people who want collateral damage accountability and moderation are all emotionally irrational and only want petty revenge, I guess? Is that what I'm supposed to take away from the movie?




    In comparison to those exaggerated threats as a foil, of course Steve Rogers seems cool and ethically sound. And I don't even have a problem with that in itself, I'm always game for black-and-white good vs evil feel good stories that run on emotions more than intellectual debates. I can enjoy Winter Soldier and Civil War when I watch them for the first time without having enough time to process the story themes in my theater seat or go into rewatching them knowing what to expect. But my problem with the sequels is that those antagonists are treated as secret looming threats that take over a more interesting narrative premise.

    So they're good vs evil stories trying to disguise themselves as politically complex films, which only disappoints me. Because it makes me think about if we actually got a politically complex film through and through. It's easy to say that you shouldn't go to superhero stories to find mature storytelling, but that's a load of BS to me, especially after Joker's success.

    Down below is more rambling about what I wish Cap movies would explore, and more about why I liked First Avenger and criticize the sequels:

    Spoiler:
    I want to see stories that show the struggles of how Cap adjusts to modern day, interacts with people, and challenges his methods and political perspective (you can't say that a guy who wears the American flag for a costume isn't political lol). Which can make Cap even more impressive as a result by seeing how he either proves his ideology right against those tempting odds or charismatically matures as a person to show his humility in an inspiring way.

    And yet, the First Avenger still actually has more insightful political intrigue and humanizing moments than the later movies? Like Steve being an illustrator, which I'm sure 90% of audiences completely forgot by now. Or that scene where Steve looks like an idiot when he disobeys orders and dives over a grenade to protect everyone from the explosion, but it's fake. Which is a brief but cool way to show selfless yet goofy and flawed Steve is since he doesn't have powers at that point. Much more charming than spitting cheesy one liners mid-battle. And to this day I still love that musical propaganda montage that perfectly captures the era while poking fun at how over the top patriotism can be. That segment actually explores a more interesting side to Cap as a hero by showing what it's like for him to make staged public appearances and interact with ordinary people.


    That's actually what I was looking forward to seeing more of, Cap being a human being dealing with the pressure of being an inspiring American hero, in Cap 2 juxtaposed with a present day fish out of water setting for a Cap 2 film. But of course played more for drama than solely comedy.

    But then the Winter Soldier subtitle got shown off and revealed that we were skipping Cap adjusting to present day almost entirely besides a few gags to immediately deal with his past haunting him. Oh well. Maybe we'll get this in Falcon and Winter Soldier Disney+ show though. Maybe.

    Now in contrast, Cap sequels and Endgame ground Cap's humanity entirely in either Bucky or his love interests, Peggy and Sharon. But a bunch of problems arise here because Bucky is only ever a victim for Steve to protect or a sparring partner for brief action scenes. He gets brainwashed or killed by villains most of the time. So he feels like an static plot device with little agency as a character, but the movies want me to care about him only because he's Steve's best friend and we only vaguely remember his "death" scene in First Avenger.

    Sharon's an underdeveloped character and that whole relationship is creepy for obvious reasons.

    Steve's relationship with Peggy is good, but she's only a prominent plot focus in First Avenger. So every time she gets referenced or cameos once or twice in feature films, those moments relies on First Avenger nostalgia as a crutch for empathizing with Steve yet can't be appreciated in a vacuum if you haven't seen previous Cap films. But with every year that passes I remember Peggy's presence in First Avenger less and less, which makes those moments less impactful for me because I only have a foggy vignette of Peggy being that one lady Steve wanted to dance with and little else unless I make the effort to rewatch First Avenger side-by-side with newer films. And even then, the movies don't give Steve's grieving moments much room to feel organic and breathe, like when she randomly happens to die in Civil War and Sharon steals Cap's best speech from the comics because why knows why that was a good idea and then the main plot completely unrelated to Peggy has to keep on trucking. So those moments feel tacked on than truly compelling. So while I like Steve's beautiful ending coming full circle with the dance in Endgame, it feels more like a checklist for sending him off than something truly built-up in a movie focusing mostly on time travel and alien shenanigans. Further, at this point I have to wonder if Steve's time travel relationship with Peggy would even realistically work considering how much he's changed as a person since World War II.

    So... I really don't care about Steve's supporting cast, to put it short. But at least Steve shines in First Avenger as a fleshed out character and that movie has a properly focused romance compared to the sequels.

    I suppose the storytelling I want for Cap stories would risk mainstream appeal, profit, and military funding in Marvel Studio's/Disney's eyes, so they don't do it. Even though that is objectively false because again Joker and Old Man Logan and all the other hip new subversive superhero shows exist, but whatever.


    The Cap sequel films are good and entertaining, don't get me wrong. But so many people keep propping them up as politically deep stories when they are not that in the slightest, which admittingly plays a big role in souring them for me so that might be a bit biased although my point still stands. They're merely fun thrillers that run on basic emotional cues tied to your attachment to characters over the years with cool action scenes, not much more than that. And I find the Russos to be overrated as storytellers, but that can be it's own whole essay post.

    If you want to talk about the weakest MCU movies, I argue you're most likely to find them in Phase 3. Plus Ant-Man.
    Well, all 3 movies are MCU Cap. It started with Tony's 1st 2 movies and Disney always planned to get him from Paramount. Feige has talked about this in the past.

    From my perspective, Cap was built up to juxtapose Tony. Both characters had to be balanced to a certain degree. Both were wrong in instances and right as well. They dug deeper into Cap being too much "in the now" in the latter movies, but he was introduced as simple and down to Earth in his 1st movie. That's what happens when you want to pull off a larger scale continuity. Characters become so flexible at their core. They do this in a plethora of stories to snag the audience, then hit you with the "this character is deeper than you thought". It is rare for a character to survive this without inconsistency and a total loss of credible writing.

    I, on the other hand, am a sucker for an antagonist. Like how some prefer great art over great writing in a manga, I put a lot of stock in how the antagonist is set up and handled through the story. Cap 2 and 3 had way better antagonist, and out of the 3, I was most familiar with Red Skull. I liked Cap 1, but it's the weakest link of the 3. Wish it wasn't that way.

  2. #11842
    The Die Has Been Cast Count Mario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Planet Zordoom

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cockycent View Post
    I keep seeing this confusion over what is MCU and what isn't. For context, Sony's been trying to establish a universe since Spiderman 3. Kraven, Mysterio, Morbius, Venom, Vulture etc have all been in development as not only part of Spidey flicks, but their own solo films as well. This universe, that started with Homecoming, has been made for Spidey and his supporting figures. They are further etablishing that this is Spidey's universe. There has been this whole race for Spidey and it played out after FFH dropped.

    So, how could you bait an audience into your own universe? Spidey is in the MCU just as much as he is in his own universe. The truth is that Sony is responsible for Homecoming and FFH, just as much as Disney is. Some of the audience have this way of thinking where everything they like about any of the Spidey films has to be due to Disney. "Disney did this scene or hired this director, writer, actor etc". It has been a collaborative effort and when people admit that they are brainwashed and conditioned by Disney at some capacity, then real conversations can take place. How would someone feel if they found out certain hiring were done by Sony in the collaboration.
    I know all of that. And I actually supported Sony during the whole Spider-Man leaving the MCU fiasco because Sony pours a lot into MCU Spidey film production Disney and has too much of a media monopoly.

    The problem here though is we don't know if the independent Spider-Man universe has actually started yet. Neither do we have any surefire confirmation on yet on Morbius being part of a shared universe. You can guess that it is because Morbius is a Spider-Man villain in the comics, but that's not confirmation and would be like saying the Joker will tie into the DCEU because Joker is known as a Batman villain. But at least with that, DC and Warner Bros went out of their way to say it's a standalone movie, which we do not have with Morbius. Only guesses and teases to, well... bait the audience into watching the movie to see if they get the confirmation from the film itself. Unless you think it's fair for people to have to risk reading spoilers online to find that out if Sony does not give official confirmation.

    We know Sony has been trying to its own Spider-Man universe for years, and maybe wants to have Tom Holland's Spidey, in it. But what I'm emphasizing is how there is no official confirmation yet. Only rumors and speculation based on supposed teases.

    So if they don't announce it prior to the movie's release, they're making viewers pay to watch the movie so they can find out if Morbius will connect to Spider-Man or Venom or Sinister Six of whatever. And people who watch the trailers will go see the movie because they'll look at the Raimi Spider-Man mural and Michael Keaton at the end going, "wait, was that Tom Holland Spider-Man and Vulture?!", even though the former could amount to nothing besides a background reference and Michael Keaton could very well be a different character.

    For all we know, this movie could very well be contained to itself, like Venom was, and that's a character who is much more tied to Spider-Man than Morbius is. Sony definitely wants to start a universe, sure, but how do we know they're going to start crossing over different properties in Morbius of all movies, rather than Venom or even Kraven?

    Despite whatever majority opinion and or reputation there is, or whether they're in the right or wrong of a business dispute, no corporation is your friend. Disney, Sony, or anyone else. They only care about money and have the power to take advantage of people. And if they can get away with it while seeming like they're trendy and appealing, they most likely will because it mostly helps them, not you. Giving them the benefit of the doubt that they'll give you what they seem to promise is exactly what they're counting on you to gullibly do. That's capitalism for you.

    Well, all 3 movies are MCU Cap. It started with Tony's 1st 2 movies and Disney always planned to get him from Paramount. Feige has talked about this in the past.
    Um... of course these movies all feature MCU Cap. I'm saying that I prefer one movie's depiction of the character over the others, not implying that they're completely different characters.

    From my perspective, Cap was built up to juxtapose Tony. Both characters had to be balanced to a certain degree. Both were wrong in instances and right as well. They dug deeper into Cap being too much "in the now" in the latter movies, but he was introduced as simple and down to Earth in his 1st movie. That's what happens when you want to pull off a larger scale continuity. Characters become so flexible at their core. They do this in a plethora of stories to snag the audience, then hit you with the "this character is deeper than you thought". It is rare for a character to survive this without inconsistency and a total loss of credible writing.
    I have always seen how Steve and Tony are meant to parallel each other. You are completely right about that.

    But the parallel never really works for me because it's always Tony who has to be the flawed perspective. Not once have I felt like Tony had an interesting moral high ground over or even on the same level as Cap. The only times Cap falters post-gaining powers in these films is not saving Bucky (which wasn't his fault), not preventing the explosion in the beginning of Civil War (which is only used as a plot device for the Accords and not something Cap himself is actually criticized for by someone we're meant to agree with), not telling Tony about who killed his parents (which was selfish but he did it because he thought Tony couldn't handle it, and guess what, he ended up being right because Tony tried to kill an innocent brainwashed man), and failing to stop Thanos' snap (but EVERYONE failed at that, especially Quill and Thor, aside from maybe Dr. Strange).

    Yet despite that, this makes me more interested in Tony as a character than Cap because Tony's flaws are at least interesting to explore even if it's obvious he's in the wrong. And Tony at least tries to alter his methods, like making robot drones evacuate and safeguard people in Age of Ultron and giving superhero registration, but those actions backfire because of his ego and/or because Marvel wants him to backfire without focusing on his merits. Meanwhile, Cap's behavior is predictable and often disingenuous with how I see his traditional SWAT team and "let's beat the bad guy up to save the day" methods turning out if they actually happened in real life without a convenient irredeemable villain puppeteering the situation the shadows. Normally I can ignore whether or not superheroes are realistic crusaders of justice for suspension of disbelief, but Civil War wants to put a magnifying glass on the issue so I have to acknowledge it.

    Notice how in Civil War, Cap never really gives a solid retort or changes his approach in response to the criticism for the collateral damage that his team failed preventing in Lagos when apprehending Crossbones. All we get is him telling Wanda something along the lines of "people die, but all we can do is try our best, and if we don't act we can't help anyone." Which is a cute uplifting truism, but is so obvious and complacent that it doesn't mean anything when lives are at stake, and is reasonably not enough for governments to be okay with. It would be fine if a cop or FBI agent said that because they're adhering to the best protocol they have, but Cap follows his own rules, so he's not exempt from the criticism. The superhero registration is extreme, inefficient, and corrupt. It's not the right way (My Hero Academia does a way better job of showing that type of thing). But that doesn't make Cap's side all that agreeable either, yet the movie keeps trying to make it sound like it is. Which Infinity War emphasizes even further when the characters band together and acknowledge the Accords as being pointless, so there's no room whatsoever to see flaws with Cap from the movie's perspective.

    I, on the other hand, am a sucker for an antagonist. Like how some prefer great art over great writing in a manga, I put a lot of stock in how the antagonist is set up and handled through the story. Cap 2 and 3 had way better antagonist, and out of the 3, I was most familiar with Red Skull. I liked Cap 1, but it's the weakest link of the 3. Wish it wasn't that way.
    I love great antagonists, but a superhero movie won't ride or die by solely that aspect for me. Sort of like how I only love The Dark Knight for Joker but could care less for Bale's Batman. A great hero or a great villain can carry a movie even if you find the other side lacking. But whether or not they can do that is subjective, so I can respect that.

    If you didn't like Red Skull, what appeals to you about Winter Soldier, HYDRA, and Zemo in comparison? I'm not fans of any of them, but I'm always curious to hear differing opinions.
    Last edited by Count Mario; January 13th, 2020 at 09:19 PM.

    Spoiler:
    "Life's not about finding out which card is yours, but finding out which cards you're not."

  3. #11843

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    I liked the first Cap film.

    I did not enjoy the Russo films. That includes both of their Avengers movies.

    I know, lotta people's favorites, and they're well done, and have great moments in them, I won't argue that. I'm not in any way saying they're bad. I can see that they're good movies.

    But overall I did not enjoy them.

    They all lacked fun, and felt overlong. (Yes, there were fun moments. But they were *moments*) Heck, if Civil War didn't have the airport sequence with Spiderman and Ant Man to mix things up it would have been pretty joyless. Avengers 3 and 4 combined were nearly 6 hours long and they FELT like it. I know showing off the entire MCU and giving dozens of characters plot lines pads out the run time, but...
    To support Viz hosting all Jump manga for FREE and day of release, Arlong Park will now support the official release.
    https://www.viz.com/shonenjump

    Official chapter discussions now start Sundays at Noon, EST.
    Please do not post threads when scan sites release their version, and just discuss those releases in the spoiler thread.

  4. #11844

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    This is what gets so frustrating, some people get annoyed when the marvel movies are all jokes and fun and not serious enough, then other people are the complete opposite and think the ones with no jokes are overly serious and take themselves to seriously

    It's living proof that you can't satisfy everyone, regardless of how good it is someone out there won't be satisfied for the exact same reason someone else loves it

  5. #11845

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Mario View Post
    I know all of that. And I actually supported Sony during the whole Spider-Man leaving the MCU fiasco because Sony pours a lot into MCU Spidey film production Disney and has too much of a media monopoly.

    The problem here though is we don't know if the independent Spider-Man universe has actually started yet. Neither do we have any surefire confirmation on yet on Morbius being part of a shared universe. You can guess that it is because Morbius is a Spider-Man villain in the comics, but that's not confirmation and would be like saying the Joker will tie into the DCEU because Joker is known as a Batman villain. But at least with that, DC and Warner Bros went out of their way to say it's a standalone movie, which we do not have with Morbius. Only guesses and teases to, well... bait the audience into watching the movie to see if they get the confirmation from the film itself. Unless you think it's fair for people to have to risk reading spoilers online to find that out if Sony does not give official confirmation.
    Before Iron Man came out, Marvel was vocal about him heading the MCU. When you watch Iron Man, the most you get is Nick Fury and don't fully comprehend how this "universe" will work. Venom was flaunted around as the first non Spidey flick that further expands Spidey's universe. Not hearsay, it was part of it's campaign. Reuben was making this clear during the press tour that this further expands the universe and that the studio has been obdurate about him leaving room for Holland to hop in when necessary. Feige (Disney/Marvel) has also spoken about the partnership and how both universes will flourish from it. Avi and Amy who are producers have talked about this universe as well after they trashed Black and Silver.

    So, the independent universe has been confirmed for a while and began once Homecoming came out. Disney/Marvel's characters are just using him for as long as they can. Vulture is Sony's character, not Disney/Marvel. This was part of why Sony didn't care if Disney wants to continue or not because they have their own universe already which started with Homecoming. Outside of Happy, Fury, Pepper, and some other MCU characters, over 90% of the story and characters from Homecoming and FFH would be used.

    The DCEU is different. They aren't that vocal about plans. I won't go into how their lack of transparency sucks, but yeah. It took a while for someone to confirm that Joker is a standalone. They are still being weird about Reeve's Batman. Reeves has gone between this is a standalone and being vague.


    We know Sony has been trying to its own Spider-Man universe for years, and maybe wants to have Tom Holland's Spidey, in it. But what I'm emphasizing is how there is no official confirmation yet. Only rumors and speculation based on supposed teases.

    So if they don't announce it prior to the movie's release, they're making viewers pay to watch the movie so they can find out if Morbius will connect to Spider-Man or Venom or Sinister Six of whatever. And people who watch the trailers will go see the movie because they'll look at the Raimi Spider-Man mural and Michael Keaton at the end going, "wait, was that Tom Holland Spider-Man and Vulture?!", even though the former could amount to nothing besides a background reference and Michael Keaton could very well be a different character.

    For all we know, this movie could very well be contained to itself, like Venom was, and that's a character who is much more tied to Spider-Man than Morbius is. Sony definitely wants to start a universe, sure, but how do we know they're going to start crossing over different properties in Morbius of all movies, rather than Venom or even Kraven?

    Despite whatever majority opinion and or reputation there is, or whether they're in the right or wrong of a business dispute, no corporation is your friend. Disney, Sony, or anyone else. They only care about money and have the power to take advantage of people. And if they can get away with it while seeming like they're trendy and appealing, they most likely will because it mostly helps them, not you. Giving them the benefit of the doubt that they'll give you what they seem to promise is exactly what they're counting on you to gullibly do. That's capitalism for you.


    Um... of course these movies all feature MCU Cap. I'm saying that I prefer one movie's depiction of the character over the others, not implying that they're completely different characters.



    I have always seen how Steve and Tony are meant to parallel each other. You are completely right about that.

    But the parallel never really works for me because it's always Tony who has to be the flawed perspective. Not once have I felt like Tony had an interesting moral high ground over or even on the same level as Cap. The only times Cap falters post-gaining powers in these films is not saving Bucky (which wasn't his fault), not preventing the explosion in the beginning of Civil War (which is only used as a plot device for the Accords and not something Cap himself is actually criticized for by someone we're meant to agree with), not telling Tony about who killed his parents (which was selfish but he did it because he thought Tony couldn't handle it, and guess what, he ended up being right because Tony tried to kill an innocent brainwashed man), and failing to stop Thanos' snap (but EVERYONE failed at that, especially Quill and Thor, aside from maybe Dr. Strange).

    Yet despite that, this makes me more interested in Tony as a character than Cap because Tony's flaws are at least interesting to explore even if it's obvious he's in the wrong. And Tony at least tries to alter his methods, like making robot drones evacuate and safeguard people in Age of Ultron and giving superhero registration, but those actions backfire because of his ego and/or because Marvel wants him to backfire without focusing on his merits. Meanwhile, Cap's behavior is predictable and often disingenuous with how I see his traditional SWAT team and "let's beat the bad guy up to save the day" methods turning out if they actually happened in real life without a convenient irredeemable villain puppeteering the situation the shadows. Normally I can ignore whether or not superheroes are realistic crusaders of justice for suspension of disbelief, but Civil War wants to put a magnifying glass on the issue so I have to acknowledge it.

    Notice how in Civil War, Cap never really gives a solid retort or changes his approach in response to the criticism for the collateral damage that his team failed preventing in Lagos when apprehending Crossbones. All we get is him telling Wanda something along the lines of "people die, but all we can do is try our best, and if we don't act we can't help anyone." Which is a cute uplifting truism, but is so obvious and complacent that it doesn't mean anything when lives are at stake, and is reasonably not enough for governments to be okay with. It would be fine if a cop or FBI agent said that because they're adhering to the best protocol they have, but Cap follows his own rules, so he's not exempt from the criticism. The superhero registration is extreme, inefficient, and corrupt. It's not the right way (My Hero Academia does a way better job of showing that type of thing). But that doesn't make Cap's side all that agreeable either, yet the movie keeps trying to make it sound like it is. Which Infinity War emphasizes even further when the characters band together and acknowledge the Accords as being pointless, so there's no room whatsoever to see flaws with Cap from the movie's perspective.


    I love great antagonists, but a superhero movie won't ride or die by solely that aspect for me. Sort of like how I only love The Dark Knight for Joker but could care less for Bale's Batman. A great hero or a great villain can carry a movie even if you find the other side lacking. But whether or not they can do that is subjective, so I can respect that.

    If you didn't like Red Skull, what appeals to you about Winter Soldier, HYDRA, and Zemo in comparison? I'm not fans of any of them, but I'm always curious to hear differing opinions.
    Amy and Avi have said that the Spidey verse is real. I don't get where you feel like it's a tease. I've already expounded on this with Iron Man 1. If no one says these things, i'm fully with you that it's weirdly in the air and not confirmed. When the actual producers and directors say that it's real, I have to disagree. The writer for Homecoming has said that the universe is real. The trailer for Morbius further establishes what has been said.

    When it comes to the Cap films, all of them carried the same level of gravity to me. Winter Soldier captured that the best tho. The presence of Fury made it even better. The more Fury, the better. Plus the main antagonist wasn't combative and didn't fit the "formula". I love that

  6. #11846

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiebs View Post
    This is what gets so frustrating, some people get annoyed when the marvel movies are all jokes and fun and not serious enough, then other people are the complete opposite and think the ones with no jokes are overly serious and take themselves to seriously
    Not throwing anyone under the bus but those people occasionally tend to be one and the same.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ubiq View Post
    I've often wondered about that myself; seems like being supported by people who only want you there so the world can end in fire (with you going to Hell in the process) would be somewhat off-putting
    3DS Friend Code 0044-2806-5284




  7. #11847

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    Quote Originally Posted by Green_vs_Red View Post
    Not throwing anyone under the bus but those people occasionally tend to be one and the same.
    Lol this is unfortunately true sometimes

  8. #11848

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    So are they not making a Hawkeye tv show now?

  9. #11849

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    You are the one that brought it up, you tell me.

  10. #11850

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    That rumor hasn't been confirmed so (or seemingly debunked).
    Quote Originally Posted by Ubiq View Post
    I've often wondered about that myself; seems like being supported by people who only want you there so the world can end in fire (with you going to Hell in the process) would be somewhat off-putting
    3DS Friend Code 0044-2806-5284




  11. #11851

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    Hawkeye's tv show was never a rumor. They've had 3 shows greenlighted since Infinity War. They confirmed 5 last year with WandaVision, Hawkeye, Falcon and the Winter Soldier, Loki and What If.

    After that, they confirmed Moon Knight, She Hulk and Ms. Marvel

  12. #11852

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    The rumor I'm referring to and which Shiebs was referring to was about it's supposed cancellation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ubiq View Post
    I've often wondered about that myself; seems like being supported by people who only want you there so the world can end in fire (with you going to Hell in the process) would be somewhat off-putting
    3DS Friend Code 0044-2806-5284




  13. #11853

    Default Re: Marvel Movies Thread: Excelsior!

    The Rumor was postponed, not cancelled and last I checked it was debunked.

    So as of right now a Hawkeye show is still 100% happening.
    Switch Friend Code: SW-1795-2519-1884 Click Here to check out my Twitch Channel[/CENTER]

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts