Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 4:04:46 GMT
Actually, the distinction between Marvel Studios productions and movies that are based on Marvel properties has become more apparent by general audiences, as soon phase one was completed with The Avengers people really started to see the difference between a legitimate Marvel movie where they are calling every shot( Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, etc.) to one which is based on their properties but primarily produced by a different party altogether( The X-Men's, the Spider-Man's, the Blades, the Ghost Riders, the Punishers, etc.) It's helped Marvel out a lot that with pretty much all their releases they use the "Marvel Studios" block on top of the logos for their films and have a special title sequence to play in front of each. Secondly, its clear as day that the X-Men movies do not occupy the same world as the Marvel Studios movies do, there is just too much in both franchises that contradicts the other its just impossible to think it were any other way. And both iterations of Quicksilver appear too vastly different to be the same exact character, and it wouldn't line up at all to think for one second that Quicksilver in DOFP is the same as the one in AoU, in DOFP Quicksilver is in his twenties and its in the 1970s, in AoU it is the 2010's and Quicksilver is not a mutant but an experiment with a very thick accent. It's called suspension of disbelief. Recasting roles in franchises is nothing new, the James Bond franchise - which you ironically used to defend WB's decision making with this Joker origins movie, has done it before and will continue to do so. Have a problem with it? Blame Howard and Norton for not being more professional and wanting to play ball. Why should I blame Howard for asking for a raise? He's not in movies for free. It's his livelihood. There's nothing wrong with him asking for a raise for doing his job any more than a elementary school teacher or a nurse at a hospital asking their boss for a raise. SO you think any school teacher or nurse who asks their boss for a raise should be fired too?
MCU has made billions so it's not like MCU couldn't afford to give Howard a raise. So no, I don't blame Howard at all for simply asking for a raise for doing his job. I blame his greedy employer who refused to give him a raise even though they've made billions.
So what are your thoughts on the DCEU's upcoming reboot? What will the new DC cinematic universe be like now that this one is dying?
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 24, 2017 4:07:57 GMT
The Flash has been on Legends of Tomorrow. In fact, Supergirl, The Flash, Arrow, and Legends of Tomorrow had a 4-way crossover last season and will have another 4-way crossover this season.
Powerless is a show about non-super-powered beings living in a world of superheroes. The main characters are non-super-powered beings. So it makes sense that they didn't have any of the major superheroes on it.
why not have Diana and Arthur pop up on CW then, hmmm? After all, you say that by having the movies and TV shows separate there is unlimited freedom for these shows, also why we're at it here's a good one to ask - Where the hell is Batman on any of those shows? He's been referenced as well, and considering Gotham is another universe in itself what gives then, right? For the same reason that Diana didn't help Superman in his battle against Zod and the Kryptonians in MoS. Because Diana lives in Paris, not Metropolis.
Similarly for the CW TV shows, Supergirl takes place in National City, The Flash takes place in Central City, and Arrow takes place in Star City. Diana and Arthur and Batman don't live in National City or Central City or Star City. And the Legends are on a ship traveling back and forth through time.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 24, 2017 4:09:56 GMT
Very well, and because you only saw the first episode and nothing else you don't have the merit to call the series "the worst superhero show ever made" as you often do - you need to see the full season to make such judgement.Very well, and because you only saw the first episode and nothing else you don't have the merit to call the series "the worst superhero show ever made" as you often do - you need to see the full season to make such judgement. No, I don't. Watching 1 full episode is enough to judge a TV show. I've tried to explain this to you MCU fans many times before, but you're slow at getting things. MCU is dumb to try to connect the TV shows with the movies because TV and movies are 2 different mediums. When viewers go to watch a movie, even if the movie starts off really slow and boring, they'll probably stay to see the entire movie because it's just 2 hours or so. But if a TV show starts off really slow and boring, viewers aren't going to spend 13 hours (for a short series) or 22 hours (for a full series) watching the entire season. So a TV show has to get viewers interested with the pilot episode. Moreover, when TV shows are pitched to network executives, network executives will watch the pilot episode and make a decision whether or not to pick up the TV show based on what they see in the pilot episode. Network executives don't watch an entire season to make their decision. Similarly, when Emmy voters vote for the best TV shows, they don't watch the entire season of all the nominated shows. They only watch 1 episode of each nominated show and make their decision based on 1 episode. So it's entirely fair to judge a TV show by its pilot episode only. And Jessica Jones' pilot episode was really boring and crappy so I stopped watching the rest of the series. And it's entirely fair and valid for me to call Jessica Jones the worst superhero TV show ever based on its pilot episode, because that's how TV shows are judged, by network executives as well as Emmy voters. Never Say Never Again was not produced by Eon Productions and isn't considered part of continuity with the James Bond franchise as a whole, complicated filming rights to the novel Thunderball got it up and running and with Sean Connery back as 007 it was hard to say no to it given how he was still the most popular Bond portrayer. The movie didn't do bad critically, however it made quite a bit less than Octopussy, the legitimate Bond sequel, earlier that year. It was an ironic turn of events, as people thought NSNA would make more because of Connery's involvement, but that was simply not the case. Nevertheless, it's still the same scenario you claimed would confuse viewers about DC. 2 movies released just months apart about the same character but played by 2 different actors. And just as general movie audiences don't make a distinction between Marvel movies produced by Fox vs MCU, they don't make a distinction between James Bond movies produced by 2 different production companies. No, watching one episode, the first one especially, is NOT enough to judge an entire series. You cannot watch the first episodes of The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, American Gods, Hannibal, or Westworld and make final judgement then and there. To properly judge the series as a whole you do need to watch them in their entirety as they intend to tell season long to series long story arcs. It's like reading a book but only stopping on page one. Most scholars of the medium of TV and professional critics of the medium would agree that you cannot judge a whole show by just its first episode is not a good and healthy way to critique a program unless the episode itself is part of an anthology series like The Twilight Zone where its entire arc is told in one show. No, it is not the same scenario. Rights to adapt Fleming's novel were complicated and thus allowed another studio to produce a version of their own with Connery back in the role. The Joker stand-alone movie and the rest of the DCEU is produced all by Warner Bros. so its a pointless and confusing business venture. You also forgot to note that Never Say Never Again did NOT make as much as the in-continuity Octopussy of that same year. People these days are aware what is and what isn't MCU, I cannot for the life of me recall anybody asking where were The Avengers in Logan on any website I've ever visited talking about it.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 24, 2017 4:11:54 GMT
Actually, the distinction between Marvel Studios productions and movies that are based on Marvel properties has become more apparent by general audiences, as soon phase one was completed with The Avengers people really started to see the difference between a legitimate Marvel movie where they are calling every shot( Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, etc.) to one which is based on their properties but primarily produced by a different party altogether( The X-Men's, the Spider-Man's, the Blades, the Ghost Riders, the Punishers, etc.) It's helped Marvel out a lot that with pretty much all their releases they use the "Marvel Studios" block on top of the logos for their films and have a special title sequence to play in front of each. Secondly, its clear as day that the X-Men movies do not occupy the same world as the Marvel Studios movies do, there is just too much in both franchises that contradicts the other its just impossible to think it were any other way. And both iterations of Quicksilver appear too vastly different to be the same exact character, and it wouldn't line up at all to think for one second that Quicksilver in DOFP is the same as the one in AoU, in DOFP Quicksilver is in his twenties and its in the 1970s, in AoU it is the 2010's and Quicksilver is not a mutant but an experiment with a very thick accent. It's called suspension of disbelief. Recasting roles in franchises is nothing new, the James Bond franchise - which you ironically used to defend WB's decision making with this Joker origins movie, has done it before and will continue to do so. Have a problem with it? Blame Howard and Norton for not being more professional and wanting to play ball. Why should I blame Howard for asking for a raise? He's not in movies for free. It's his livelihood. There's nothing wrong with him asking for a raise for doing his job any more than a elementary school teacher or a nurse at a hospital asking their boss for a raise. SO you think any school teacher or nurse who asks their boss for a raise should be fired too?
MCU has made billions so it's not like MCU couldn't afford to give Howard a raise. So no, I don't blame Howard at all for simply asking for a raise for doing his job. I blame his greedy employer who refused to give him a raise even though they've made billions.
If they're being professional about it, then yes perhaps they do deserve a raise, if they are not( Which Howard was) then too bad so sad another can do their job.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 24, 2017 4:14:33 GMT
why not have Diana and Arthur pop up on CW then, hmmm? After all, you say that by having the movies and TV shows separate there is unlimited freedom for these shows, also why we're at it here's a good one to ask - Where the hell is Batman on any of those shows? He's been referenced as well, and considering Gotham is another universe in itself what gives then, right? For the same reason that Diana didn't help Superman in his battle against Zod and the Kryptonians in MoS. Because Diana lives in Paris, not Metropolis.
Similarly for the CW TV shows, Supergirl takes place in National City, The Flash takes place in Central City, and Arrow takes place in Star City. Diana and Arthur and Batman don't live in National City or Central City or Star City. And the Legends are on a ship traveling back and forth through time.
You are totally missing the point of my question. Please go to school and take a course on reading comprehension.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 24, 2017 4:38:27 GMT
No, watching one episode, the first one especially, is NOT enough to judge an entire series. You cannot watch the first episodes of The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, American Gods, Hannibal, or Westworld and make final judgement then and there. To properly judge the series as a whole you do need to watch them in their entirety as they intend to tell season long to series long story arcs. 1 episode is more than enough. That's how network executives decide whether or not to pick up a TV show. By watching the pilot episode only, not an entire season. In 2011, there was a pilot episode for a new Wonder Woman TV series starring Adrienne Palicki as Wonder Woman. The pilot episode was never aired on TV (because the network executives decided after watching the pilot episode not to pick up the series), but I've seen the pilot episode and it was awful and I can see why network executives passed on it. Same with the pilot episode of Jessica Jones. It was really boring and crappy. And that's enough to judge Jessica Jones as being the worst superhero show ever made. Most scholars of the medium of TV and professional critics of the medium would agree that you cannot judge a whole show by just its first episode That's exactly how network executives judge a TV show when they're deciding whether or not to pick up the show. They watch the pilot episode only. They don't watch the entire season. And that's also exactly how Emmy voters judge a TV show when they're voting for the best TV shows. They watch 1 episode only of each nominated show. They don't watch the entire season. Rights to adapt Fleming's novel were complicated and thus allowed another studio to produce a version of their own with Connery back in the role. The Joker stand-alone movie and the rest of the DCEU is produced all by Warner Bros. so its a pointless and confusing business venture. And that was of no concern to most general movie audiences. For most general audiences, it was simply just 2 James Bond movies in the same year starring 2 different actors as James Bond. Same with the Marvel movies. Fox or MCU-produced is of no concern to most general audiences. For most general audiences, they simply just see the "Marvel" logo at the beginning of the movies and associate the movie with Marvel comics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 4:42:38 GMT
You know, Anne_Hathaway-Fan, all this arguing with Judge is meaningless. The DCEU is getting a full reboot soon, and it'll be better than anything Hack Snyder could ever make because of Marvel's agent, Joss Whedon, fixing it.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Aug 24, 2017 4:44:35 GMT
I'm a big Anne Hathaway fan, myself.
She's hot as fuck!
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 24, 2017 5:16:52 GMT
No, watching one episode, the first one especially, is NOT enough to judge an entire series. You cannot watch the first episodes of The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, American Gods, Hannibal, or Westworld and make final judgement then and there. To properly judge the series as a whole you do need to watch them in their entirety as they intend to tell season long to series long story arcs. 1 episode is more than enough. That's how network executives decide whether or not to pick up a TV show. By watching the pilot episode only, not an entire season. In 2011, there was a pilot episode for a new Wonder Woman TV series starring Adrienne Palicki as Wonder Woman. The pilot episode was never aired on TV (because the network executives decided after watching the pilot episode not to pick up the series), but I've seen the pilot episode and it was awful and I can see why network executives passed on it. Same with the pilot episode of Jessica Jones. It was really boring and crappy. And that's enough to judge Jessica Jones as being the worst superhero show ever made. Most scholars of the medium of TV and professional critics of the medium would agree that you cannot judge a whole show by just its first episode That's exactly how network executives judge a TV show when they're deciding whether or not to pick up the show. They watch the pilot episode only. They don't watch the entire season. And that's also exactly how Emmy voters judge a TV show when they're voting for the best TV shows. They watch 1 episode only of each nominated show. They don't watch the entire season. Rights to adapt Fleming's novel were complicated and thus allowed another studio to produce a version of their own with Connery back in the role. The Joker stand-alone movie and the rest of the DCEU is produced all by Warner Bros. so its a pointless and confusing business venture. And that was of no concern to most general movie audiences. For most general audiences, it was simply just 2 James Bond movies in the same year starring 2 different actors as James Bond. Same with the Marvel movies. Fox or MCU-produced is of no concern to most general audiences. For most general audiences, they simply just see the "Marvel" logo at the beginning of the movies and associate the movie with Marvel comics. No, going off of one episode is not "more than enough", its actually "less than enough." That is especially true if you're calling it "the worst superhero show ever made", how is it "the worst superhero show ever made"? If it bored you, fine, but worst superhero show ever made? So its as bad as that Justice League pilot from the 1997 with the Crypt Keeper himself Jon Kassir playing The Atom? Network executives make the most mistakes in handling television, that's why cable networks like HBO, AMC, Starz, and Showtime and streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime are where top notch, high quality entertainment thrive and are able to live up to their fullest potential. Network TV rarely offers content that actually stands toe to toe with what HBO, AMC and Netflix produce, and when they do they do not last very long - Look at Hannibal, a show that aired on NBC of all places but had as much depth, character growth, acting talent, and visual flare that made it rival some of cable's top dramas around the time. NBC also got rid of Community, which thankfully found a new home in Yahoo and managed to finish its series plan( just needs a movie now). So who cares what they think? And no, the Emmy's do watch more than one episode to a series, that is how they actually are able to critique the program and see if its deserving of an award or not. I'm pretty sure people were confused about seeing two Bond films in the same year, and went with the one that was actually set in continuity with the other films hence why Octopussy made more than the stand alone venture Never Say Never Again, which had only one gimmick - Connery back as Bond. A lot of people are aware the difference between a Marvel Studios release and one that is from a different studio that just so happens to be making a film based on their content. Continuity is in, why do you think so many studios in Hollywood are trying to ride on the cinematic universe train?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 7:53:03 GMT
I forgot to mention. This is not the only DC movie in development that is not part of the DCEU. From what I have read about 'Booster Gold' it is not going to be part of the DCEU either and will exist as a separate movie and 'The Monolith' is being made by Lionsgate. I would love to see the 'Wildstorm Universe' (which DC now own) played out separately with Gen 13, Danger Girl, Wild C.A.T.s, Strangers In Paradise, Stormwatch, The Authority, Wet Works and Dv8 'cause I don't think it would fit the DCEU.'Gen 13', 'Danger Girl' and 'Strangers In Paradise' movies are LONG overdue too and 'Strangers In Paradise' is one of the best LGBT comic book series of all time. why are you using someone elses profile picture, are you pig ugly or something? I am using a photo of Country Music Singer/Actress Mackenzie Porter from her Instagram account who I have been using multiple photos of as my avatar on the IMDB2 and IMDB Boards. Why do you use Harrison Ford as your avatar Stylesyboy? Do you find him cute like I find Mackenzie cute?
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 26, 2017 2:43:14 GMT
People these days are aware what is and what isn't MCU, I cannot for the life of me recall anybody asking where were The Avengers in Logan on any website I've ever visited talking about it. Here's a thread where an Patriots' fan shadyvsesham thinks that Logan is part of MCU: imdb2.freeforums.net/thread/47316/quick-call-9-1The idiot even wrote on July 29: "Logan isnt MCU? I swore Wolverine was a part of MCU." So there are people who make no distinction between the Marvel movies produced by Fox and the Marvel movies produced by MCU. Both have a "Marvel" logo screen at the beginning of the movie so they consider them all to be Marvel. So having 2 different Quicksilvers in Marvel movies would definitely confuse a lot of people.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 26, 2017 2:49:01 GMT
Why should I blame Howard for asking for a raise? He's not in movies for free. It's his livelihood. There's nothing wrong with him asking for a raise for doing his job any more than a elementary school teacher or a nurse at a hospital asking their boss for a raise. SO you think any school teacher or nurse who asks their boss for a raise should be fired too?
MCU has made billions so it's not like MCU couldn't afford to give Howard a raise. So no, I don't blame Howard at all for simply asking for a raise for doing his job. I blame his greedy employer who refused to give him a raise even though they've made billions.
If they're being professional about it, then yes perhaps they do deserve a raise, if they are not( Which Howard was) then too bad so sad another can do their job. Howard was professional about it. When Iron Man made money at the box office, Howard respectfully asked for a raise. It's no different than Patty Jenkins negotiating for more money to direct Wonder Woman II now that Wonder Woman is a huge success and the #1 movie of the summer.
But MCU was greedy and refused to grant Howard a raise. So basically, it's OK for MCU to make billions of dollars but it isn't OK for Howard to ask for more money. Howard has bills to pay too so there's nothing wrong with Howard asking for a raise, especially since MCU has made billions and can afford it.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 26, 2017 5:12:49 GMT
People these days are aware what is and what isn't MCU, I cannot for the life of me recall anybody asking where were The Avengers in Logan on any website I've ever visited talking about it. Here's a thread where an Patriots' fan shadyvsesham thinks that Logan is part of MCU: imdb2.freeforums.net/thread/47316/quick-call-9-1The idiot even wrote on July 29: "Logan isnt MCU? I swore Wolverine was a part of MCU." So there are people who make no distinction between the Marvel movies produced by Fox and the Marvel movies produced by MCU. Both have a "Marvel" logo screen at the beginning of the movie so they consider them all to be Marvel. So having 2 different Quicksilvers in Marvel movies would definitely confuse a lot of people. Oh wow, one person, one out of billions of other human beings who occupy the planet. Also, the user you're pointing at isn't a product of an audience member suffering brand confusion, they just associate anything based on a Marvel comic to be "Marvel Cinematic Universe", they know what is and what isn't connected they just don't care that much about the technicalities at the end of the day - they're interests are stronger for other media.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 26, 2017 5:23:45 GMT
If they're being professional about it, then yes perhaps they do deserve a raise, if they are not( Which Howard was) then too bad so sad another can do their job. Howard was professional about it. When Iron Man made money at the box office, Howard respectfully asked for a raise. It's no different than Patty Jenkins negotiating for more money to direct Wonder Woman II now that Wonder Woman is a huge success and the #1 movie of the summer.
But MCU was greedy and refused to grant Howard a raise. So basically, it's OK for MCU to make billions of dollars but it isn't OK for Howard to ask for more money. Howard has bills to pay too so there's nothing wrong with Howard asking for a raise, especially since MCU has made billions and can afford it.
No, Howard wasn't being professional if he were he would've recognized that he is not the star of the franchise and that RDJ is the one who is Iron Man, accepted the money would've made and continue to play Rhodes and star in later Marvel films. His loss, but he seems to be doing fine these days anyway, his career isn't in any worse or better shape than Don Cheadle's in.
|
|