|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 3, 2017 1:03:21 GMT
The only difference is you pay more money and the screen is bigger. But for most people, IMAX, 3D, and IMAX 3-D are all still theater. Whether it's IMAX, 3D, IMAX 3-D, or regular theater, they go to the theater, pay money to enter, sit in an auditorium and watch the movie on a large screen.
In most cities, the large multiplex theaters have both regular theaters and an IMAX theater. So for 99% of movie watchers, they don't call it an "IMAX theater", they just call it a theater, and IMAX movie is still a theatrical movie. And since Inhumans was shown in theaters, most people associate Inhumans as another MCU failure and associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
You are so wrong. A person wouldn't go see an IMAX movie as a regular thing. For one thing, IMAX doesn't show regular movies all the time. So people would have a regular theater they'd go to. And most cities don't have IMAX and regular theaters in one place. There are actual IMAX theaters separate from regular theaters as it's own thing. In most cities, theaters are multiplexes in which they have 10 to 20 movie theaters in 1 location. And 1 of those movie theaters would have an IMAX screen showing movies in IMAX. I have several local multiplexes nearby which have IMAX screens included with their regular screens.
When people go to the window to buy a ticket to watch a movie in the multiplex, they can see all the available showtimes for each movie. Some movies will have a regular showing and an IMAX showing. A viewer would decide if they want to see the regular showing (on a regular-sized screen) or the IMAX showing (on an IMAX screen). The only difference is they pay more money for the IMAX showing.
Once they pay and enter, whether or not they chose the regular showing or the IMAX showing, they use the same concession stands and the same restrooms. Other than the screen size, everything else is the same. So 99% of movie viewers consider an IMAX movie to be just another movie and they don't call it an "IMAX theater", they just call it a theater. On the ticket, it might be referred to as Theater 1 or Theater 2 or Theater 3, but not referred to as "IMAX theater". So since Inhumans was shown in theaters, most people associate Inhumans as another MCU failure and associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 3, 2017 1:11:03 GMT
You are so wrong. A person wouldn't go see an IMAX movie as a regular thing. For one thing, IMAX doesn't show regular movies all the time. So people would have a regular theater they'd go to. And most cities don't have IMAX and regular theaters in one place. There are actual IMAX theaters separate from regular theaters as it's own thing. In most cities, theaters are multiplexes in which they have 10 to 20 movie theaters in 1 location. And 1 of those movie theaters would have an IMAX screen showing movies in IMAX. I have several local multiplexes nearby which have IMAX screens included with their regular screens.
When people go to the window to buy a ticket to watch a movie in the multiplex, they can see all the available showtimes for each movie. Some movies will have a regular showing and an IMAX showing. A viewer would decide if they want to see the regular showing (on a regular-sized screen) or the IMAX showing (on an IMAX screen). The only difference is they pay more money for the IMAX showing.
Once they pay and enter, whether or not they chose the regular showing or the IMAX showing, they use the same concession stands and the same restrooms. Other than the screen size, everything else is the same. So 99% of movie viewers consider an IMAX movie to be just another movie and they don't call it an "IMAX theater", they just call it a theater. On the ticket, it might be referred to as Theater 1 or Theater 2 or Theater 3, but not referred to as "IMAX theater". So since Inhumans was shown in theaters, most people associate Inhumans as another MCU failure and associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
No they don't, FFS dude almost no one saw Inhumans in the cinema's it sold 170k tickets in north America, that's all most people didn't go to see it because most people who knew about it knew it was just a TV show getting a limited theatrical debut for a quick buck, 45m tickets are sold to the average MCU film in north America, Inhumans numbers is a drop in the bucket to the greater fanbase so stop spouting this inane bullshit, just focus on the fact Inhumans is dogshit you wont look so stupid that way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 13:11:58 GMT
HAHAHA! Inhumans marks the beginning of the end of the MCU. And meanwhile we are still wating for the DCEU to have a beginning. That died before it started.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 22, 2017 18:16:44 GMT
And 99% of movie viewers don't give a shit about that. I watched Wonder Woman at a local theater. I also watched A United Kingdom at a local theater. I don't give a shit how many more theaters Wonder Woman was in compared to A United Kingdom. I watched both at local theaters so both are theatrical movies as far as I'm concerned.
Same with Inhumans. People who watched Inhumans in theaters don't give a shit about how many or how few theaters Inhumans was in. They went to a theater (not just an "IMAX theater, but a theater) that has both regular movies and IMAX movies and they paid money to enter and sit in an auditorium and watched Inhumans and saw the Marvel Studios logo at the beginning of the movie. So they associate Inhumans as an MCU movie, and they associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
Other TV shows have had limited theatrical runs where, just like Inhumans, they presented two episodes to an audience. Game of Thrones did this with episodes 9 and 10 of its fourth season and like Inhumans it played for IMAX screens. Would you call that a movie? No, of course not. Inhumans was never advertised as a movie, it was always promoted as a television series. IMAX was just used to give it an extra push, but it was always designed to be a television series and the first two episodes that were filmed for the format do not tell a complete story and a montage of upcoming episodes was played directly after the second episode. Also, the Marvel Studios logo, this one - www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKxxmxU8GNo, did not play in front of the Inhumans, the standard Marvel logo did like it does with all other Marvel TV shows, again highlighting that while from the same company not the same creative team - Once more, Kevin Feige has no call to make on the TV division, Jeph Loeb does and before him Ike Perlmutter. Most general audience don't care whether Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter gave the greenlight for Inhumans. Most general audience don't even know who Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter are.
To most general audiences, Inhumans was an MCU product and it sucked! Here's a thread on the Now Playing and Upcoming Films sub-board of the Movies board (that's right, the Movies board, not the Television board, because Inhumans was shown in theaters so most general audiences associate Inhumans with the MCU movies) where a general user says "Wow apparently marvel can lay a egg":
Marvels' Inhumans
That general user clearly associated Inhumans with the MCU movies, which is why he wrote the thread on the Movies board and not the Television board and which is why he seemed surprised that "marvel can lay a egg" after the positive reviews for so many MCU movies. Like I said, since Inhumans was shown in theaters, most people associate Inhumans as another MCU product and associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 22, 2017 20:04:49 GMT
Other TV shows have had limited theatrical runs where, just like Inhumans, they presented two episodes to an audience. Game of Thrones did this with episodes 9 and 10 of its fourth season and like Inhumans it played for IMAX screens. Would you call that a movie? No, of course not. Inhumans was never advertised as a movie, it was always promoted as a television series. IMAX was just used to give it an extra push, but it was always designed to be a television series and the first two episodes that were filmed for the format do not tell a complete story and a montage of upcoming episodes was played directly after the second episode. Also, the Marvel Studios logo, this one - www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKxxmxU8GNo, did not play in front of the Inhumans, the standard Marvel logo did like it does with all other Marvel TV shows, again highlighting that while from the same company not the same creative team - Once more, Kevin Feige has no call to make on the TV division, Jeph Loeb does and before him Ike Perlmutter. Most general audience don't care whether Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter gave the greenlight for Inhumans. Most general audience don't even know who Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter are.
To most general audiences, Inhumans was an MCU product and it sucked! Here's a thread on the Now Playing and Upcoming Films sub-board of the Movies board (that's right, the Movies board, not the Television board, because Inhumans was shown in theaters so most general audiences associate Inhumans with the MCU movies) where a general user says "Wow apparently marvel can lay a egg":
Marvels' Inhumans
That general user clearly associated Inhumans with the MCU movies, which is why he wrote the thread on the Movies board and not the Television board and which is why he seemed surprised that "marvel can lay a egg" after the positive reviews for so many MCU movies. Like I said, since Inhumans was shown in theaters, most people associate Inhumans as another MCU product and associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
So what?? No one said the MCU is perfect. Even then, it's just a TV show. Meanwhile, DC has had three feature movie failures.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Oct 22, 2017 20:54:37 GMT
Other TV shows have had limited theatrical runs where, just like Inhumans, they presented two episodes to an audience. Game of Thrones did this with episodes 9 and 10 of its fourth season and like Inhumans it played for IMAX screens. Would you call that a movie? No, of course not. Inhumans was never advertised as a movie, it was always promoted as a television series. IMAX was just used to give it an extra push, but it was always designed to be a television series and the first two episodes that were filmed for the format do not tell a complete story and a montage of upcoming episodes was played directly after the second episode. Also, the Marvel Studios logo, this one - www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKxxmxU8GNo, did not play in front of the Inhumans, the standard Marvel logo did like it does with all other Marvel TV shows, again highlighting that while from the same company not the same creative team - Once more, Kevin Feige has no call to make on the TV division, Jeph Loeb does and before him Ike Perlmutter. Most general audience don't care whether Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter gave the greenlight for Inhumans. Most general audience don't even know who Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter are.
To most general audiences, Inhumans was an MCU product and it sucked! Here's a thread on the Now Playing and Upcoming Films sub-board of the Movies board (that's right, the Movies board, not the Television board, because Inhumans was shown in theaters so most general audiences associate Inhumans with the MCU movies) where a general user says "Wow apparently marvel can lay a egg":
Marvels' Inhumans
That general user clearly associated Inhumans with the MCU movies, which is why he wrote the thread on the Movies board and not the Television board and which is why he seemed surprised that "marvel can lay a egg" after the positive reviews for so many MCU movies. Like I said, since Inhumans was shown in theaters, most people associate Inhumans as another MCU product and associate the Inhumans' failure as an MCU failure.
Oh wow, one person said that? Unbelievable! Stop the presses, one person, one of the billions who inhabit the Earth, said something this ignorant on a message board for an IMDb substitute! The failure of Innumans will DAMAGE all potential income for Thor: Ragnarok soon...Oh wait, no it won't. It's getting good word of the mouth and projected to do pretty darn well. Most general audiences don't care if the MCU has had one failure or another, especially if its a TV series for ABC that only had one week in IMAX theatres, and they likely won't consider that to be the norm for the entire MCU, either. You fail. Again.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Oct 22, 2017 22:41:59 GMT
Let's be honest here: Inhumans is nothing. It was a failed experiment that will be swept under the rug and I doubt the general audience even know it exist.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 22, 2017 22:59:08 GMT
Most general audience don't care whether Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter gave the greenlight for Inhumans. Most general audience don't even know who Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter are. Exactly. And though you will only want to use that one way...it also works against what you are hoping for. Most general audience don't know the TV stuff and the MCU are "in the same universe". Agents of Shield may have the most awareness on that but I would be shocked if the average person actually connected it to the MCU. Most general audience don't even know Inhumans exist. You see the ratings for that show? The only people watching it were die-hard Marvel fans and they certainly aren't going to be turned off on Marvel. It would be like claiming that terrible Star Trek show is going to ruin the ST movie franchise. Hardly. As we are currently seeing, Thor 3 is the dominant Marvel story...Inhumans is a non entity and will quickly be forgotten. Oh...and most general audience don't even know the difference between Marvel and DC either. So this falls under the "much ado about nothing" umbrella. When it comes to the general audience, the stuff fanboys argue about is nonexistent.
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 23, 2017 3:26:52 GMT
Most general audience don't care whether Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter gave the greenlight for Inhumans. Most general audience don't even know who Kevin Feige or Jeph Loeb or Ike Perlmutter are. Exactly. And though you will only want to use that one way...it also works against what you are hoping for. Most general audience don't know the TV stuff and the MCU are "in the same universe". Agents of Shield may have the most awareness on that but I would be shocked if the average person actually connected it to the MCU.Most general audience don't even know Inhumans exist. You see the ratings for that show? The only people watching it were die-hard Marvel fans and they certainly aren't going to be turned off on Marvel. It would be like claiming that terrible Star Trek show is going to ruin the ST movie franchise. Hardly. As we are currently seeing, Thor 3 is the dominant Marvel story...Inhumans is a non entity and will quickly be forgotten. Oh...and most general audience don't even know the difference between Marvel and DC either. So this falls under the "much ado about nothing" umbrella. When it comes to the general audience, the stuff fanboys argue about is nonexistent. How would they not know? It has Marvel in the title, also has SHEILD in the title, and has Agent Coulson as a lead character. Anyone who saw the Avengers and didn’t make the connection has to be an idiot.
|
|
|
Post by OrsonSwelles on Oct 23, 2017 3:50:24 GMT
Exactly. And though you will only want to use that one way...it also works against what you are hoping for. Most general audience don't know the TV stuff and the MCU are "in the same universe". Agents of Shield may have the most awareness on that but I would be shocked if the average person actually connected it to the MCU.Most general audience don't even know Inhumans exist. You see the ratings for that show? The only people watching it were die-hard Marvel fans and they certainly aren't going to be turned off on Marvel. It would be like claiming that terrible Star Trek show is going to ruin the ST movie franchise. Hardly. As we are currently seeing, Thor 3 is the dominant Marvel story...Inhumans is a non entity and will quickly be forgotten. Oh...and most general audience don't even know the difference between Marvel and DC either. So this falls under the "much ado about nothing" umbrella. When it comes to the general audience, the stuff fanboys argue about is nonexistent. How would they not know? It has Marvel in the title, also has SHEILD in the title, and has Agent Coulson as a lead character. Anyone who saw the Avengers and didn’t make the connection has to be an idiot. You think the average movie goes cares about Marvel/DC? Their connectedness is a peripheral aspect. The average movie goer going to a CBM is going for the action/special effects. Whether it's Marvel or DC is irrelevant. Do you think the average movie goer can name the actress that played Wonder Woman? Heck, it wouldn't surprise me if the average movie goer couldn't name who plays Wolverine and he's been in how many movies?
|
|
|
Post by Grabthar's Hammer on Oct 23, 2017 6:06:29 GMT
I've said many times that DC was smart to keep their movies and TV shows separate since movies and TV are 2 different mediums. MCU was dumb to try to force their movies and TV shows to connect together and now MCU is quickly becoming an even bigger disaster than the Trump Presidency. Inhumans’ Failure Hurts MCUthe show arrives with a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes
But being bad (and in case that’s not been made abundantly clear, Inhumans is bad) and arriving on TV with minimal fanfare are the least of the problems. Sure, we’re unlikely to get a Season 2 unless there’s a major late-season turnaround and showrunner Scott Buck (who already delivered a Marvel dud with Iron Fist earlier this year) is running out of chances, but the real problem is what it means for the wider MCU.
Marvel TV is starting to try and square up to Marvel Studios – and failing terribly. But that’s all insular; to casual audiences on the outside, there’s just one big red logo. It is all connected, after all.
Because of the virgin MCU’s “it’s all connected” tagline, many more casual audience members not knowing the behind-the-scenes drama view movies and TV as the products of the same creatives. Naturally, they do all feed into a bigger picture of superhero proliferation and potential fatigue, but we’re talking more specifically about the Marvel logo; The Defenders‘ mixed reaction reflects on expectations for Thor: Ragnarok not because they’re both superpowered but because they’re from the same brand.
Inhumans‘ IMAX release made it even harder to distinguish. This was in cinemas. You were paying money to see it. It showed alongside Spider-Man: Homecoming in some multiplexes. A trailer for Ragnarok played before it. Obviously, it was a flatter proposal given the muted advertising befitting a TV show at the movies (indeed, its box office struggles do go to show that the Marvel logo alone isn’t enough for financial success) but it had that place as a movie experience.
the show’s sense of place in a complete world is nonexistent; the only outside connections are very vague repercussions from that S.H.I.E.L.D. set up. It reflects badly on the MCU by association.
this is the real danger of the shared universe model – so many get invited that you can no longer keep control.Su per weird show, totally awkward storylines. The first MCU show I've felt completely unsatisfied by.
Before this there was Agent Carter. I loved the cast, but the show never felt right to me. Mostly because it was like they couldn't do much because the future of the MCU had already been established. Not that prequels haven't been done well before, but it felt like we had already seen so much from the universe already that anything from Agent Carter felt unspectacular. I wish they had made Agent Carter more of a straightforward spy thriller.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 23, 2017 18:01:49 GMT
Exactly. And though you will only want to use that one way...it also works against what you are hoping for. Most general audience don't know the TV stuff and the MCU are "in the same universe". Agents of Shield may have the most awareness on that but I would be shocked if the average person actually connected it to the MCU.Most general audience don't even know Inhumans exist. You see the ratings for that show? The only people watching it were die-hard Marvel fans and they certainly aren't going to be turned off on Marvel. It would be like claiming that terrible Star Trek show is going to ruin the ST movie franchise. Hardly. As we are currently seeing, Thor 3 is the dominant Marvel story...Inhumans is a non entity and will quickly be forgotten. Oh...and most general audience don't even know the difference between Marvel and DC either. So this falls under the "much ado about nothing" umbrella. When it comes to the general audience, the stuff fanboys argue about is nonexistent. How would they not know? It has Marvel in the title, also has SHEILD in the title, and has Agent Coulson as a lead character. Anyone who saw the Avengers and didn’t make the connection has to be an idiot. That's people who actually watch the show. I'll repeat: "I would be shocked if the average person connects it to the MCU". If you don't believe it, just ask someone on the street about all this stuff we think is "common knowledge". Most people don't even know the difference between Marvel and DC at all. Some are wondering why Superman isn't in the Avengers movies.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 23, 2017 18:09:06 GMT
How would they not know? It has Marvel in the title, also has SHEILD in the title, and has Agent Coulson as a lead character. Anyone who saw the Avengers and didn’t make the connection has to be an idiot. That's people who actually watch the show. I'll repeat: "I would be shocked if the average person connects it to the MCU". If you don't believe it, just ask someone on the street about all this stuff we think is "common knowledge". Most people don't even know the difference between Marvel and DC at all. Some are wondering why Superman isn't in the Avengers movies. You even have people that do like the stuff that get confused between DC and Marvel. I don't know how many times I've seen YouTube vids and they say the other company's name.
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 23, 2017 18:45:48 GMT
I feel sorry for all those involved, the actors, directors, everyone. There is only one person to blame, this dude called Ike Plummeter or whatever his name is.
Ike made it his mission to destroy X-Men because fox wont share rights, he is erasing X-men from everything but he forgot that X-Men was already very established even without marvel, long before MCU showed up. this inhumans thing was forced down on people as a replacement for x-men and people said No,I think this is the boiling point and what i said yesterday that there is line between marvel and mcu fans. marvel fans and people rejected inhumans because it was a poor substitute for X-Men. MCU fans are too busy living a lie.
Inhumans should have been its own thing, you would think marvel would have learned by now with how they treat other marvel properties they dont have the movie rights too but anytime marvel tries to screw non MCU properties, its backfires on them big time, case in point, The Gifted ended up stomping over Inhumans and this is just a throw away xmen tv series, not even the best one (Legion).
I think marvel should apologise to the Inhumans fans, they did not deserve this but it is also a lesson, hate and malicious acts only leads to disasters.
I also think Kevin Feige deserves some praise for his insight, Feige has always said he wants X-Men in the MCU and nothing more or less will do. this is the reason Feige turned down making an inhumans movie since he did not like the idea that marvel wanted to use it as a replacement for X-Men, he wanted the real thing. I believe this is when inhumans got bunked from movie to tv.
Feige erased them from his movie timeline and split from Ike Plummeter with hope that X-men and F4 will return to marvel, While this idea upsets me as I don't xmen anywhere near the MCU, I have to give credit to Kevin Feige for his great insight on the whole situation.
Ike is running this now disaster of a tv show, let him clean it up.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 24, 2017 0:49:09 GMT
I feel sorry for all those involved, the actors, directors, everyone. There is only one person to blame, this dude called Ike Plummeter or whatever his name is. Ike made it his mission to destroy X-Men because fox wont share rights, he is erasing X-men from everything but he forgot that X-Men was already very established even without marvel, long before MCU showed up. this inhumans thing was forced down on people as a replacement for x-men and people said No,I think this is the boiling point and what i said yesterday that there is line between marvel and mcu fans. marvel fans and people rejected inhumans because it was a poor substitute for X-Men. MCU fans are too busy living a lie. Do get over yourself. Legion worked because no one knew it was connected to X-Men and goes for that sell-out "grounded" approach. Gifted is a Heroes knock-off that again rejects the fantastic. Yeah, it'll prove once and for all how incompetent Singer and Fox are. MCU X-Men would give us stuff like them fighting Krakoa, being kidnapped by the Grandmaster and forced to fight in the Contest of Champions, battling a Phalanx Invasion....cool stuff.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 24, 2017 5:36:20 GMT
Yeah, it'll prove once and for all how incompetent Singer and Fox are.
MCU X-Men would give us stuff like them fighting Krakoa, being kidnapped by the Grandmaster and forced to fight in the Contest of Champions, battling a Phalanx Invasion....cool stuff. Fox has screwed up everything they touch so badly that Marvel could actually made a poor X-men movie and it would look pretty good in comparison. How does one studio screw up that many characters and still have people claim that Marvel of all studios would do worse? It boggles the mind. Here is a short list of the characters Fox had at their disposal that they somehow managed to completely epic fail with: Galactus: A cloud? Really? Silver Surfer: For that one they should be condemned to making Archie Comics movies. Dr Doom: Wasting him once wasn't enough...they had to do it twice just to prove they are utterly clueless. Cyclops: Unforgiveable Storm: This one really bugs me. She is epic in the comics and a joke in Fox movies. Rogue: She was transformed into a whiny drama queen by Fox...nice job. Colossus: A non character until Ryan Reynolds rescued him. Angel: Could have been cool anywhere but with Fox. Jean Grey/Phoenix: Really? They had to totally waste the Phoenix saga? Get ready for round 2 of that. Fox loves to double up on their suckage. Ice Man: He's almost a real character...but not quite. Apocalypse: Another Fox fail...big surprise. Kitty Pryde: She was almost good in Days of Wolverine Past. Mystique: Actually did ok with her until X3. Then they got too cute with JLaw and ruined her too. Wolverine: Actually made me sick of a character I liked. Maybe Marvel can create the real character onscreen someday. Juggernaut: That's just sad. Psylocke: Good casting but the character was a non-entity. Deadpool: This one by itself renders any defense of Fox moot. They actually made him a mute! I'm not making that up...they were actually that clueless. So yeah....how could Marvel possibly do worse than Fox? It's un-possible.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 24, 2017 7:34:10 GMT
Yeah, it'll prove once and for all how incompetent Singer and Fox are.
MCU X-Men would give us stuff like them fighting Krakoa, being kidnapped by the Grandmaster and forced to fight in the Contest of Champions, battling a Phalanx Invasion....cool stuff. how could Marvel possibly do worse than Fox? Spider-Man - MCU turned Marvel's flagship character from a superhero who cares about using his powers because he has a "great responsibility" (as he learned from not stopping the thief who would kill Uncle Ben) into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about "When is Happy Hogan going to call me back?" and "I hope Tony Stark is impressed with what I'm doing".
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 24, 2017 11:32:56 GMT
how could Marvel possibly do worse than Fox? Spider-Man - MCU turned Marvel's flagship character from a superhero who cares about using his powers because he has a "great responsibility" (as he learned from not stopping the thief who would kill Uncle Ben) into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about "When is Happy Hogan going to call me back?" and "I hope Tony Stark is impressed with what I'm doing". This IS in line with the early comics, combined with the Mentor-Teacher relationship he had with Tony about 10 years ago in the comics. And he DID want to join super-teams early on as well. If you knew the comics instead of just seeing Raimi as gospel, you'd know this.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 24, 2017 18:34:55 GMT
how could Marvel possibly do worse than Fox? Spider-Man - MCU turned Marvel's flagship character from a superhero who cares about using his powers because he has a "great responsibility" (as he learned from not stopping the thief who would kill Uncle Ben) into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about "When is Happy Hogan going to call me back?" and "I hope Tony Stark is impressed with what I'm doing". Well of course you will find a reason to not like it. I'm talking about normal people without agendas. You may not like it, but Homecoming is considered a big success and a huge improvement on the 3 previous Sony efforts. Marvel even had the foresight to cast a guy who actually looks like a teenager (because he was a teen at the time). Not to mention the rest of the cast who also look the part. And since he is a teen, of course he is going to act like a young person. Not sure how that is surprising. Hero worship is much more pronounced in young people. You got half of it. In combination with Peter's innate desire to do good, a desire to live up to the standard of one of the most famous "do gooders" in the world Peter inhabits is hardly a flaw. It's even part of the character arc when he finally decides it would be better for him to stay independent as he rejected Tony's offer at the end. Is this one of those fake complaints I've heard from DC/Batman fans? 1-"Where are the other Avengers? It's not realistic they wouldn't show up!" 2-"It's not even _____ movie! They put ____ in it to make it Avengers 2.5!" You can count on a DC fan to pull one of those nuggets out depending upon the situation. Another thing Marvel improved was the villain of course. Certain fan bases like to claim Marvel doesn't have good villains (who does?). But Vulture is the best villain of the year so far and leaps and bounds above Venom, Harry, Lizard, Electro, and Rhino. Good lord...if you want to talk about bad villains you are talking about Sony.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Oct 24, 2017 20:02:28 GMT
Spider-Man - MCU turned Marvel's flagship character from a superhero who cares about using his powers because he has a "great responsibility" (as he learned from not stopping the thief who would kill Uncle Ben) into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about "When is Happy Hogan going to call me back?" and "I hope Tony Stark is impressed with what I'm doing". Well of course you will find a reason to not like it. I'm talking about normal people without agendas. You may not like it, but Homecoming is considered a big success and a huge improvement on the 3 previous Sony efforts. Marvel even had the foresight to cast a guy who actually looks like a teenager (because he was a teen at the time). Not to mention the rest of the cast who also look the part. And since he is a teen, of course he is going to act like a young person. Not sure how that is surprising. Hero worship is much more pronounced in young people. You got half of it. In combination with Peter's innate desire to do good, a desire to live up to the standard of one of the most famous "do gooders" in the world Peter inhabits is hardly a flaw. It's even part of the character arc when he finally decides it would be better for him to stay independent as he rejected Tony's offer at the end. Is this one of those fake complaints I've heard from DC/Batman fans? 1-"Where are the other Avengers? It's not realistic they wouldn't show up!" 2-"It's not even _____ movie! They put ____ in it to make it Avengers 2.5!" You can count on a DC fan to pull one of those nuggets out depending upon the situation. Another thing Marvel improved was the villain of course. Certain fan bases like to claim Marvel doesn't have good villains (who does?). But Vulture is the best villain of the year so far and leaps and bounds above Venom, Harry, Lizard, Electro, and Rhino. Good lord...if you want to talk about bad villains you are talking about Sony. And let's not forget 'Beavis and Butt-Head' Green Goblin.
|
|