Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 17:06:58 GMT
When someone has to resort to attacking dark and gritty films for being unsustainable, you know Logan has hit the nerves of MCU fanboys who do not want their formula to be challenged. Another irony in this thread is: If Disney's fun and colorful formula is "sustainable" and can last for decades, it is safe in business sense, and definitely NOT risky in creative sense. The bias is showing if one says Disney is more willing to take risks than Fox even though we all know that Fox made Deadpool and Logan.Truer words have never been spoken.
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Mar 8, 2017 17:08:37 GMT
When someone has to resort to attacking dark and gritty films for being unsustainable, you know Logan has hit the nerves of MCU fanboys who do not want their formula to be challenged. Another irony in this thread is: If Disney's fun and colorful formula is "sustainable" and can last for decades, it is safe in business sense, and definitely NOT risky in creative sense. The bias is showing if one says Disney is more willing to take risks than Fox even though we all know that Fox made Deadpool and Logan.Ah yes, this Marvel "formula" no one has ever been able to proper define. Logan was just the usual X-Men story. The only difference here was that since it was Jackman's last hurrah they could kill him off with no repercussions as there won't be more movies in that timeline. Same with Xavier and co. And Fox didn't make Deadpool, Ryan Reynolds did. No one at Fox thought it would succeed, that's why they kept slashing the budget and released it in the Dump Months.
So yeah, FOX won't be able to keep making stuff like Logan and Deadpool. They don't have the balls.
Lol if you seriously think no supported Deadpool over at Fox. They got the movie made.
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Mar 8, 2017 17:10:59 GMT
Nitpick: Actually, it was an attempt on wiping out technology rather than humanity as part of a Tower of Babel metaphor. Apocalypse wanted the world to worship him like a god instead of worshiping machines("everything they've build will fall"). Which is iconically very similar to Enchantress's goal in Sucide Squad, the very next superhero to come out after Apocalypse. So that's why he destroyed bridges and buildings? Hmmph. If he was going to wipe out technology, a huge EMP would have worked. Those are forms of technology.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 17:57:10 GMT
When someone has to resort to attacking dark and gritty films for being unsustainable, you know Logan has hit the nerves of MCU fanboys who do not want their formula to be challenged. Another irony in this thread is: If Disney's fun and colorful formula is "sustainable" and can last for decades, it is safe in business sense, and definitely NOT risky in creative sense. The bias is showing if one says Disney is more willing to take risks than Fox even though we all know that Fox made Deadpool and Logan.Not really. I'm just tired of people saying that there's no room for fun and colorful films when there are R-rated ones around. No, the irony is people like you getting smug before this "new" R-rated formula has even had a chance to prove itself sustainable. The reason Deadpool and Logan worked is because those particular characters work with an R-rating, but the same can't be said for a huge amount of other superheroes, many of which were created with an audience of all ages in mind. So good luck maintaining an R-rated formula that demands bleaker outlooks and more character deaths, guaranteeing a reoccurring cast is out of the question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 17:58:55 GMT
Ah yes, this Marvel "formula" no one has ever been able to proper define. Logan was just the usual X-Men story. The only difference here was that since it was Jackman's last hurrah they could kill him off with no repercussions as there won't be more movies in that timeline. Same with Xavier and co. And Fox didn't make Deadpool, Ryan Reynolds did. No one at Fox thought it would succeed, that's why they kept slashing the budget and released it in the Dump Months.So yeah, FOX won't be able to keep making stuff like Logan and Deadpool. They don't have the balls. Lol if you seriously think no supported Deadpool over at Fox. They got the movie made. That doesn't prove the studio had any faith in the film. They also didn't think the original Star Wars would be a big hit, either, but they still released it.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 8, 2017 18:02:00 GMT
It took Marvel like 10 movies to ever address the collateral damage that the good guys cause. Probably because the general people in Marvel movies are smarter than the ones in DC. Guess they realized that for all the damage done the Avengers were still responsible for saving them from utter destruction.
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Mar 8, 2017 18:02:35 GMT
Lol if you seriously think no supported Deadpool over at Fox. They got the movie made. That doesn't prove the studio had any faith in the film. They also didn't think the original Star Wars would be a big hit, either, but they still released it. After the little numbers Kick-Ass pulled, I don't blame them. That was also a violent R-Rated superhero comedy.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 8, 2017 18:03:47 GMT
I just finished watching Logan last night and while I greatly enjoyed it, I realized something: That if there were too many of these dark and gritty superhero movies, audiences would get tired of it very easily. Spoken like a true McMarvel McMark: "This movie was really unique and interesting and enjoyable. BUT YOU CAN'T REMAKE IT FIFTY TIMES IN A ROW WITHOUT LOSING MONEY SO IT'S A TERRIBLE IDEA FOR A SINGLE FILM!!!!1" McMarvel McMark? Jeeze, how old are you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 18:04:47 GMT
It took Marvel like 10 movies to ever address the collateral damage that the good guys cause. Probably because the general people in Marvel movies are smarter than the ones in DC. Guess they realized that for all the damage done the Avengers were still responsible for saving them from utter destruction. I think it's more because everyone in the MCU is a quip-machine who doesn't care about anything. As long as they get their shawarma at the end, they're happy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 18:05:38 GMT
Yeah, not that big of a hit, but thankfully, it had a low budget, so it was easily able to make its money back.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 8, 2017 18:06:52 GMT
When someone has to resort to attacking dark and gritty films for being unsustainable, you know Logan has hit the nerves of MCU fanboys who do not want their formula to be challenged. Another irony in this thread is: If Disney's fun and colorful formula is "sustainable" and can last for decades, it is safe in business sense, and definitely NOT risky in creative sense. The bias is showing if one says Disney is more willing to take risks than Fox even though we all know that Fox made Deadpool and Logan.So apparently pointing out a valid point is now "attacking" something? Yeah... looks like it was your nerve that got hit. Not everything is about fanboyism you know. You can actually point out critical arguments without being biased. It's called being mature.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 8, 2017 18:07:48 GMT
Probably because the general people in Marvel movies are smarter than the ones in DC. Guess they realized that for all the damage done the Avengers were still responsible for saving them from utter destruction. I think it's more because everyone in the MCU is a quip-machine who doesn't care about anything. As long as they get their shawarma at the end, they're happy. No.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 18:08:26 GMT
When someone has to resort to attacking dark and gritty films for being unsustainable, you know Logan has hit the nerves of MCU fanboys who do not want their formula to be challenged. Another irony in this thread is: If Disney's fun and colorful formula is "sustainable" and can last for decades, it is safe in business sense, and definitely NOT risky in creative sense. The bias is showing if one says Disney is more willing to take risks than Fox even though we all know that Fox made Deadpool and Logan.So apparently pointing out a valid point is now "attacking" something? Yeah... looks like it was your nerve that got hit. Not everything is about fanboyism you know. You can actually point out critical arguments without being biased. It's called being mature. They're Fox-Men fans. Maturity isn't part of the equation.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Mar 8, 2017 18:10:33 GMT
So that's why he destroyed bridges and buildings? Hmmph. If he was going to wipe out technology, a huge EMP would have worked. Those are forms of technology. So you are saying there were no buildings and bridges in his time?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Mar 8, 2017 18:21:28 GMT
Probably because the general people in Marvel movies are smarter than the ones in DC. Guess they realized that for all the damage done the Avengers were still responsible for saving them from utter destruction. I think it's more because everyone in the MCU is a quip-machine who doesn't care about anything. As long as they get their shawarma at the end, they're happy. So if a bunch of firefighters/Rescue Workers decided to go out for dinner together after a successful day on the job it means they don't care about anything?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 18:24:37 GMT
I think it's more because everyone in the MCU is a quip-machine who doesn't care about anything. As long as they get their shawarma at the end, they're happy. So if a bunch of firefighters/Rescue Workers decided to go out for dinner together after a successful day on the job it means they don't care about anything? Don't you know? People taking pride in their work after the fact isn't allowed. They have to stand around navel-gazing and discussing philosophy all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Mar 8, 2017 18:26:39 GMT
Those are forms of technology. So you are saying there were no buildings and bridges in his time? There were, but they were build by him as he said to Magneto.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 18:28:10 GMT
Sounds like Apocalypse was more pretentious than I originally gave it credit for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2017 20:15:15 GMT
So apparently pointing out a valid point is now "attacking" something? Yeah... looks like it was your nerve that got hit. Not everything is about fanboyism you know. You can actually point out critical arguments without being biased. It's called being mature. If MCU movies can get away with criticism because they are lighthearted, is Marvel Studio playing safe or being risky? I am waiting for you to solve your "valid" paradox. The Marvel-Only Bots will not allow ANY criticisms to be directly towards the MCU. It causes them to emotionally break down. They have to protect their corporate overlords.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Mar 8, 2017 20:33:35 GMT
So you are saying there were no buildings and bridges in his time? There were, but they were build by him as he said to Magneto. All of them? All over the world? Even the small houses? Outhouses, too? There were no carpenters? No architects? He did it all? Like some early day Sim City? Was he like a beach bully and came and knocked down people's houses that he didn't build? I just had this crazy image of Apocalypse doing a doubletake at a house he didn't build and making a fashion designer-type comment, before knocking it down. Now we know why he says "Everything 'they' built will fall." Selfish bastard.
|
|