|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 21, 2019 22:15:08 GMT
I have to disagree with Tony Stark and Starlord having the same personalities. Sure they both have a penchant for cracking jokes and sleeping around but Tony is nowhere near the goofball that Peter Quill is. Antman is really the personality duplicate of Starlord, and Dr. Strange the duplicate of Tony Stark. Peter Parker might have the same goofiness of Quill and Lang but he has enough innocence and naivete to his personality that he's a completely unique MCU character. And yes, there are definitely duplicates in personalities with the male characters as well but it's usually limited to 2, maybe 3 overlapping characters. And if that's all it was with the women then I wouldn't be complaining. But when you have 7-10 female characters all sharing the same personality type then you have a problem. Especially when they comprise about 75% of female characters on screen. And sure, having more screen time can help, and I definitely support the women getting more screentime, but it's really not a good excuse for having generic personalities. Not when BW, Gamora and Wasp all have had multiple movies to develop unique personalities all the while a guy like Ulysses Klaue manages to showcase a very unique personality with very limited screentime. As for Thor and Stormbreaker, I understand why he said he needed the weapon but what we see on screen doesn't support it. I mean, the only thing SB seemed to grant him was control over the Bifrost plus the ability to fly. Other than that SB just seemed to function like a very durable axe. Is that really all that was needed to supposedly defeat Thanos? Just to your last point (though I agree with Ant-Man and Starlord being closer to kindred spirits than the latter and Stark), yeah, I think that's all what Storm Breaker needed to be. Really the only thing that distinguishes is from the hammer is it has a sharp edge. The hammer can dent and pierce till the cows come home but penetration puts Storm Breaker over the top.
I think that's all that's needed. I guess it has psychic powers and decides who's worthy too, but a sharp object is really all that's needed to kill Thanos. In theory, metal equal to or stronger than whatever his armor is made from could do the trick.
If it was just against Thanos himself then I'd agree. But at the time Thor went for SB, Thanos already had the power and space stones and was on his way to claim more. I'm having trouble believing Thor really thought all he'd need to defeat a being powerful enough to destroy worlds was a simple sharp, tough axe that he could mentally call to himself.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Nov 21, 2019 22:42:14 GMT
Just to your last point (though I agree with Ant-Man and Starlord being closer to kindred spirits than the latter and Stark), yeah, I think that's all what Storm Breaker needed to be. Really the only thing that distinguishes is from the hammer is it has a sharp edge. The hammer can dent and pierce till the cows come home but penetration puts Storm Breaker over the top.
I think that's all that's needed. I guess it has psychic powers and decides who's worthy too, but a sharp object is really all that's needed to kill Thanos. In theory, metal equal to or stronger than whatever his armor is made from could do the trick.
If it was just against Thanos himself then I'd agree. But at the time Thor went for SB, Thanos already had the power and space stones and was on his way to claim more. I'm having trouble believing Thor really thought all he'd need to defeat a being powerful enough to destroy worlds was a simple sharp, tough axe that he could mentally call to himself. Well you do have his monologue to Rocket before he gets Stormbreaker. It was like his last bit of cockiness erupting through the layers upon layers of humility dumped on him through loss. He still thought he could win the day himself with a little help from a new weapon. And if he couldn't then die trying to be with his family and friends. So maybe it was partly Cockiness and partly suicide mission to die in battle and be in Valhalla with his loved ones. In his state of mind that was the 2 outcomes. Win the day or die trying and be reunited. He didn't foresee losing and surviving. That's why his crash was so hard. So it's perfectly sensible that he just wanted a sharp weapon that gave him the abilities that Moljnir had with maybe 1 or 2 upgrades.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 21, 2019 23:05:12 GMT
If it was just against Thanos himself then I'd agree. But at the time Thor went for SB, Thanos already had the power and space stones and was on his way to claim more. I'm having trouble believing Thor really thought all he'd need to defeat a being powerful enough to destroy worlds was a simple sharp, tough axe that he could mentally call to himself. Well you do have his monologue to Rocket before he gets Stormbreaker. It was like his last bit of cockiness erupting through the layers upon layers of humility dumped on him through loss. He still thought he could win the day himself with a little help from a new weapon. And if he couldn't then die trying to be with his family and friends. So maybe it was partly Cockiness and partly suicide mission to die in battle and be in Valhalla with his loved ones. In his state of mind that was the 2 outcomes. Win the day or die trying and be reunited. He didn't foresee losing and surviving. That's why his crash was so hard. So it's perfectly sensible that he just wanted a sharp weapon that gave him the abilities that Moljnir had with maybe 1 or 2 upgrades. Well sure, we can theorize that and it would make sense. Problem is that's just us theorizing, trying to come up with explanations. There's really nothing in the movie that indicates that's indeed what it was. And that's my main gripe: That the MCU is so inconsistent with power levels that it's up to us to make up excuses to explain the power discrepancies. For example: It doesn't really make sense Wanda was completely overpowering Thanos when she was struggling with Proxima Midnight who in turn was struggling with BW and Okoye. So we try to make excuses for this inconsistency by thinking that maybe Wanda was just really pissed off that Thanos killed Vision. Thing is, had their power levels been written more consistently then we shouldn't have needed to make excuses for this inconsistency. I guess what I'm trying to say is: I can make excuses and theories for every single power inconsistency we've seen in the MCU. That still won't change the fact that they have a problem with power consistency.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Nov 21, 2019 23:30:55 GMT
Well you do have his monologue to Rocket before he gets Stormbreaker. It was like his last bit of cockiness erupting through the layers upon layers of humility dumped on him through loss. He still thought he could win the day himself with a little help from a new weapon. And if he couldn't then die trying to be with his family and friends. So maybe it was partly Cockiness and partly suicide mission to die in battle and be in Valhalla with his loved ones. In his state of mind that was the 2 outcomes. Win the day or die trying and be reunited. He didn't foresee losing and surviving. That's why his crash was so hard. So it's perfectly sensible that he just wanted a sharp weapon that gave him the abilities that Moljnir had with maybe 1 or 2 upgrades. Well sure, we can theorize that and it would make sense. Problem is that's just us theorizing, trying to come up with explanations. There's really nothing in the movie that indicates that's indeed what it was. And that's my main gripe: That the MCU is so inconsistent with power levels that it's up to us to make up excuses to explain the power discrepancies. For example: It doesn't really make sense Wanda was completely overpowering Thanos when she was struggling with Proxima Midnight who in turn was struggling with BW and Okoye. So we try to make excuses for this inconsistency by thinking that maybe Wanda was just really pissed off that Thanos killed Vision. Thing is, had their power levels been written more consistently then we shouldn't have needed to make excuses for this inconsistency. I guess what I'm trying to say is: I can make excuses and theories for every single power inconsistency we've seen in the MCU. That still won't change the fact that they have a problem with power consistency. Agreed. I was just going for a plausible for that one point about him just going for an axe. And yes the power settings in the MCU vary greatly. They tend to use the old axiom of the Powers are determined by what's needed by the plot or even more by individual scene, that comic books and movies are well known for. Here with the MCU it's exaggerated though. The main reason is the massive Continuity. What other Superhero Series has this many examples of the same characters over and over again. So we have more examples and more to compare too. So the fluctuations are amplified. XMU would be the next best example for superheroes and it has some power inconsistency the continuity in that series throws everything for a loop too. If you want to go with the king of power inconsistency magnified by continuity and time go no further than Star Trek. 761 Episodes (TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DIS, Short Treks), 13 Movies (TOS, TNG, Kelvin) and my god you find that "plot power ratings" and "plot armor" to the nth degree. Technology = Whatever they need it to be.
|
|
|
Post by hobowar on Nov 22, 2019 10:44:39 GMT
Occasionally the cinematography goes a little too far into the grey/dark blue/brown thing that I'm really not a fan of.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Nov 22, 2019 12:50:09 GMT
Thor knew he needed something more than lightning to defeat Thanos. Stormbreaker does more than Mjolnir ever did. He wasn't dependent on a weapon in general, but he needed firepower if he was going to take on a guy wielding infinity stones. Yeah Thanos was all over the place though, it really sticks out if you watch both films in a short time. Tony, Spidey and Star-Lord all have the same personality if you use broad generalizations like you did with the women. I'm not even saying you're wrong, I'm saying it goes both ways. Thor eventually morphed into that same personality. Drax isn't entirely different from Hulk. They should mix up their character traits in the next go round so every group doesn't have the same character dynamic and power structure. I have to disagree with Tony Stark and Starlord having the same personalities. Sure they both have a penchant for cracking jokes and sleeping around but Tony is nowhere near the goofball that Peter Quill is. Antman is really the personality duplicate of Starlord, and Dr. Strange the duplicate of Tony Stark. Peter Parker might have the same goofiness of Quill and Lang but he has enough innocence and naivete to his personality that he's a completely unique MCU character. And yes, there are definitely duplicates in personalities with the male characters as well but it's usually limited to 2, maybe 3 overlapping characters. And if that's all it was with the women then I wouldn't be complaining. But when you have 7-10 female characters all sharing the same personality type then you have a problem. Especially when they comprise about 75% of female characters on screen. And sure, having more screen time can help, and I definitely support the women getting more screentime, but it's really not a good excuse for having generic personalities. Not when BW, Gamora and Wasp all have had multiple movies to develop unique personalities all the while a guy like Ulysses Klaue manages to showcase a very unique personality with very limited screentime. As for Thor and Stormbreaker, I understand why he said he needed the weapon but what we see on screen doesn't support it. I mean, the only thing SB seemed to grant him was control over the Bifrost plus the ability to fly. Other than that SB just seemed to function like a very durable axe. Is that really all that was needed to supposedly defeat Thanos? Agreed 100% with most of what you say here, especially the Tony/Strange comparisons. And there's no excuse for the lack of character development with the women (though I'd say Gamora and Nebula have had a ton of character development). As for Stormbreaker...control of the Bifrost is a pretty potent ability, and don't forget Stormbreaker overpowered the gauntlet with all six stones. The fact that Thor didn't deliver the killshot is beside the point. They win right there with a better aimed throw.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Nov 22, 2019 23:09:32 GMT
I dislike the portrayal of Cap within the story, to me Cap outside of his stand alone 2 movies comes across like a dick, in Avengers he tries to demean and belittle Tony despite not knowing dick about him, he judges Tony based on nothing, thinking he is better than Tony when he isn't, in AOU he is quick to blame and think the worst of Tony, he believes 2 crazy people who minutes earlier were helping Ultron when they say Tony cannot be trusted and he takes it as gospel, turns out to be wrong and yet Cap doesn't own up to this, in CW he is again judging and assuming the worst of Tony all the while Cap himself is being deceitful and self serving, again something never truly addressed, Tony's flaws are picked apart in almost every film, he is constantly questioned and demeaned despite growing as a person movie to movie, Cap doesn't but everyone licks his rim as if he is infallible despite repeatedly being proven otherwise, this just pisses me off.
The overuse of comedy, in GOTG 2 Drax was too jokey for my liking, in Ragnarok the overuse of comedy killed a lot of the seriousness of the movie, a lot of people loved it but I felt they went half a step too far.
The boring an repetive cliché that every woman is infact superior to their male counterparts in the exact same way, like come on guys women can have flaws you know, not every female hero has to be better than the guy, let them have their own strengths which is complimentary to the male whch makes them a better team, instead of the guys being an inferior copy, it's just boring now.
Doesn't seem to be an issue now but the at one time prevalent villain issue, luckily we have had several solid bad guys, though some are still either bleh or seem to be one and done which is kind of boring.
There is a little too formulaic an approach, personally I would like more variety, if Marvel were to say experiment a little with just one of their films each year, not make it the MCU formula and see how it comes out would be fun to see and they still have their other 2 to 3 movies following the formula to rely on if all goes tits up I guess.
These are just off the top of my head...oh erm the Russo's running their mouths and confusing things after the movies, like seriously these guys never fix anything they just make it all the more convoluted and nonsensical, which is odd because their films themselves don't do this, it's just them rabbiting after the fact that causes issues.
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Nov 23, 2019 6:47:05 GMT
The humor
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 23, 2019 6:53:29 GMT
Sorry thenewnexus, but I'm pretty sure you don't qualify for this thread as per OP stipulations. I mean, feel free to voice your opinion of course, but this thread isn't really meant for you.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 23, 2019 18:51:38 GMT
If you dislike MCU movies, this thread is not for you. If you believe DCEU and Fox X-Men movies are generally better than MCU movies, this is not for you either. If you think the MCU is ruining cinema, this is not for you. If majority of the threads you make in this forum are anti-MCU, this thread is definitely not for you. This question is directed for those hardcore MCU fans who think the MCU generally creates the best superhero movies ever. Who feel that the praise the MCU gets is truly deserved. Who thinks that the MCU has completely left DC and Fox superhero movies in the dust (barring a few good ones from those studios). And the question is this: What things irritate you the most about the MCU? What are your most legitimate complaints against the MCU? P.S. - I actually consider myself a hardcore MCU fan, and I will contribute my own answer to this thread in a bit.The most legitimate complaint against MCU is that MCU movies is that MCU Dictator Kevin Feige just has no clue about what being a true superhero is about. Because as I've proven many times, MCU's so-called "heroes" aren't true superheroes but just a bunch of selfish assholes who always put their own agenda ahead of innocent people's lives and who always think that they don't have to answer to the people or be held accountable for their actions because they believe in the paradigm that " Might Makes Right" and since they consider themselves "Earth's mightiest heroes", that gives them the Right to do whatever they want whenever they want without any restrictions or oversight and without having to answer to anyone or be held accountable.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 23, 2019 19:36:24 GMT
If you dislike MCU movies, this thread is not for you. If you believe DCEU and Fox X-Men movies are generally better than MCU movies, this is not for you either. If you think the MCU is ruining cinema, this is not for you. If majority of the threads you make in this forum are anti-MCU, this thread is definitely not for you. This question is directed for those hardcore MCU fans who think the MCU generally creates the best superhero movies ever. Who feel that the praise the MCU gets is truly deserved. Who thinks that the MCU has completely left DC and Fox superhero movies in the dust (barring a few good ones from those studios). And the question is this: What things irritate you the most about the MCU? What are your most legitimate complaints against the MCU? P.S. - I actually consider myself a hardcore MCU fan, and I will contribute my own answer to this thread in a bit.The most legitimate complaint against MCU is that MCU movies is that MCU Dictator Kevin Feige just has no clue about what being a true superhero is about. Because as I've proven many times, MCU's so-called "heroes" aren't true superheroes but just a bunch of selfish assholes who always put their own agenda ahead of innocent people's lives and who always think that they don't have to answer to the people or be held accountable for their actions because they believe in the paradigm that " Might Makes Right" and since they consider themselves "Earth's mightiest heroes", that gives them the Right to do whatever they want whenever they want without any restrictions or oversight and without having to answer to anyone or be held accountable. So what were you telling others when you said that X-Men: Dark Phoenix was the best comic book film of 2019 (at least until Joker came out)? I need to hear this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 19:42:31 GMT
If you dislike MCU movies, this thread is not for you. If you believe DCEU and Fox X-Men movies are generally better than MCU movies, this is not for you either. If you think the MCU is ruining cinema, this is not for you. If majority of the threads you make in this forum are anti-MCU, this thread is definitely not for you. This question is directed for those hardcore MCU fans who think the MCU generally creates the best superhero movies ever. Who feel that the praise the MCU gets is truly deserved. Who thinks that the MCU has completely left DC and Fox superhero movies in the dust (barring a few good ones from those studios). And the question is this: What things irritate you the most about the MCU? What are your most legitimate complaints against the MCU? P.S. - I actually consider myself a hardcore MCU fan, and I will contribute my own answer to this thread in a bit.The most legitimate complaint against MCU is that MCU movies is that MCU Dictator Kevin Feige just has no clue about what being a true superhero is about. Because as I've proven many times, MCU's so-called "heroes" aren't true superheroes but just a bunch of selfish assholes who always put their own agenda ahead of innocent people's lives and who always think that they don't have to answer to the people or be held accountable for their actions because they believe in the paradigm that " Might Makes Right" and since they consider themselves "Earth's mightiest heroes", that gives them the Right to do whatever they want whenever they want without any restrictions or oversight and without having to answer to anyone or be held accountable. Unless they're agents of the law, they're all vigilantes. As films and comics try to get more gritty, they leave behind the notion these characters were meant to be simple avatars for good and evil. I don't see how your argument doesn't apply to all superheroes.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 23, 2019 19:53:11 GMT
The humor a lot of time isn't funny and gets even cringey at times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 20:08:16 GMT
If you dislike MCU movies, this thread is not for you. If you believe DCEU and Fox X-Men movies are generally better than MCU movies, this is not for you either. If you think the MCU is ruining cinema, this is not for you. If majority of the threads you make in this forum are anti-MCU, this thread is definitely not for you. This question is directed for those hardcore MCU fans who think the MCU generally creates the best superhero movies ever. Who feel that the praise the MCU gets is truly deserved. Who thinks that the MCU has completely left DC and Fox superhero movies in the dust (barring a few good ones from those studios). And the question is this: What things irritate you the most about the MCU? What are your most legitimate complaints against the MCU? P.S. - I actually consider myself a hardcore MCU fan, and I will contribute my own answer to this thread in a bit.I think they tend to overdo the comedy sometimes, which undercuts the dramatic tension in scenes. I think they tend to have weak villains. Thanos is an exception, though honestly I'd prefer "his evil plan makes sense" over "his evil plan makes no sense, but it's okay because he's insane." Speaking of villains, the Mandarin. I'm not a fan of the comics (never read one), so I wasn't gritting my teeth over the alterations to the lore or whatever. But the Mandarin we got in the first hour was an interesting villain, and the guy they replaced him with was literally driven by the fact that Tony snubbed him at a party like fifteen years ago. Horrible, horrible thing to do. From the same movie, the whole thing with Stark's PTSD. One manifestation of his PTSD was constantly building new Iron Man suits, so there were like 30 of them. And the solution for his PTSD is... to focus on building stuff. Which, how is that an answer to anything? Then the PTSD thing was just dropped and he's okay again. Iron Man 3 was just about the weakest of the Marvel movies, IMO. I think they were slow to do a female superhero with her own movie. IMO they should have done a "Jane Bond"-style spy movie with Black Widow way the hell back about fifteen movies ago. It bothers me that they don't seem to know what to do with the Hulk, and I don't like "Semi-Hulk" very much. Infinity War implies that Hulk is scared to come out after the drubbing Thanos gave him, which is great... then it's like they decided not to bother with that and do a comedy Hulk instead. I'm sure there are other things, but those are the ones that spring to mind.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 23, 2019 20:17:39 GMT
The most legitimate complaint against MCU is that MCU movies is that MCU Dictator Kevin Feige just has no clue about what being a true superhero is about. Because as I've proven many times, MCU's so-called "heroes" aren't true superheroes but just a bunch of selfish assholes who always put their own agenda ahead of innocent people's lives and who always think that they don't have to answer to the people or be held accountable for their actions because they believe in the paradigm that " Might Makes Right" and since they consider themselves "Earth's mightiest heroes", that gives them the Right to do whatever they want whenever they want without any restrictions or oversight and without having to answer to anyone or be held accountable. Unless they're agents of the law, they're all vigilantes. As films and comics try to get more gritty, they leave behind the notion these characters were meant to be simple avatars for good and evil. I don't see how your argument doesn't apply to all superheroes.
My point is about MCU's so-called "heroes" being selfish assholes who put their own agenda ahead of innocent lives (for example, Bruce Banner going to the university during the day when there were plenty of civilians around and then refusing to surrender peacefully before he turned into Hulk and put many civilian lives at risk) and who think that they don't have to answer to anyone (for example, Steve Rogers thinking that the Avengers, under his command, can just blow up a bunch of civilians while chasing Crossbones and not have to be held or agree to oversight for his team). That doesn't apply to all superheroes. For example, unlike Banner (who put his own agenda of not getting captured ahead of the lives of many civilians), Superman was willing to surrender himself to the custody of the US Army, knowing that they would in turn surrender him over to Zod, to prevent Zod from carrying out his threat to punish the people of Earth if they didn't hand over Kal-El. Moreover, Superman was willing to appear before a Congressional committee when summoned to even though they didn't have the power to make him appear because unlike Steve Rogers, Superman believes that all heroes no matter how powerful they are still need to answer to the people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 20:21:30 GMT
I may not qualify as a hardcore MCU fan by the rules laid out above but...
I'd say the biggest issue by far is that a lot of the solo movies are created to be disposable blockbusters and not much more. You can see how they really bring their A-game for the big ones like Infinity War and Civil War (or maybe the screenwriters/directors are just better in those) while half of the solo flicks are entertaining but ultimately not very memorable. Movies like Ant Man 2, Captain Marvel, Doctor Strange and Far From Home are all competent enough to be viewed positively but play it very safe and don't leave a lasting impression.
|
|
|
Post by hobowar on Nov 23, 2019 20:26:03 GMT
If you dislike MCU movies, this thread is not for you. If you believe DCEU and Fox X-Men movies are generally better than MCU movies, this is not for you either. If you think the MCU is ruining cinema, this is not for you. If majority of the threads you make in this forum are anti-MCU, this thread is definitely not for you. This question is directed for those hardcore MCU fans who think the MCU generally creates the best superhero movies ever. Who feel that the praise the MCU gets is truly deserved. Who thinks that the MCU has completely left DC and Fox superhero movies in the dust (barring a few good ones from those studios). And the question is this: What things irritate you the most about the MCU? What are your most legitimate complaints against the MCU? P.S. - I actually consider myself a hardcore MCU fan, and I will contribute my own answer to this thread in a bit.I think they tend to overdo the comedy sometimes, which undercuts the dramatic tension in scenes. I think they tend to have weak villains. Thanos is an exception, though honestly I'd prefer "his evil plan makes sense" over "his evil plan makes no sense, but it's okay because he's insane." Speaking of villains, the Mandarin. I'm not a fan of the comics (never read one), so I wasn't gritting my teeth over the alterations to the lore or whatever. But the Mandarin we got in the first hour was an interesting villain, and the guy they replaced him with was literally driven by the fact that Tony snubbed him at a party like fifteen years ago. Horrible, horrible thing to do. From the same movie, the whole thing with Stark's PTSD. One manifestation of his PTSD was constantly building new Iron Man suits, so there were like 30 of them. And the solution for his PTSD is... to focus on building stuff. Which, how is that an answer to anything? Then the PTSD thing was just dropped and he's okay again. Iron Man 3 was just about the weakest of the Marvel movies, IMO. I think they were slow to do a female superhero with her own movie. IMO they should have done a "Jane Bond"-style spy movie with Black Widow way the hell back about fifteen movies ago. It bothers me that they don't seem to know what to do with the Hulk, and I don't like "Semi-Hulk" very much. Infinity War implies that Hulk is scared to come out after the drubbing Thanos gave him, which is great... then it's like they decided not to bother with that and do a comedy Hulk instead. I'm sure there are other things, but those are the ones that spring to mind. I think Killian was driven to become the man that Tony Stark was at the start of Iron Man 1. Tony meeting him probably wouldn't have made a difference to him wanting to make biological weapons in the wake of the battle of New York, and for Tony's PTSD, I think that was more about him coming to terms with the world changing around him and remembering that the Iron Man suit isn't what his real power is. "Why don't you just build something?" - Harley
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 20:31:09 GMT
I think Killian was driven to become the man that Tony Stark was at the start of Iron Man 1. Tony meeting him probably wouldn't have made a difference to him wanting to make biological weapons in the wake of the battle of New York, and for Tony's PTSD, I think that was more about him coming to terms with the world changing around him and remembering that the Iron Man suit isn't what his real power is. "Why don't you just build something?" - Harley If you say so, but I don't think either of those things worked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 20:45:58 GMT
Unless they're agents of the law, they're all vigilantes. As films and comics try to get more gritty, they leave behind the notion these characters were meant to be simple avatars for good and evil. I don't see how your argument doesn't apply to all superheroes.
My point is about MCU's so-called "heroes" being selfish assholes who put their own agenda ahead of innocent lives (for example, Bruce Banner going to the university during the day when there were plenty of civilians around and then refusing to surrender peacefully before he turned into Hulk and put many civilian lives at risk) and who think that they don't have to answer to anyone (for example, Steve Rogers thinking that the Avengers, under his command, can just blow up a bunch of civilians while chasing Crossbones and not have to be held or agree to oversight for his team). That doesn't apply to all superheroes. For example, unlike Banner (who put his own agenda of not getting captured ahead of the lives of many civilians), Superman was willing to surrender himself to the custody of the US Army, knowing that they would in turn surrender him over to Zod, to prevent Zod from carrying out his threat to punish the people of Earth if they didn't hand over Kal-El. Moreover, Superman was willing to appear before a Congressional committee when summoned to even though they didn't have the power to make him appear because unlike Steve Rogers, Superman believes that all heroes no matter how powerful they are still need to answer to the people. Superman is the very definition of might makes right. He's like a one man nuclear deterrent. The most recent batch of DCEU films didn't do it for me, but one good idea they touched on is Superman doesn't have to be their ally. He owes no allegiance to the well-being of the world. He could spend his entire life disguised as a human and never lift a finger.
No, the entire genre is composed of characters whose might makes right. Almost every superhero put to the screen has surrendered themselves in some way. Iron Man dumped the nuke into the vacuum of space. Banner tried to kill himself and 'the other guy' spat it out. Steve Rogers first act as a powered individual was to chase a spy through the city on barefoot.
It does apply to all superheroes. At least the superheroes whose popularity have carried comic books for decades. Superman, Batman, Spiderman, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Archelaus on Nov 23, 2019 21:34:16 GMT
Some of these have already been addressed, but I'll repeat it again. I love the use of comedic interactions between the characters, but I don't like when the humor comes at the expense of the drama. Another complaint is the drab cinematography. We discussed it before, but some of the MCU films lack true black values so the most darkest colors appear to be gray onscreen. Now, they have embraced the look of comic books so they really should increase the saturation.
|
|