|
Post by formersamhmd on Aug 17, 2017 14:41:29 GMT
This thread is such a low moment in the history of imdb 2.0. some brain dead mcu fans think xmen should have any link with the mcu movies. Nah, we just think X-Men deserves a proper movie portrayal. None of this "grounded" garbage.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Aug 17, 2017 14:42:40 GMT
Because CBM villain have traditionally been the real stars of the movie, and when the MCU first started critics weren't used to the idea that the hero could actually lead the movie without the villain stealing the show. That's why they complained the villains were "weak", because the heroes were stronger than usual in a CBM. No, phase 1 had the same mould of villains as appeared in CBMs before it in Stane and Red Skull. After the disney takeover, post phase 1 they retarded all the subsequent villains and made them a self-parody. Putting weak in quotation marks wont hide the fact they are shown with minimal inventiveness and lazy writing. No, Stane and Red Skull weren't scene stealers who took over the movie. The film-makers never forgot that Iron Man and Cap were the main characters of their movies (unlike Nolan with Batman). Problem was, the audiences weren't used to the idea of the hero being the actual lead and thus were baffled that this was now so.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 17, 2017 16:07:56 GMT
/t I'm afraid your Die Hard comparison doesn't quite work. Die Hard was released at a time when the go-to action heroes were supermen who had muscles upon muscles and could handle any situation that stood in their way, grit and edge were present but even a dose of believability and logic were thrown out the window - Think "McBain" from The Simpsons. Die Hard offered an unconventional take on the modern action hero by having Bruce Willis as the lead - Who represented the common man, which people wanted to see. In addition to that, Willis was mostly known for being the male lead in a sitcom and having some musical success but he was not proven to be leading man material, let alone an action star. Die Hard wasn't exactly a sophisticated movie but it played upon action film stereotypes of the time and grounded it enough that the action wasn't all flash - the hero, John McClane, actually got hurt and became a mess towards the end. The appeal of Die Hard had a lasting effect and its influence still continues to this day, it has a timeless appeal of seeing the common person tackling such a high stakes situation. Ok Die Hard isnt the best example since it came off the top of my head. You can substitute any other generic action film, Predator for example. The point I was making, which youve unknowingly supported anyway, is that if the fundamentals of creating a film are in check like good characters/direction/writing then whether the themes of the film are original or not doesn't matter on the how well it will recieved in decades down the line. It didnt matter that Die Hard showed a common man being the hero for a change, thats not what makes the movie memorable. Self contradictory. Those themes of rejection and outcast ARE timeless, so why dismiss them in the very same sentence? Which is exactly the arguments Im putting forward in saying that X2 is a great film and would still hold up if released today. Is that why Logan and Wonder Woman have been the best comic films of the year? Well have to agree to disagree then. I think if X2 was released today, it would get a very positive response because its appeal is there is a balance within the movie that separates it from other properties today. Its not too dark, and not too light. There is humour but its not overkill. The villain is menacing and the basic storyline is well presented. And people who complain about Hugh Jackman not having the yellow suit make up a minuscule percentage of the movie going audience. Die Hard having the common man in a high stakes situation *is* what makes the movie memorable, everything John McClane does in the film relates to this concept. The later movies( Live Free or Die Hard, A Good Day to Die Hard) forgot this and made McClane into one of those supermen and the end results only turned off long time fans of the franchise. It's not self contradictory, those themes are timeless but execution of them is a very different story and up for debate, it's not the same world as it was in 2003 straying away from "normal" is well, normal now. Before you highlighted those words and made them in bold print did you read the rest of the paragraph which suggested it was for superhero movies that were not afraid to embrace their comic roots no matter how campy? The example I used was 2002's Spider-Man, which for all its liberties stays closer to its roots in style, tone, and feel than X-2 does, compared to today's superhero films Spider-Man has more in common with the norm than X-2. Wonder Woman wasn't grounded, they didn't try to justify that its magical elements have scientific basis in reality and there was plenty of levity. There was grit, but it wasn't overdone to the point where only adults can enjoy it. Logan being dark and grounded served its theme of learning to accept your roots; a commentary on the films distancing/opening themselves from/to the source material. It's theatrical concept that puts it ahead of the other films and will keep it relevant for a long time. I'm just going by your suggestion if X-2 were released today people probably would express such criticism, but as X-2 came out in 2003 and thus in a different era of superhero movies enough time and films have come around that Wolverine having his classic attire is not a must have, not that they don't want it for when the character eventually returns with a different actor in the part.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 17, 2017 16:22:12 GMT
All this beatiful and thoughtful posting, wasted on a dullard like charzino who will just reject it all and still insist he's right. Sigh... You are right, though. None of the X-Men villains have been great. I'll take your average MCU villain over any of these dinguses. The average MCU villain is written for kids... You mean like Iron Monger who negotiated with a terrorist group to kidnap and kill Tony Stark and eventually tried to dispose of him himself with his own cybernetic suit? Or The Abomination, the rusty soldier who agrees to be injected with the super soldier serum that he becomes very addicted to and eventually becomes an uncaring killing machine only Hulk can get rid of? Or Yellowjacket who has been overexposed to Pym particles and is on the tipping point of losing it? And who, after being screwed over by Ant-Man and company goes after Scott Lang's own family, his daughter in particular, and tries to see them meet their maker? Or Ronan the overly religious Kree fanatic who tries to reignite war between their race the Nova Corps of Xandar and do so with an Infinity Stone which just increases the potential level of carnage he can do? What about Grant Ward on Agents of SHIELD? A HYDRA agent who played SHIELD for fools and commits unspeakable crimes, and is eventually selected to be the host of HIVE, the ancient being who HYDRA bases itself upon. Just saying, for what was once a TV-PG series Ward did a lot of nasty stuff that was on the level of a baddie from something like the better seasons of 24.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Aug 17, 2017 16:27:09 GMT
Because CBM villain have traditionally been the real stars of the movie, and when the MCU first started critics weren't used to the idea that the hero could actually lead the movie without the villain stealing the show. That's why they complained the villains were "weak", because the heroes were stronger than usual in a CBM. No, phase 1 had the same mould of villains as appeared in CBMs before it in Stane and Red Skull. After the disney takeover, post phase 1 they retarded all the subsequent villains and made them a self-parody. Putting weak in quotation marks wont hide the fact they are shown with minimal inventiveness and lazy writing. You couldn't be anymore wrong, the MCU has had plenty of good villains since the Disney acquisition which, just to refresh memory, occurred a year after the first two phase 1 films were released.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 17:24:01 GMT
All this beatiful and thoughtful posting, wasted on a dullard like charzino who will just reject it all and still insist he's right. Sigh... You are right, though. None of the X-Men villains have been great. I'll take your average MCU villain over any of these dinguses. The average MCU villain is written for kids... The average X-Men and DCEU villain is no better.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Aug 17, 2017 17:32:09 GMT
The average MCU villain is written for kids... The average X-Men and DCEU villain is no better. Agreed. Most superhero villains are pretty lame. The greatest exceptions to this are probably Lex Luthor in Superman, and The Joker in Batman. Of course, both roles were written for, and played by, all time great actors.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 20:41:48 GMT
This thread is such a low moment in the history of imdb 2.0. some brain dead mcu fans think xmen should have any link with the mcu movies. Translation: Waah! MCU fans whom I consider to be stupid are actually giving valid points Waah! Seriously the only ones brain dead here are you and your little posse of X Men fanboys that for some odd reason hang out on MCU boards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 20:46:25 GMT
This thread is such a low moment in the history of imdb 2.0. some brain dead mcu fans think xmen should have any link with the mcu movies. Translation: Waah! MCU fans whom I consider to be stupid are actually giving valid points Waah! Seriously the only ones brain dead here are you and your little posse of X Men fanboys that for some odd reason hang out on MCU boards. And for some reason hate the MCU despite both being Marvel properties. I didn't start to hate the X-Men movies until it became clear no one working on them cares about the material or the characters, and the Fox's executives won't let people who do care be the ones to handle them.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Aug 18, 2017 1:02:55 GMT
Most FoX-Men fans hate all of Marvel's other characters and can't stand the idea that the X-Men must co-exist with them in the comics, which is why they use the movies as a shield. The thought that these characters they hate (merely for existing) co-existing with the movies as well is just too much for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2017 1:07:35 GMT
Most FoX-Men fans hate all of Marvel's other characters and can't stand the idea that the X-Men must co-exist with them in the comics, which is why they use the movies as a shield. The thought that these characters they hate (merely for existing) co-existing with the movies as well is just too much for them. Which is bizarre, because Marvel had been crossing over the X-Men and their other properties for decades before this. Hell, many comic book writers love playing with the idea that Captain America and Wolverine served together in World War II.
|
|
agentblue
Sophomore
@agentblue
Posts: 792
Likes: 248
|
Post by agentblue on Aug 18, 2017 1:27:49 GMT
This thread is such a low moment in the history of imdb 2.0. some brain dead mcu fans think xmen should have any link with the mcu movies. Translation: Waah! MCU fans whom I consider to be stupid are actually giving valid points Waah! Seriously the only ones brain dead here are you and your little posse of X Men fanboys that for some odd reason hang out on MCU boards. Amen to that.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Aug 19, 2017 16:39:32 GMT
On the subject of villains, maybe John Noble as the voice of Mastermold.
Also, Krakoa. Of course we'd need someone willing to do the Motion Capture stuff and the voice like what Liam Neeson did for the Monster.
Essentially, bring up any X-Villains aside from Magneto.
|
|
agentblue
Sophomore
@agentblue
Posts: 792
Likes: 248
|
Post by agentblue on Aug 19, 2017 17:41:42 GMT
On the subject of villains, maybe John Noble as the voice of Mastermold. Also, Krakoa. Of course we'd need someone willing to do the Motion Capture stuff and the voice like what Liam Neeson did for the Monster. Essentially, bring up any X-Villains aside from Magneto. Magneto still needs to be established in the universe.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Aug 19, 2017 18:48:02 GMT
On the subject of villains, maybe John Noble as the voice of Mastermold. Also, Krakoa. Of course we'd need someone willing to do the Motion Capture stuff and the voice like what Liam Neeson did for the Monster. Essentially, bring up any X-Villains aside from Magneto. Magneto still needs to be established in the universe. Xavier can mention his old friend and how they parted ways, but there's no need for him to be the first villain right off the bat. X-Men's problem is that aside from Magneto they've never been that good as creating any other villains.
|
|
agentblue
Sophomore
@agentblue
Posts: 792
Likes: 248
|
Post by agentblue on Aug 20, 2017 1:30:10 GMT
Magneto still needs to be established in the universe. Xavier can mention his old friend and how they parted ways, but there's no need for him to be the first villain right off the bat. X-Men's problem is that aside from Magneto they've never been that good as creating any other villains. Magneto or Stryker. I thought Shaw was good but he was just a clone of Magneto.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2017 1:35:09 GMT
Xavier can mention his old friend and how they parted ways, but there's no need for him to be the first villain right off the bat. X-Men's problem is that aside from Magneto they've never been that good as creating any other villains. Magneto or Stryker. I thought Shaw was good but he was just a clone of Magneto. No. That would be retreading ground that's been gone over three times, at least, in the current films. The X-Men need to face someone else.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Aug 20, 2017 1:43:35 GMT
Xavier can mention his old friend and how they parted ways, but there's no need for him to be the first villain right off the bat. X-Men's problem is that aside from Magneto they've never been that good as creating any other villains. Magneto or Stryker. I thought Shaw was good but he was just a clone of Magneto. The movie version of Stryker was was a combination of two villains from the comics, so even then they had to take a lot of liberties. Of course, what really made Stryker stand out was Cox's acting. Other than that he's rather flat as a character.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2017 4:59:28 GMT
Yeah IF X-Men were to go back to Marvel/Disney they would need to go away from what Fox has done much like they are doing with Spider-Man. No origin story that we've seen already and no using Magneto, Stryker, Phoenix, Hellfire Club, Apocalypse. That's been my biggest issue after watching Apocalypse, it was just a bunch of crap we've already seen before even Fox can't seem to deviate from the same few characters/scenes. So IF they joined the MCU do it like Spider-Man and give him a villain that we have yet to see in an X-Men film which is why I chose Sinister. My cast is what I'd personally want and that ignores origin stories like Spider-Man Homecoming and gives a fresh new villain and avoids characters like Wolverine, Mystique, Magneto, Stryker and instead puts focus on characters I feel haven't been done justice or are absolute staples (Charles Xavier). Honestly it wouldn't even upset me if this already had Charles Xavier dead.
In my mind these movies would evolve into Cyclops being the next Magneto much like he was in AvX. I personally would create this story to lead to Cyclops being the radical mutant whose trying to revive mutants after this giant massacre from the first movie by any means necessary. Much like Magneto is, he's a villain that you can understand why he's doing what he's doing and Cyclops fits that mold. Plus in my mind we'd see Cyclops get to be a total bad ass. So yeah maybe have Charles live until the third film and have Cyclops kill him like in AvX. However they could use a different character there as well which I wouldn't mind because we've already seen a former X-Man kill Charles in the previous Fox movies so to avoid doing the same things use a different character maybe.
|
|
agentblue
Sophomore
@agentblue
Posts: 792
Likes: 248
|
Post by agentblue on Aug 20, 2017 5:58:41 GMT
Yeah IF X-Men were to go back to Marvel/Disney they would need to go away from what Fox has done much like they are doing with Spider-Man. No origin story that we've seen already and no using Magneto, Stryker, Phoenix, Hellfire Club, Apocalypse. That's been my biggest issue after watching Apocalypse, it was just a bunch of crap we've already seen before even Fox can't seem to deviate from the same few characters/scenes. So IF they joined the MCU do it like Spider-Man and give him a villain that we have yet to see in an X-Men film which is why I chose Sinister. My cast is what I'd personally want and that ignores origin stories like Spider-Man Homecoming and gives a fresh new villain and avoids characters like Wolverine, Mystique, Magneto, Stryker and instead puts focus on characters I feel haven't been done justice or are absolute staples (Charles Xavier). Honestly it wouldn't even upset me if this already had Charles Xavier dead. In my mind these movies would evolve into Cyclops being the next Magneto much like he was in AvX. I personally would create this story to lead to Cyclops being the radical mutant whose trying to revive mutants after this giant massacre from the first movie by any means necessary. Much like Magneto is, he's a villain that you can understand why he's doing what he's doing and Cyclops fits that mold. Plus in my mind we'd see Cyclops get to be a total bad ass. So yeah maybe have Charles live until the third film and have Cyclops kill him like in AvX. However they could use a different character there as well which I wouldn't mind because we've already seen a former X-Man kill Charles in the previous Fox movies so to avoid doing the same things use a different character maybe. Theres no way they cant have Xavier in this one. I think they should have the original lineup of the X Men in the film and a new villain of course but have Erik make an appearance.
|
|