|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Sept 24, 2017 18:10:06 GMT
I count the EVENTS as cannon, Hulk destroying NY and stuff, but not the movie its self. This is because of the actor change ( i HATE it when that shit happens ) before IW P1 airs in cinemas i may have an epic binge of MCU movies in the correct timeline ( starting with cap america the 1st avenger ) and i will skip the hulk in that binge. The only reason im not gunna skip fellow actor - change headach film Iron man 1 is because its Iron mans origin story and really important to the MCU but yeah the hulk can go fuck himself, and u Edward Norton if ur reading this. Well, MCU doesn't consider The Incredible Hulk to be cannon either. That's why they haven't made another Hulk movie and even replaced the actor playing Bruce Banner in the hope that people would forget there was ever a Hulk movie in MCU. How? We see footage from TIH in The Avengers and get a mention of the Hulk and Abomination's fight in Harlem. There was also a Marvel One-Shot talking about the events of TIH and establishing Stark's role at the end of the film. The Harlem fight is also seen in a newspaper clipping at the New York Bulletin building in the Netflix shows. The Abomination's been mentioned more than once on Agents of SHIELD, too, still in SHIELD custody. The reason why we haven't gotten another solo Hulk movie is because Universal doesn't want to play ball with Marvel Studios, since they won't cooperate again the character appears in other films.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 18:19:24 GMT
Well, MCU doesn't consider The Incredible Hulk to be cannon either. That's why they haven't made another Hulk movie and even replaced the actor playing Bruce Banner in the hope that people would forget there was ever a Hulk movie in MCU. How? We see footage from TIH in The Avengers and get a mention of the Hulk and Abomination's fight in Harlem. There was also a Marvel One-Shot talking about the events of TIH and establishing Stark's role at the end of the film. The Harlem fight is also seen in a newspaper clipping at the New York Bulletin building in the Netflix shows. The Abomination's been mentioned more than once on Agents of SHIELD, too, still in SHIELD custody. The reason why we haven't gotten another solo Hulk movie is because Universal doesn't want to play ball with Marvel Studios, since they won't cooperate again the character appears in other films. I think X-box One is a troll. A harmless one but a troll regardless.
|
|
|
Post by sandwichclegane on Sept 24, 2017 18:27:22 GMT
How? We see footage from TIH in The Avengers and get a mention of the Hulk and Abomination's fight in Harlem. There was also a Marvel One-Shot talking about the events of TIH and establishing Stark's role at the end of the film. The Harlem fight is also seen in a newspaper clipping at the New York Bulletin building in the Netflix shows. The Abomination's been mentioned more than once on Agents of SHIELD, too, still in SHIELD custody. The reason why we haven't gotten another solo Hulk movie is because Universal doesn't want to play ball with Marvel Studios, since they won't cooperate again the character appears in other films. I think X-box One is a troll. A harmless one but a troll regardless. fuck you man i seriously do not like 2008 hulk
|
|
|
Post by sandwichclegane on Sept 24, 2017 18:28:55 GMT
How? We see footage from TIH in The Avengers and get a mention of the Hulk and Abomination's fight in Harlem. There was also a Marvel One-Shot talking about the events of TIH and establishing Stark's role at the end of the film. The Harlem fight is also seen in a newspaper clipping at the New York Bulletin building in the Netflix shows. The Abomination's been mentioned more than once on Agents of SHIELD, too, still in SHIELD custody. The reason why we haven't gotten another solo Hulk movie is because Universal doesn't want to play ball with Marvel Studios, since they won't cooperate again the character appears in other films. I think X-box One is a troll. A harmless one but a troll regardless. sooo whats stopping MARVEL from making a Hulk film? they clearly have the rights to the character
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 18:34:50 GMT
I think X-box One is a troll. A harmless one but a troll regardless. sooo whats stopping MARVEL from making a Hulk film? they clearly have the rights to the character It's a good question. Many people want it. But it's just not in their schedule.
|
|
|
Post by sandwichclegane on Sept 24, 2017 18:37:55 GMT
sooo whats stopping MARVEL from making a Hulk film? they clearly have the rights to the character It's a good question. Many people want it. But it's just not in their schedule. I no longer care what you have to say due to your unfounded accusations of me being a troll, my grandfather was killed by trolls in 97, so for you to so publicly accuse of being one is quite frankly, erroneous!
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Sept 24, 2017 18:47:35 GMT
Bond, Batman...yeah but those films are NOT part of a continuity based film series, dumbass. Agreed. MCU's biggest hype has been that they constantly remind people that they're a shared cinematic universe and their movies are all connected. So when they hype that up as their biggest selling point and then they replace an actor in a major role after he was in just 1 movie, then that's a HUGE FAIL for continuity. Actually the Bond movies, outside of the independent one-shot Never Say Never Again, up to Die Another Day are part of a continuity based film series. Bernard Lee played M from Dr. No all the way up to Moonraker, Robert Brown took over the part till License to Kill. Judi Dench was announced as the new M in Goldeneye. Desmond Llewelyn played Q in From Russia with Love all the way up to The World Is Not Enough in 1999. Tracy Bond( Diana Rigg), Bond's wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, gets referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only, License to Kill, Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough. And, all the actors who have played Bond up to Die Another Day were portraying the same character. Now I say up to Die Another Day because Casino Royale was a total reboot. The original Batman movies(1989-1997) are for all intents and purposes in the same continuity. We get a reference to Vicki Vale and The Joker in Batman Returns, Catwoman is referenced in Forever and so is The Joker, and Michael Gough and Pat Hingle portray Alfred and Gordon in all four. There is also an arc, albeit somewhat invisible, concerning Batman's approach to crime and public image in all four. In the 1989 film he's brutal and prefers to stay in the shadows, and after learning The Joker killed his parents as a child he let's loose and chooses to become a loose canon to roughly all the criminals he encounters, he becomes at peace with taking lives after disposing of Jack Napier. In Returns, he sees what the ramifications are with his loose canon attitude and deals with extreme versions of what he could've been with Catwoman and Penguin, and after thinking he lost Catwoman he decides to reign himself in more, which carries us to Forever. In Forever he's a bit more open to appearing in public and a little less brutal in his crime fighting( on the level of Batman '89 before the third act at least). He also questions his life choices and wonders if being Batman has done him any good as he believes its become a curse. At the end he accepts Dick's help and welcomes a partner in his battle for justice. In Batman & Robin he has become more at peace with losing his parents, is not brutal in combat, and is very open to appearing before the public. He's content. Recasting a character doesn't damage the concept of a cinematic universe at all.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 24, 2017 19:19:03 GMT
Agreed. MCU's biggest hype has been that they constantly remind people that they're a shared cinematic universe and their movies are all connected. So when they hype that up as their biggest selling point and then they replace an actor in a major role after he was in just 1 movie, then that's a HUGE FAIL for continuity. Actually the Bond movies, outside of the independent one-shot Never Say Never Again, up to Die Another Day are part of a continuity based film series. Bernard Lee played M from Dr. No all the way up to Moonraker, Robert Brown took over the part till License to Kill. Judi Dench was announced as the new M in Goldeneye. Desmond Llewelyn played Q in From Russia with Love all the way up to The World Is Not Enough in 1999. Tracy Bond( Diana Rigg), Bond's wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, gets referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only, License to Kill, Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough. And, all the actors who have played Bond up to Die Another Day were portraying the same character. Now I say up to Die Another Day because Casino Royale was a total reboot. The original Batman movies(1989-1997) are for all intents and purposes in the same continuity. We get a reference to Vicki Vale and The Joker in Batman Returns, Catwoman is referenced in Forever and so is The Joker, and Michael Gough and Pat Hingle portray Alfred and Gordon in all four. There is also an arc, albeit somewhat invisible, concerning Batman's approach to crime and public image in all four. In the 1989 film he's brutal and prefers to stay in the shadows, and after learning The Joker killed his parents as a child he let's loose and chooses to become a loose canon to roughly all the criminals he encounters, he becomes at peace with taking lives after disposing of Jack Napier. In Returns, he sees what the ramifications are with his loose canon attitude and deals with extreme versions of what he could've been with Catwoman and Penguin, and after thinking he lost Catwoman he decides to reign himself in more, which carries us to Forever. In Forever he's a bit more open to appearing in public and a little less brutal in his crime fighting( on the level of Batman '89 before the third act at least). He also questions his life choices and wonders if being Batman has done him any good as he believes its become a curse. At the end he accepts Dick's help and welcomes a partner in his battle for justice. In Batman & Robin he has become more at peace with losing his parents, is not brutal in combat, and is very open to appearing before the public. He's content. Recasting a character doesn't damage the concept of a cinematic universe at all. The James Bond movies and Batman movies didn't hype up the continuity as a the biggest selling point like MCU does. When you hype up continuity and all the movies being connected as your biggest selling point and the you replace a major character after he was in just 1 movie, that destroys your entire selling point and is a HUGE FAIL on your hyped-up claims of continuity.
|
|
|
Post by sandwichclegane on Sept 24, 2017 19:21:01 GMT
Agreed. MCU's biggest hype has been that they constantly remind people that they're a shared cinematic universe and their movies are all connected. So when they hype that up as their biggest selling point and then they replace an actor in a major role after he was in just 1 movie, then that's a HUGE FAIL for continuity. Actually the Bond movies, outside of the independent one-shot Never Say Never Again, up to Die Another Day are part of a continuity based film series. Bernard Lee played M from Dr. No all the way up to Moonraker, Robert Brown took over the part till License to Kill. Judi Dench was announced as the new M in Goldeneye. Desmond Llewelyn played Q in From Russia with Love all the way up to The World Is Not Enough in 1999. Tracy Bond( Diana Rigg), Bond's wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, gets referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only, License to Kill, Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough. And, all the actors who have played Bond up to Die Another Day were portraying the same character. Now I say up to Die Another Day because Casino Royale was a total reboot. yes, SOME of the movies were connected by sequals and pierce brosnan came back for those sequals. i think you are missing the point here
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 24, 2017 19:37:24 GMT
Actually the Bond movies, outside of the independent one-shot Never Say Never Again, up to Die Another Day are part of a continuity based film series. Bernard Lee played M from Dr. No all the way up to Moonraker, Robert Brown took over the part till License to Kill. Judi Dench was announced as the new M in Goldeneye. Desmond Llewelyn played Q in From Russia with Love all the way up to The World Is Not Enough in 1999. Tracy Bond( Diana Rigg), Bond's wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, gets referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only, License to Kill, Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough. And, all the actors who have played Bond up to Die Another Day were portraying the same character. Now I say up to Die Another Day because Casino Royale was a total reboot. yes, SOME of the movies were connected by sequals and pierce brosnan came back for those sequals. i think you are missing the point here The point was, why is it so difficult to accept a different actor is the same character? What is this problem? It happened with Dumbledore mid series. We're about to get a new Han Solo. I tend to truly appreciate the different versions, so I don't know why you would look at it as some sort of an issue.
|
|
|
Post by sandwichclegane on Sept 24, 2017 19:49:35 GMT
yes, SOME of the movies were connected by sequals and pierce brosnan came back for those sequals. i think you are missing the point here The point was, why is it so difficult to accept a different actor is the same character? What is this problem? It happened with Dumbledore mid series. We're about to get a new Han Solo. I tend to truly appreciate the different versions, so I don't know why you would look at it as some sort of an issue. because its all supposed to be PART OF THE SAME WORLD you butthole! if you went to bed with ur wife one night and woke up next to a completey different woman but she acted the same as your wife and your kids treated her as their mom without any question, how would u feel holmes? look, the point is, your wife is not who she says she is.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 24, 2017 20:30:42 GMT
The point was, why is it so difficult to accept a different actor is the same character? What is this problem? It happened with Dumbledore mid series. We're about to get a new Han Solo. I tend to truly appreciate the different versions, so I don't know why you would look at it as some sort of an issue. because its all supposed to be PART OF THE SAME WORLD you butthole! ArArArchStanton just got owned!
I agree. MCU has constantly hyped themselves as all PART OF THE SAME UNIVERSE and CONTINUITY so when they replace a major character after the actor was in just 1 movie, that destroys their biggest selling point.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Sept 24, 2017 20:47:32 GMT
Actually the Bond movies, outside of the independent one-shot Never Say Never Again, up to Die Another Day are part of a continuity based film series. Bernard Lee played M from Dr. No all the way up to Moonraker, Robert Brown took over the part till License to Kill. Judi Dench was announced as the new M in Goldeneye. Desmond Llewelyn played Q in From Russia with Love all the way up to The World Is Not Enough in 1999. Tracy Bond( Diana Rigg), Bond's wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, gets referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only, License to Kill, Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough. And, all the actors who have played Bond up to Die Another Day were portraying the same character. Now I say up to Die Another Day because Casino Royale was a total reboot. The original Batman movies(1989-1997) are for all intents and purposes in the same continuity. We get a reference to Vicki Vale and The Joker in Batman Returns, Catwoman is referenced in Forever and so is The Joker, and Michael Gough and Pat Hingle portray Alfred and Gordon in all four. There is also an arc, albeit somewhat invisible, concerning Batman's approach to crime and public image in all four. In the 1989 film he's brutal and prefers to stay in the shadows, and after learning The Joker killed his parents as a child he let's loose and chooses to become a loose canon to roughly all the criminals he encounters, he becomes at peace with taking lives after disposing of Jack Napier. In Returns, he sees what the ramifications are with his loose canon attitude and deals with extreme versions of what he could've been with Catwoman and Penguin, and after thinking he lost Catwoman he decides to reign himself in more, which carries us to Forever. In Forever he's a bit more open to appearing in public and a little less brutal in his crime fighting( on the level of Batman '89 before the third act at least). He also questions his life choices and wonders if being Batman has done him any good as he believes its become a curse. At the end he accepts Dick's help and welcomes a partner in his battle for justice. In Batman & Robin he has become more at peace with losing his parents, is not brutal in combat, and is very open to appearing before the public. He's content. Recasting a character doesn't damage the concept of a cinematic universe at all. The James Bond movies and Batman movies didn't hype up the continuity as a the biggest selling point like MCU does. When you hype up continuity and all the movies being connected as your biggest selling point and the you replace a major character after he was in just 1 movie, that destroys your entire selling point and is a HUGE FAIL on your hyped-up claims of continuity. No, if continuity is broken or not it lies solely on the writing, not the performer. But if its that big of an issue for you then blame Norton and Howard for not being professional and agreeing to play ball, otherwise they'd still be playing those characters.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Sept 24, 2017 20:51:47 GMT
because its all supposed to be PART OF THE SAME WORLD you butthole! ArArArchStanton just got owned!
I agree. MCU has constantly hyped themselves as all PART OF THE SAME UNIVERSE and CONTINUITY so when they replace a major character after the actor was in just 1 movie, that destroys their biggest selling point.
It really doesn't. If you want to make this argument then shouldn't you express criticism towards the DC-CW shows for recasting Sara Lance? Remember, Jacqueline MacInnes Wood played her originally but she was recast with Caity Lotz. So, after pointing this out I'd say its time to announce that you got owned.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Sept 24, 2017 20:52:21 GMT
Actually the Bond movies, outside of the independent one-shot Never Say Never Again, up to Die Another Day are part of a continuity based film series. Bernard Lee played M from Dr. No all the way up to Moonraker, Robert Brown took over the part till License to Kill. Judi Dench was announced as the new M in Goldeneye. Desmond Llewelyn played Q in From Russia with Love all the way up to The World Is Not Enough in 1999. Tracy Bond( Diana Rigg), Bond's wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, gets referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only, License to Kill, Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough. And, all the actors who have played Bond up to Die Another Day were portraying the same character. Now I say up to Die Another Day because Casino Royale was a total reboot. yes, SOME of the movies were connected by sequals and pierce brosnan came back for those sequals. i think you are missing the point here No, I'm not.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Sept 24, 2017 20:54:44 GMT
The point was, why is it so difficult to accept a different actor is the same character? What is this problem? It happened with Dumbledore mid series. We're about to get a new Han Solo. I tend to truly appreciate the different versions, so I don't know why you would look at it as some sort of an issue. because its all supposed to be PART OF THE SAME WORLD you butthole! if you went to bed with ur wife one night and woke up next to a completey different woman but she acted the same as your wife and your kids treated her as their mom without any question, how would u feel holmes? look, the point is, your wife is not who she says she is. It's called suspension of disbelief, there are just some things in visual media you've just got to accept and go with the flow. If you have a problem with this, then blame Norton and Howard for not playing ball and being unprofessional, otherwise they'd still be their characters.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 24, 2017 21:11:09 GMT
The James Bond movies and Batman movies didn't hype up the continuity as a the biggest selling point like MCU does. When you hype up continuity and all the movies being connected as your biggest selling point and the you replace a major character after he was in just 1 movie, that destroys your entire selling point and is a HUGE FAIL on your hyped-up claims of continuity. No, if continuity is broken or not it lies solely on the writing, not the performer. But if its that big of an issue for you then blame Norton and Howard for not being professional and agreeing to play ball, otherwise they'd still be playing those characters. Why should Howard agree to play ball when he's underpaid? Howard isn't in movies for free. He has bills to pay too and acting is how he makes money to pay his bills. If MCU is underpaying him, then why should he agree to play ball and work for less than what he deserves?
Look at the DCEU. Patty Jenkins wanted a raise for Wonder Woman II so WB gave her a raise. Howard just wanted a raise too. It's not like MCU couldn't afford to give him a raise. But MCU, which not only put a bad TV show in theaters but made people pay IMAX money to see that bad TV show in theaters, was too greedy to give Howard a reasonable raise.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 24, 2017 21:18:37 GMT
No, if continuity is broken or not it lies solely on the writing, not the performer. But if its that big of an issue for you then blame Norton and Howard for not being professional and agreeing to play ball, otherwise they'd still be playing those characters. Why should Howard agree to play ball when he's underpaid? Howard isn't in movies for free. He has bills to pay too and acting is how he makes money to pay his bills. If MCU is underpaying him, then why should he agree to play ball and work for less than what he deserves?
Look at the DCEU. Patty Jenkins wanted a raise for Wonder Woman II so WB gave her a raise. Howard just wanted a raise too. It's not like MCU couldn't afford to give him a raise. But MCU, which not only put a bad TV show in theaters but made people pay IMAX money to see that bad TV show in theaters, was too greedy to give Howard a reasonable raise.
You have no idea how the film business works, asshole
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Sept 24, 2017 21:19:42 GMT
The point was, why is it so difficult to accept a different actor is the same character? What is this problem? It happened with Dumbledore mid series. We're about to get a new Han Solo. I tend to truly appreciate the different versions, so I don't know why you would look at it as some sort of an issue. because its all supposed to be PART OF THE SAME WORLD you butthole! if you went to bed with ur wife one night and woke up next to a completey different woman but she acted the same as your wife and your kids treated her as their mom without any question, how would u feel holmes? look, the point is, your wife is not who she says she is. Ok, come back when you aren't 12 alright.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 24, 2017 21:20:51 GMT
ArArArchStanton just got owned!
I agree. MCU has constantly hyped themselves as all PART OF THE SAME UNIVERSE and CONTINUITY so when they replace a major character after the actor was in just 1 movie, that destroys their biggest selling point.
Jacqueline MacInnes Wood played her originally but she was recast with Caity Lotz. Jacqueline MacInnes Wood played Sara Lance in a flashback scene in the pilot episode. That flashback scene took place in the past so she was a younger Sara Lance. It's not a continuity fuck-up to have a different actor/actress play a younger version of a character. Supergirl has different actresses playing younger versions of Kara and Alex. Superman: The Movie had a different actor playing a younger version of Clark Kent. MoS also had different actor playing a younger version of Clark Kent (i.e. the kid who pushed the school bus out of the water). And Wonder Woman had 3 different actresses playing Diana - 10-year-old Lily Aspell, 14-year-old Emily Carey, and Gal Gadot.
According to this timeline posted by MCU fans, i.stack.imgur.com/bu1LW.jpg, The Incredible Hulk takes place in 2009 and The Avengers takes place in 2010. So they should've been played by the same actor. To replace a major character after the actor was in just 1 movie and his next movie is supposed to take place just 1 year later destroys their biggest selling point.
|
|