|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 2, 2017 20:19:42 GMT
It's one of the definitions of it when used in context.
Kinberg meant they aren't going to do anything cool with the story, as usual.
Honestly, leave it to them they'd make the Asgardians into some delusional LARPer Cult who live in castle somewhere.
Show me one filmmaker defining the word as such. Otherwise it's just a case of people being too lazy to use the definition and just assume what a word means. Take a look at all the X-Men movies, there is the definition made reality. |
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 3, 2017 2:14:55 GMT
Show me one filmmaker defining the word as such. Otherwise it's just a case of people being too lazy to use the definition and just assume what a word means. Take a look at all the X-Men movies, there is the definition made reality. You're just arguing for the sake of it now. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Oct 7, 2017 4:57:08 GMT
Take a look at all the X-Men movies, there is the definition made reality. You're just arguing for the sake of it now. You're starting to figure it out. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 7, 2017 19:43:53 GMT
I just reread the original Dark Phoenix Saga and it was 99% on earth or near it. So I don't understand why people are getting upset at the movie version not being too intergalactic when the source material was only intergalactic for a few pages when Jean eats a star...then the story goes straight back to our solar system. Do people just don't know that inter galactic refers to traveling to other galaxies, just utter ignorant about galaxies, or didn't read/remember Dark Phoenix? You saying the Shi'ar wasn't a part of it? Or that they came from the moon? |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 7, 2017 20:02:25 GMT
That's what it refers to though, keeping something that SHOULD be flying FROM flying. It's what has kept X-Men stagnant for so long while MCU and even DCEU try innovation. And Kinberg doesn't know what he's talking about. Except that's not what the dictionary says. Which makes your point invalid. Kinberg just meant that the film primarily took place on earth. Because you know...that's what the word means. That's actually what it means when it comes to movies and such. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 20:33:15 GMT
Except that's not what the dictionary says. Which makes your point invalid. Kinberg just meant that the film primarily took place on earth. Because you know...that's what the word means. That's actually what it means when it comes to movies and such. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. A noble effort, but X-Tra DUMB is fully committed to denying any kind of shortcomings in the FoX-Men films. |
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 7, 2017 21:04:26 GMT
I just reread the original Dark Phoenix Saga and it was 99% on earth or near it. So I don't understand why people are getting upset at the movie version not being too intergalactic when the source material was only intergalactic for a few pages when Jean eats a star...then the story goes straight back to our solar system. Do people just don't know that inter galactic refers to traveling to other galaxies, just utter ignorant about galaxies, or didn't read/remember Dark Phoenix? You saying the Shi'ar wasn't a part of it? Or that they came from the moon? Independence Day, War of The Worlds, The Thing are not regarded as intergalactic adventures either. Because of their setting. |
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Oct 7, 2017 21:13:41 GMT
I just reread the original Dark Phoenix Saga and it was 99% on earth or near it. So I don't understand why people are getting upset at the movie version not being too intergalactic when the source material was only intergalactic for a few pages when Jean eats a star...then the story goes straight back to our solar system.
Do people just don't know that intergalactic refers to traveling to other galaxies, just utter ignorant about galaxies, or didn't read/remember Dark Phoenix? |
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 7, 2017 21:14:27 GMT
Except that's not what the dictionary says. Which makes your point invalid. Kinberg just meant that the film primarily took place on earth. Because you know...that's what the word means. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. Care to give an example of a filmmaker defining the word as such? Because it seems more like people didn't know what the word meant and just made wild guesses instead of checking due to laziness. Which is something @weirdraptor does very often. I mean did Singer and Burton even use that word to discribe those? And there is nothing fantastical about child soldiers. It's a very real thing. People have called Batman taking Robin under his wing irresponsible even in the comics. Nitpick: Mystique is naked 24/7 in the comics. She just forms clothing all the time. And X-Men in general is a sci-fi series and because their abilities are based on evolution. So is Star War and is labelled as such. Very bad examples. EDIT: And intergalactic travel falls under sci-fi, not fanasty. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 21:19:42 GMT
That's actually what it means when it comes to movies and such. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. Care to give an example of a filmmaker defining the word as such? Because it seems more like people didn't know what the word meant and just made wild guesses instead of checking due to laziness. Which is something @weirdraptor does very often. Nitpick: Mystique is naked 24/7 in the comics. She just forms clothing all the time. And X-Men in general is a sci-fi series and because their abilities are based on evolution. So is Star War and is label as such. Very bad examples. No, Star Wars is fantasy disguises as Sci-Fi. Whoops. Looks like an X-Tra DUMB little loser shouldn't throw stones. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 21:21:02 GMT
That's actually what it means when it comes to movies and such. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. Care to give an example of a filmmaker defining the word as such? Because it seems more like people didn't know what the word meant and just made wild guesses instead of checking due to laziness. Which is something @weirdraptor does very often. Nitpick: Mystique is naked 24/7 in the comics. She just forms clothing all the time. And X-Men in general is a sci-fi series and because their abilities are based on evolution. So is Star War and is labelled as such. Very bad examples. And my fact-checking is just fine. The number of minutes someone has on-screen does not equate to anything meaningful automatically. You're just being picky because it suits your needs. Man, you should have been an abortion. |
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 7, 2017 21:39:11 GMT
Care to give an example of a filmmaker defining the word as such? Because it seems more like people didn't know what the word meant and just made wild guesses instead of checking due to laziness. Which is something @weirdraptor does very often. Nitpick: Mystique is naked 24/7 in the comics. She just forms clothing all the time. And X-Men in general is a sci-fi series and because their abilities are based on evolution. So is Star War and is label as such. Very bad examples. No, Star Wars is fantasy disguises as Sci-Fi. Whoops. Looks like an X-Tra DUMB little loser shouldn't throw stones. Oh so you're saying Star Wars doesn't futuristic technology, space travel, and extraterrestrial life. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 21:40:35 GMT
No, Star Wars is fantasy disguises as Sci-Fi. Whoops. Looks like an X-Tra DUMB little loser shouldn't throw stones. Oh so you're saying Star Wars doesn't futuristic technology, space travel, and extraterrestrial life. Oh so you're saying Star Wars doesn't have a very strong mystical element like The Force and ghosts? |
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 7, 2017 21:45:35 GMT
Oh so you're saying Star Wars doesn't futuristic technology, space travel, and extraterrestrial life. Oh so you're saying Star Wars doesn't have a very strong mystical element like The Force and ghosts? Considering I never said it was "sci-fi disguised as fanasty" that's a pretty dumb question. But that's to be expected. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 21:48:35 GMT
Oh so you're saying Star Wars doesn't have a very strong mystical element like The Force and ghosts? Considering I never said it was "sci-fi disguised as fanasty" that's a pretty dumb question. But that's to be expected. Yes, I do expect dumb questions from you. |
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 7, 2017 21:50:04 GMT
Considering I never said it was "sci-fi disguised as fanasty" that's a pretty dumb question. But that's to be expected. Yes, I do expect dumb questions from you. Except I never asked a question. You don't see a "?" at the end of my post. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 22:04:18 GMT
Yes, I do expect dumb questions from you. Except I never asked a question. You don't see a "?" at the post of my post. So were you naturally born without a brain stem, or was it surgically removed? |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 7, 2017 22:19:43 GMT
That's actually what it means when it comes to movies and such. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. Care to give an example of a filmmaker defining the word as such? Actions speak louder than words. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Oct 8, 2017 3:43:46 GMT
"That's no moon. It's a space station."
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 8, 2017 9:25:43 GMT
That's actually what it means when it comes to movies and such. Not having Robin in a Batman movie because him fighting crime with a 14 year old is not realistic. You're placing a fantasy story element in our reality. Or grounding it. Saying Mystique should be naked because she can't shape shift her clothes because that's not realistic is grounding it. They are taking fantasy elements out of these movies. X-men is not sci-fi. It is fantasy. X-men should be this generation's Star Wars. Care to give an example of a filmmaker defining the word as such? Because it seems more like people didn't know what the word meant and just made wild guesses instead of checking due to laziness. Which is something @weirdraptor does very often. I mean did Singer and Burton even use that word to discribe those? And there is nothing fantastical about child soldiers. It's a very real thing. People have called Batman taking Robin under his wing irresponsible even in the comics. Nitpick: Mystique is naked 24/7 in the comics. She just forms clothing all the time. And X-Men in general is a sci-fi series and because their abilities are based on evolution. So is Star War and is labelled as such. Very bad examples. EDIT: And intergalactic travel falls under sci-fi, not fanasty. Burton's movies are never grounded. They all have a sense of otherworldliness. Singer described his take Apocalypse as grounded. Even saying him growing big in the real world as silly. Actually, there is something fantastical about Robin. Batman is the Dark Knight . Wouldn't that make Robin his squire? He is training him to take over for him as the new Batman. Yes, she is technically naked, but the filmmakers were dumb enough to over think that. They made the X-men movies sci-fi. Also, mutants didn't come about from natural evolution. The Celestials put the x-gene into humans. Something they co opted from the Kree creating Inhumans. Star Wars is technically sci-fantasy because it is in a futuristic setting. 9The same X-men technically being urban fantasy. You know when you put fantasy elements into a modern setting. |
|
