|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 14, 2017 16:52:22 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 20:15:09 GMT
And the DCEU takes another punch to its non-existent balls. This is like if Downey had insisted opting out of the MCU completely after Ironman 2.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 14, 2017 20:24:39 GMT
bravo if true! No talented artist should stay in a typecast role too long, Ben Affleck is a gifted Oscar nominated director and actor and has a strong versatile career going.
Not every actor gets a Logan out, just ask sorry Jonny Depp and Robert Downey Jun, two talents of their generation remembered as washed up money clowns for Disney Mouse movies.
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Nov 14, 2017 21:34:35 GMT
Then they better be thinking about how good of a Batman the Nightwing actor can be while they look for him.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 14, 2017 21:51:02 GMT
R rated Batman film before you leave, been! Have your Batman die in a blaze of glory!
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 1:40:04 GMT
Not surprising. DCEU needs to hire people with thicker skin.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 15, 2017 1:44:39 GMT
What's his contract again? I'm getting conflicting reports that it's either 3 or 5 films, OR he didn't even sign one with WB.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 15, 2017 1:48:52 GMT
And the DCEU takes another punch to its non-existent balls. This is like if Downey had insisted opting out of the MCU completely after Ironman 2. It would have saved Downey the embarrassment of doing a tired one trick pony character and phoning even that in for the sake of a paycheck. Of course it's not like the audience notices or cares and we all know why.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 1:58:04 GMT
And the DCEU takes another punch to its non-existent balls. This is like if Downey had insisted opting out of the MCU completely after Ironman 2. It would have caused Downey to miss out on playing a 3-Dimensional character he's delighted to play. Fixed.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 15, 2017 2:15:27 GMT
It would have caused Downey to miss out on playing a 3-Dimensional character he's delighted to play. Fixed. He's an asshole that makes smug comments and snarky "jokes". That's not really a nuanced.......Oh wait you mean he gets to be in 3D movies, right? I guess that's a reason to keep trotting out the same boring character. Not a good reason but it is a reason. You are a bright little fella former whatever. Yes you are. Do you like to wear those 3D galsses I bet you do. Hooray!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 2:19:17 GMT
He's an asshole that makes smug comments and snarky "jokes".[/quote] While struggling to do good in a world his family helped make less safe and trying to humble himself in his interactions with others whereas before he wouldn't give a damn. The frequent theme is Tony's past coming back to bite him in the ass. It makes for a 3-D character.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 15, 2017 2:32:49 GMT
He's an asshole that makes smug comments and snarky "jokes". While struggling to do good in a world his family helped make less safe and trying to humble himself in his interactions with others whereas before he wouldn't give a damn. The frequent theme is Tony's past coming back to bite him in the ass. It makes for a 3-D character. [/quote] No. 3D glasses make for a 3D character. RDJ is trotting out a hackneyed CARICATURE. Being a mcu fan you are having a trouble seeing the difference but I'm glad you are enjoying that caricature. He funny and stuff, right? Hooray!!!
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 2:37:24 GMT
RDJ is trotting out a hackneyed CARICATURE Nah, he still shows 3-Dimensional qualities in every appearance. I remember how detractors kept complaining about how he'd never side with the Government in Civil War, yet ignored the character development that easily showed why he'd do that. Guess they're too used to the leads giving out Monologues to tell us what they think instead of just watching them and not needing it spelled out.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 15, 2017 2:46:45 GMT
RDJ is trotting out a hackneyed CARICATURE Nah, he still shows 3-Dimensional qualities in every appearance. I remember how detractors kept complaining about how he'd never side with the Government in Civil War, yet ignored the character development that easily showed why he'd do that. Guess they're too used to the leads giving out Monologues to tell us what they think instead of just watching them and not needing it spelled out. Nah, still the same snarky douchebag as he was at the end of IM. He had a tiny character arc (what passes for one in a mcu film at least) in the first movie and has been doing the same guy every since. If you're happy with stagnant characters and cut and paste plots who am I try and change your mind? Hooray!!!
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 3:00:26 GMT
Nah, still the same snarky douchebag as he was at the end of IM. That guy never would've sided with the Government or taken on a protege. Over several movies, yes. Moreso than what we've seen from DCEU Superman, who just keeps moping.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 15, 2017 3:09:40 GMT
Nah, still the same snarky douchebag as he was at the end of IM. That guy never would've sided with the Government or taken on a protege. Over several movies, yes. Moreso than what we've seen from DCEU Superman, who just keeps moping. Wasn't he selling weapons to the government? Isn't Pepper Potts Tony's protege? Yes and Yes.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 3:20:47 GMT
That guy never would've sided with the Government or taken on a protege. Over several movies, yes. Moreso than what we've seen from DCEU Superman, who just keeps moping. Wasn't he selling weapons to the government? Isn't Pepper Potts Tony's protege? Yes and Yes. He stopped early on in the first movie and was openly against the Government having any hold on him, which was made clear in IM1 and IM2. And no, Pepper was his assistant who just became more powerful over time. I'm talking about his relationship with Peter. He'd never have done anything like that in IM1. Heck, he rejects it in IM3 with the Tennessee kid. Then via character development he's willing to be this to Peter. Compare this to Superman, who really doesn't change much at all in MOS and BvS.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 15, 2017 3:31:58 GMT
Wasn't he selling weapons to the government? Isn't Pepper Potts Tony's protege? Yes and Yes. He stopped early on in the first movie and was openly against the Government having any hold on him, which was made clear in IM1 and IM2. And no, Pepper was his assistant who just became more powerful over time. I'm talking about his relationship with Peter. He'd never have done anything like that in IM1. Heck, he rejects it in IM3 with the Tennessee kid. Then via character development he's willing to be this to Peter. Compare this to Superman, who really doesn't change much at all in MOS and BvS. So exactly as I said. He had a small character development in the first movie which according to you he has now regressed on. Pepper is indeed a protege so I was right about that as well. Didn't he send that kid in IM3 a lot of cool tech and stuff for him to experiment with? yet another protege. Are you sure you are paying close attention because I seem to notice a lot more than you and I've only seen most mcu movies once if at all.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 13:16:28 GMT
So exactly as I said. He had a small character development in the first movie[/quote] Which continued throughout the other movies. IM1 and IM2 he refuses to work with the Government, but then has to in Avengers and makes new friends. IM3 he suffers from PTSD and becomes more obsessive than ever, by the end of the movie he learns to overcome that and doesn't think he needs to be Iron Man anymore. Then he regresses in AOU, and this backfires horribly. This leads to Civil War, where he is more somber and guilty over prior actions (never would've happened before) and as a result now IS willing to work with the Government. He's also willing to open up and be more of a mentor relationship whereas before he rejected the idea. This is more about your inherent dislike of the character rather than saying he doesn't develop. I mean, it's more development than Superman or Batman have had. They made this a plot point in Civil War, where he admitted his obsession with being Iron Man after going into semi-retirement after IM3 negatively affected things. You won't see DC bothering with something like that, because there the costumed ID always meant more than the civilian one. Nope, an assistant who he treats like an equal. It's a different thing from his relationship with Peter. It's ike the difference between Batman's relationship with Alfred vs Robin. A reward for helping him. He sin't going to involve himself in the kids life beyond that. Compare this to Superman, who hardly grows or changes at all. No, dying doesn't count as character growth.
|
|
|
Post by CowherPowerForever on Nov 15, 2017 13:33:57 GMT
And the DCEU takes another punch to its non-existent balls. This is like if Downey had insisted opting out of the MCU completely after Ironman 2. That comparison is laughable. Comparing the two actors prior to their taking on these two big roles. RDJ had drinking issues and really no career at all. And since he has done nothing special either outside of the MCU. Affleck on the other hand was an Oscar winner before taking on the role. And has a bright future as an actor and director. Not sure how you are comparing the two. Would love to hear your reasoning. Also remember Feige said years ago he understood stars would leave these roles. His idea was to do what the Bond franchise did. Replace the actor and keep the story going with the same character
|
|