|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 2, 2017 19:37:20 GMT
Yeah Neal Adams didnt know what he was doing. What does he know about comics? He doesn't know how to draw Arabian characters, just like how Mark Bagley draws every man and woman with nearly the same face. The theme was that people can easily be made to fear foreigners rather than accept the evils within their own society. Making it turn out that there WERE evil foreigners involved ruins it.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 2, 2017 19:52:53 GMT
He doesn't know how to draw Arabian characters, just like how Mark Bagley draws every man and woman with nearly the same face. The theme was that people can easily be made to fear foreigners rather than accept the evils within their own society. Making it turn out that there WERE evil foreigners involved ruins it. In 1970 when the comics market was 99% white, what do you expect? Besides, there are white-looking arabs too. For the movie they wanted to use a well known actor for the villain-limited choices with real arabs. No A-lister arab actors in the West. No, having evil foreigners being manipulated by sick individuals in the society would not have ruined it. Clarence Boddicker was working for Dick Jones but he was still bad. They just didnt want to show an evil foreigner--proof? How many evil dark-skinned foreigners can you name in Disney movies since 2010?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 2, 2017 20:48:52 GMT
In 1970 when the comics market was 99% white, what do you expect? If you accept they were meant to be Arabian then you need to accept Nolan changed their ethnicities in his movies. Then there's no reason to complain over the Mandarin thing. Yeah, it would.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 2, 2017 21:06:25 GMT
If you accept they were meant to be Arabian then you need to accept Nolan changed their ethnicities in his movies. Then there's no reason to complain over the Mandarin thing. Yeah, it would. You have a very narrow experience with literary story types don't you? You cant accept multitasking in a narrative it seems. BTW I dont like Neeson in the movie. I think the red herring was well done, better than in Iron Man 3 since it was treated seriously, but I dont think Neeson was an ideal choice for the part (but I dont have a suggestion for who would have been better). The main thing with Disney MCU is that the villains have to be jokey and PC. Shakespeare and most literature and film into the 20th century didnt agree. PC may work great in a liberal college lecture, but not so much in art.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 2, 2017 21:15:26 GMT
You have a very narrow experience with literary story types don't you? You cant accept multitasking in a narrative it seems. You need to get over this obsession with the villain being the star of the show. Shakespeare gave us motiveless villains in some of his works.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 2, 2017 21:17:37 GMT
You need to get over this obsession with the villain being the star of the show. Shakespeare gave us motiveless villains in some of his works. And you need to get over the idea that a villain needs to be jokey and pc all the time. I am surprised you even know Shakespeare. I would have thought he would have triggered you something awful.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 2, 2017 21:39:03 GMT
You need to get over this obsession with the villain being the star of the show. Shakespeare gave us motiveless villains in some of his works. And you need to get over the idea that a villain needs to be jokey and pc all the time. I am surprised you even know Shakespeare. I would have thought he would have triggered you something awful. Nope, grew up reading him. People who say it's high art seem to ignore all the sex jokes.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Dec 2, 2017 21:43:04 GMT
Hey...lay off Neal Adams! Love the way he did Batman. Legend. This "weak villain" stuff is so fake. It doesn't matter. Some movies have a memorable villain (Back to the Future) some don't (Raider of the Lost Ark)....doesn't matter at all. A movie can be great either way. My favorite movie is Casablanca and that had the most generic villain ever. (Some cliche German guy) Star Wars was fine and Darth Vader is pretty much the same thing as the Winter Soldier. Never hurt SW a bit. Just so much dredging around for something to complain about with Marvel. Happens to everything that is successful. You'll always have people carping that something popular is really not that great if only people would realize it.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 2, 2017 21:44:27 GMT
Nope, grew up reading him. People who say it's high art seem to ignore all the sex jokes. The Iliad has someone getting a mouth full of horse shit. The jokes are not what makes its reputation. And the literature of old societies were aimed at all segments of society-unlike your typical corporate banker-designed movie or book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 22:00:26 GMT
Yes, they are. No one in real life is complaining about Marvel's villains. Just the internet. People are too bitchy. Ultron was a great villain. I hope we see more of his type. He lived up to all the build-up. There's nothing wrong with Iron Monger. There's nothing wrong with having the hero face a dark counterpart of himself. In fact, it happens all the time in the comics. Er, The Red Skull is Captain America's iconic villain. He kind of HAD to be the villain of the first Cap film. And The Winter Soldier/Bucky is another major part of Cap's storylines. He also kind of had to show up. And wait, I thought you liked Bucky. Yeah, it kind of went without saying that Doctor Strange would be facing other magic users. There's nothing wrong with evil Black Panthers. People are seem excited. Well the internet is what you have to go on, you don't really get to hear what many people have to say about them on the street. The odd evil counterpart is ok but it seems like the majority of villains in the MCU fit that bill. It's true that they did have to go with Red Skull and Winter Soldier really is a good villain but it does add to the overall flaw. Yellow Jacket wasn't even a villain in the comic. So it's as though they made him a villain just because he has the same power. Now with Killmonger, he doesn't wear a Black Panther suit, he has his own completely unique suit but in the movie he's just wearing the Black Panther suit. Actually, I have heard what people say about them on the street, and most in real life don't mind Marvel's villains. There's a big outcry about on the internet because there was a lot of basement dwellers with the time to rage about it. No one cares, and you don't seem to mind that Superman fought an evil Kryptonian in Man of Steel, or that Wonder Woman fought another offspring of Zeus in her movie. There is no flaw. No, they made him a villain for convenience. And? You seen Black Panther yet?
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 2, 2017 22:06:14 GMT
Okay I'll bite, how did they cuck Thor? Thor is not presented as an independent heroic character. He is seriously flawed, has parental issues, shown to be kind of dumb (like when he defends Loki in Avengers and is reminded that his brother killed 200 mortals-to which he responds with embarrassment.). Made the butt of a Stark joke. In Thor 2 he fails to defeat the bad guy-Loki and the earthlings do it. The only male characters in the Marvel universe shown to be non neurotic or traditionally successful are Nick Fury and Black Panther (maybe we can throw in Rhodes and Falcon). There is a color pattern emerging. That's not what a cuck is. A cuck is someone who enjoys watching or letting his wife/girlfriend have sex with other men. I have yet to see Thor do that on film.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 2, 2017 22:09:08 GMT
Nope, grew up reading him. People who say it's high art seem to ignore all the sex jokes. And the literature of old societies were aimed at all segments of society So, just like Disney. As opposed to DCEU or FoX-Men what with their "It's for adults only!" mentality.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 2, 2017 22:10:27 GMT
I have yet to see Thor do that on film. Give it time. Heimdall would likely be involved.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 2, 2017 22:12:44 GMT
So, just like Disney. As opposed to DCEU or FoX-Men what with their "It's for adults only!" mentality. You are forgetting all the other stuff in old literature which Wall Street Disney lacks. Not that I am fond of either DCEU or Fox, though I think Wolverine 2013 was better made than any of the Marvel Disney films. But I dont really see Logan as a superhero character.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 2, 2017 22:23:40 GMT
I have yet to see Thor do that on film. Give it time. Heimdall would likely be involved. I certainly hope so! CBM could use some BBC action!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 22:32:44 GMT
Give it time. Heimdall would likely be involved. I certainly hope so! CBM could use some BBC action! If you are looking for a big prick I can point some out for you... #teamcolden
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 22:35:27 GMT
Thor is not presented as an independent heroic character. He is seriously flawed, has parental issues, shown to be kind of dumb (like when he defends Loki in Avengers and is reminded that his brother killed 200 mortals-to which he responds with embarrassment.). Made the butt of a Stark joke. In Thor 2 he fails to defeat the bad guy-Loki and the earthlings do it. The only male characters in the Marvel universe shown to be non neurotic or traditionally successful are Nick Fury and Black Panther (maybe we can throw in Rhodes and Falcon). There is a color pattern emerging. That's not what a cuck is. A cuck is someone who enjoys watching or letting his wife/girlfriend have sex with other men. I have yet to see Thor do that on film. I thought a cuck was someone who was a republican in name only. At least, that's the definition Google came up with when I first looked it up.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 2, 2017 22:56:28 GMT
That's not what a cuck is. A cuck is someone who enjoys watching or letting his wife/girlfriend have sex with other men. I have yet to see Thor do that on film. I thought a cuck was someone who was a republican in name only. At least, that's the definition Google came up with when I first looked it up. Cuck is short for cuckolding. It's a fetish and it's name been used recently, especially during the 2016 elections, as a supposed insult to "demasculinizing liberal men" or something like that. It's a word that the jackass conservatives to use to describe people who they don't like. Kinda like how jackass liberals like to call people racist or whatever popular buzzword of the day to describe someone they don't like.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 2, 2017 22:57:27 GMT
I certainly hope so! CBM could use some BBC action! If you are looking for a big prick I can point some out for you... #teamcolden Colden got a big black dick? My man!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 23:03:53 GMT
I thought a cuck was someone who was a republican in name only. At least, that's the definition Google came up with when I first looked it up. Cuck is short for cuckolding. It's a fetish and it's name been used recently, especially during the 2016 elections, as a supposed insult to "demasculinizing liberal men" or something like that. It's a word that the jackass conservatives to use to describe people who they don't like. Kinda like how jackass liberals like to call people racist or whatever popular buzzword of the day to describe someone they don't like. Ah, okay. I haven't actually ever heard anyone use the word, in any context, until recently on this website.
|
|