|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jan 28, 2018 13:14:25 GMT
Yes, but we still have another X-Men movie coming this year I believe, Dark Phoenix. If it's in post-production now then it would have been filmed prior to Disney buying Fox, so it should have hopefully survived any interference Disney would have made? Unless of course they do reshoots or whatever. But it least it will have the same actors. Do you think that will be the last real X-Men movie though with the same actors? Before Disney make a crappy reboot like they did with that Homecoming shit? Most likely it will be the end of the main series of Xfilms. They will/might still spinoff releases like Xforce, gambit, New mutants but no more main story. Disney will probably get control and make an Xfilm in 2022.Logan (growling at Magneto): " You should not have killed my mom...or messed up my claw pedicure, poo poo head". Oh I'm so unspeakably looking forward to this...
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 13:20:41 GMT
Who cares? So they got 1 thing right. What about the countless things they've gotten wrong? They are a long way from redeeming themselves. That should be directed to MCU movies that cannot get anything right and has single handily almost destroyed the credibility of the superhero genre that the x-men and nolan trilogy gave credibility too. Other way around, the MCU saved the genre after Nolan and Singer nearly destroyed it with their creative bankruptcy.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 13:21:19 GMT
Most likely it will be the end of the main series of Xfilms. They will/might still spinoff releases like Xforce, gambit, New mutants but no more main story. Disney will probably get control and make an Xfilm in 2022.Logan (growling at Magneto): " You should not have killed my mom...or messed up my claw pedicure, poo poo head". Oh I'm so unspeakably looking forward to this... It's better than Xavier letting Magneto go again and again, like a fool. And Erik did the whole "You killed my mom" thing too. But First Class had no balls so they had to make the killer a Nazi. You have to get over your hatred of Naturalistic Dialog, people don't talk in noxious platitudes like Wonder Woman/Batman/Superman do. After all, I don't see you critiquing anything that comes out of Deadpool's mouth.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Jan 28, 2018 14:03:32 GMT
And Erik did the whole "You killed my mom" thing too. But First Class had no balls so they had to make the killer a Nazi No they had balls because Xavier, the good guy, tried to convince Magneto not to kill the Nazi-affiliated Shaw after his merciless killing of Magnetos mother. That is a ballsy conception to try and pull since everyone hates Nazis and automatically wants them dead but here we have the hero advising the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 14:05:07 GMT
And Erik did the whole "You killed my mom" thing too. But First Class had no balls so they had to make the killer a Nazi No they had balls because Xavier, the good guy, tried to convince Magneto not to kill the Nazi-affiliated Shaw after his merciless killing of Magnetos mother. It was predictable as Hell, given what we already knew about Xavier. Unpredictable would've been Xavier killing the guy and then developing a more pacifistic stance later on. Or Erik killing some guys because he assumed they were Nazis but they were just old Germans.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Jan 28, 2018 14:07:37 GMT
No they had balls because Xavier, the good guy, tried to convince Magneto not to kill the Nazi-affiliated Shaw after his merciless killing of Magnetos mother. It was predictable as Hell, given what we already knew about Xavier. Unpredictable would've been Xavier killing the guy and then developing a more pacifistic stance later on. Xavier doesnt kill, he doesnt believe in vengeful acts of violence. Having him kill then change is illogical. He was shown to grow up in a comfortable peaceful environment going to Oxford university. Thats not a upbringing that encourages murder.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Jan 28, 2018 15:25:04 GMT
Logan (growling at Magneto): " You should not have killed my mom...or messed up my claw pedicure, poo poo head". Oh I'm so unspeakably looking forward to this... It's better than Xavier letting Magneto go again and again, like a fool. And Erik did the whole "You killed my mom" thing too. But First Class had no balls so they had to make the killer a Nazi. You have to get over your hatred of Naturalistic Dialog, people don't talk in noxious platitudes like Wonder Woman/Batman/Superman do. After all, I don't see you critiquing anything that comes out of Deadpool's mouth. nah, MCU with it dumbed-down kiddy formula ruined everything including the quality CMB and other franchises such as Star Wars. It will go down in history for being that infamously huge raccoon turd for manchildren.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 19:19:31 GMT
It was predictable as Hell, given what we already knew about Xavier. Unpredictable would've been Xavier killing the guy and then developing a more pacifistic stance later on. Xavier doesnt kill, he doesnt believe in vengeful acts of violence. He has no problem repeatedly violating peoples' minds, breaking into Government property and threatening people. Showing he killed someone once as a young man wouldn't be too far removed.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 19:20:32 GMT
It's better than Xavier letting Magneto go again and again, like a fool. And Erik did the whole "You killed my mom" thing too. But First Class had no balls so they had to make the killer a Nazi. You have to get over your hatred of Naturalistic Dialog, people don't talk in noxious platitudes like Wonder Woman/Batman/Superman do. After all, I don't see you critiquing anything that comes out of Deadpool's mouth. nah, MCU with it dumbed-down kiddy formula ruined everything including the quality CMB and other franchises such as Star Wars. It will go down in history for being that infamously huge raccoon turd for manchildren. Mmmm, that salt. The MCU rescued CBMs after guys like Singer and Nolan nearly destroyed them.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jan 28, 2018 20:05:13 GMT
nah, MCU with it dumbed-down kiddy formula ruined everything including the quality CMB and other franchises such as Star Wars. It will go down in history for being that infamously huge raccoon turd for manchildren. Mmmm, that salt. The MCU rescued CBMs after guys like Singer and Nolan nearly destroyed them. Nolan nearly destroyed CBMs? How? By directing the first CBM to gross a billion dollars, and featuring the most iconic cinematic villain of the 21st century?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 20:10:55 GMT
Mmmm, that salt. The MCU rescued CBMs after guys like Singer and Nolan nearly destroyed them. Nolan nearly destroyed CBMs? How? By advocating the stance that anything fantastical or wondrous was bad, and the only way to do a CBM was to suck every last comic-booky element out of it and make it utterly and wholly "grounded" the whole way through, and to make the villains the real stars of the show with the hero as a flat archetype who is there merely to oppose them and not have any character beyond that. Look at how the DCEU does things, that is Nolan's legacy and his idea of how CBMs are to be done. You and I have had this discussion before, and you know why I think any of that happened.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jan 28, 2018 20:18:36 GMT
Nolan nearly destroyed CBMs? How? By advocating the stance that anything fantastical or wondrous was bad, and the only way to do a CBM was to suck every last comic-booky element out of it and make it utterly and wholly "grounded" the whole way through, and to make the villains the real stars of the show with the hero as a flat archetype who is there merely to oppose them and not have any character beyond that. Look at how the DCEU does things, that is Nolan's legacy and his idea of how CBMs are to be done. You and I have had this discussion before, and you know why I think any of that happened. You’re really making it hard for me to believe that you aren’t a troll. Nolan wasn’t advocating any kind of stance. His Batman movies were faithful to the comics, and even adapted a number of storylines such as Year One, The Killing Joke, and even The Dark Knight Returns. Also, the villains were not the stars of his films. Batman Begins was clearly a Batman origin story, TDK was a film that focused on Batman’s struggles to fight against anarchy and nihilism, and TDKR was all about him overcoming his past pain in order to save Gotham once and for all. By the way, if Nolan nearly destroyed CBMs like you claim, why did Jon Favreau take inspiration from him? link
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Jan 28, 2018 20:21:39 GMT
Xavier doesnt kill, he doesnt believe in vengeful acts of violence. He has no problem repeatedly violating peoples' minds, breaking into Government property and threatening people. Showing he killed someone once as a young man wouldn't be too far removed. None of those things are remotely close to murder. Talk about jumping the shark.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 20:52:01 GMT
Nolan wasn’t advocating any kind of stance. He most definitely was. He seems to believe that heroes must be archetypal rather than character-driven and that the villains must be the source of all conflict instead of there being internal conflict. "Symbols" and "Icons" over actual characters. Where there wouldn't even be a Batman if not for Ra's because he made Bruce so incompetent he needed to even be told to become Batman. Nearly everything in Begins turned out to revolve around Ra's. Struggles dominated clearly by Joker and Two-Face. Batman was a supporting character in a movie named after him! So him doing absolutely nothing but reacting to Bane, Catwoman and Talia because he couldn't be bothered to be proactive. That was in 2008, before TDK and TDKR came out and his stance was much more clear.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 20:52:54 GMT
He has no problem repeatedly violating peoples' minds, breaking into Government property and threatening people. Showing he killed someone once as a young man wouldn't be too far removed. None of those things are remotely close to murder. Uh, violating peoples' minds, threatening the President like a terrorist and being accessory to terrorism is pretty up there...
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jan 28, 2018 21:32:39 GMT
Nolan wasn’t advocating any kind of stance. He most definitely was. He seems to believe that heroes must be archetypal rather than character-driven and that the villains must be the source of all conflict instead of there being internal conflict. "Symbols" and "Icons" over actual characters. Where there wouldn't even be a Batman if not for Ra's because he made Bruce so incompetent he needed to even be told to become Batman. Nearly everything in Begins turned out to revolve around Ra's. Struggles dominated clearly by Joker and Two-Face. Batman was a supporting character in a movie named after him! So him doing absolutely nothing but reacting to Bane, Catwoman and Talia because he couldn't be bothered to be proactive. That was in 2008, before TDK and TDKR came out and his stance was much more clear. First off, Batman wasn’t an archetype. He was the most developed character throughout the trilogy. The entire trilogy was focused on his personal struggles to fix Gotham. He didn’t play a supporting role to anyone. Also, your argument that Batman was only being reactive to the villains is a load of crap. That’s like saying that the Avengers were being reactive to Loki and Ultron. BB didn’t revolve around Ra’s Al Ghul. TDK didn’t revolve around the Joker or Two Face TDKR didn’t revolve around Bane Furthermore, can you perhaps make up your mind? First you said that Nolan nearly destroyed CBMs and that the MCU had to “save them” from him, and yet you can’t even offer a rebuttal to the fact that without Nolan, the MCU as we know it wouldn’t exist.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 22:07:33 GMT
First off, Batman wasn’t an archetype. He was and still is. It's why his villains are more memorable and dynamic than he is. He's the "Rich Socialite who secretly fights crime" archetype that's existed at least since the Scarlet Pimpernel. Seriously? He needs his villains to get him to do anything. Except Ra's, and Joker, and Dent, and Bane. They were all much more proactive than him. If they wanted to show us a Batman who was really being proactive we'd have stories where he deliberately goes after corrupt police officers and politicians to get them off the force/out of City Hall. This would lead to internal conflict between him and Alfred and him and Gordon. They were all doing stuff when the Loki thing happened to conveniently get them together. They weren't just sitting around waiting for a threat. And Ultron happened BECAUSE they were proactively going after Hydra at the start. I've no doubt that Iron Man would've been made with or without Batman Begins, as Marvel was making movies before Begins. Iron Man just happened to be the first time they made one using their own studio. Thankfully their approach worked and wondrous, over-the-top stuff has become accepted and mainstream which was codified by the Avengers in 2012. Let me put it this way, if Nolan's approach was used in the MCU then the Asgardians would just be a cult of LARPers in some musty old castle somewhere and Captain America would be some PTSD addled returning soldier who wore a USA Flag T-Shirt and spent all his time fighting a Neo-Nazi Skinhead who paints his face Red while dealing drugs in "Cap's" Apartment Building.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jan 28, 2018 22:22:05 GMT
First off, Batman wasn’t an archetype. He was and still is. It's why his villains are more memorable and dynamic than he is. He's the "Rich Socialite who secretly fights crime" archetype that's existed at least since the Scarlet Pimpernel. Seriously? He needs his villains to get him to do anything. Except Ra's, and Joker, and Dent, and Bane. They were all much more proactive than him. If they wanted to show us a Batman who was really being proactive we'd have stories where he deliberately goes after corrupt police officers and politicians to get them off the force/out of City Hall. This would lead to internal conflict between him and Alfred and him and Gordon. They were all doing stuff when the Loki thing happened to conveniently get them together. They weren't just sitting around waiting for a threat. And Ultron happened BECAUSE they were proactively going after Hydra at the start. I've no doubt that Iron Man would've been made with or without Batman Begins, as Marvel was making movies before Begins. Iron Man just happened to be the first time they made one using their own studio. Thankfully their approach worked and wondrous, over-the-top stuff has become accepted and mainstream which was codified by the Avengers in 2012. Let me put it this way, if Nolan's approach was used in the MCU then the Asgardians would just be a cult of LARPers in some musty old castle somewhere and Captain America would be some PTSD addled returning soldier who wore a USA Flag T-Shirt and spent all his time fighting a Neo-Nazi Skinhead who paints his face Red while dealing drugs in "Cap's" Apartment Building. Batman has always been portrayed as a rich socialite who fights crime, but that was only the surface level depiction of his character in TDK Trilogy. In Batman Begins, he started off as someone who wanted revenge for his parent’s death, and eventually came to realize that vengeance isn’t enough, and that he needed to become something more. Ra’S Al Ghul wasn’t the one who gave him the idea to be Batman. He chose to be Bat,an as part of his own desire to fight injustice and to serve as a symbol of hope for the people of Gotham. Also, Batman was proactive in TDK Trilogy. He went after the mob throughout the first two movies, and interrogated crooked cops like Flass. Again, Jon Favreau has cited BB as a source of inspiration when he made the first Iron Man film. Why would he do that unless he felt that Nolan’s film was a genuinely good superhero movie? Even as far as the first IM movie was concerned, that movie was fairly grounded compared to the later films in the MCU. Nolan didn’t nearly destroy anything. He restored Batman’s credibility after the aschumacher films, and he proved that CBMs can be contenders for major awards.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 28, 2018 22:39:41 GMT
Batman has always been portrayed as a rich socialite who fights crime, but that was only the surface level depiction of his character in TDK Trilogy. We hardly get any glimpse of his life as Bruce Wayne, but then again the comics ignored any impact his life as Bruce could've had on the stories for decades because the idea of Batman's civilian ID having any importance aside from explaining where he gets his money was alien to them. IE, no one brings up that Bruce is a white collar criminal who steals from Wayne Enterprises. Not Alfred or Lucius or anyone. Biggest thing we have is that one guy in TDK and he has no moral outage over it. This would be a great example of internal conflict but no one acknowledges this. No Ra's, no League of Shadow training. No LOS training, Bruce never gets the idea to dress up like a bat. Practically his entire set of philosophy comes from the League of Shadows. To limited success, which the movie even says. That's why they needed Joker to drive the film. Because Nolan couldn't think of a good internal conflict. Free publicity? Who knows? Tony builds something as powerful as a Nuclear Reactor that's the size of a fist, for crying out loud! Plenty of people were thinking for years that the "grounded" way was the only way, thanks to his movies. Mainly as a way of tearing down the MCU for not being 'grounded'. You never replied to what I described Nolan's Thor or Cap would be like.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jan 28, 2018 22:45:34 GMT
Batman has always been portrayed as a rich socialite who fights crime, but that was only the surface level depiction of his character in TDK Trilogy. We hardly get any glimpse of his life as Bruce Wayne, but then again the comics ignored any impact his life as Bruce could've had on the stories for decades because the idea of Batman's civilian ID having any importance aside from explaining where he gets his money was alien to them. IE, no one brings up that Bruce is a white collar criminal who steals from Wayne Enterprises. Not Alfred or Lucius or anyone. Biggest thing we have is that one guy in TDK and he has no moral outage over it. This would be a great example of internal conflict but no one acknowledges this. No Ra's, no League of Shadow training. No LOS training, Bruce never gets the idea to dress up like a bat. Practically his entire set of philosophy comes from the League of Shadows. To limited success, which the movie even says. That's why they needed Joker to drive the film. Because Nolan couldn't think of a good internal conflict. Free publicity? Who knows? Tony builds something as powerful as a Nuclear Reactor that's the size of a fist, for crying out loud! Plenty of people were thinking for years that the "grounded" way was the only way, thanks to his movies. Mainly as a way of tearing down the MCU for not being 'grounded'. You never replied to what I described Nolan's Thor or Cap would be like. The impact that being Batman has on his life as Bruce Wayne is brought up many times throughout the trilogy. Alfred frequently confronted him on the way that being Batman was affecting his life, which ultimately culminated in Alfred resigning as his butler in TDKR. Bruce’s personal pain was brought up many times throughout the trilogy, particularly in regards to his relationship with Rachel. The LoS provided him with his training, but they were not the ones who gave him his philosophy of wanting to fight injustice and give people hope. The Nolan Batman films have some far out things too. BB had a microwave emitter that the bad guys used to spread fear toxin throughout a city for crying out loud! Why would I reply to your hypothetical scenarios for a Nolan directed Thor or Cap film? Nolan never directed those films. He directed Batman films.
|
|