Nov 30, 2017
2,750
My MCU rewatch has confirmed that Homecoming is the only movie fucking with the timeline with that time card. Remove that and everything still works perfectly on the movie front.

The only way it up is if you incorporate the tv shows. If you don't then the timeline works perfectly fine if you only pay attention to the movie themselves and not the marketing and what not.

I probably own more comics than 99% of people on here. I actually preferred Marvel more than DC growing up and I actually like a lot of MCU movies. What I don't like however are stupid arguments. I don't get the mental gymnastics people go through to justify things such as why: Christopher Reeves engaged in cold blooded murder of Zod with literally a wink and a smile is OK but neck snapping a warlord who promised genocide is unforgivable. I recall Kevin Smith and supposed Superman superfan Ralph Garman debating MOS and he was saying Superman should never kill and Kevin Smith reminded him Zod was killed in Superman 2 and he just was shut silent and then said he still didn't like it.

Participated in premeditated violence against the trucker in the original film is fine but walking away and smashing a car like he did in his first issue and on the front cover is verboten.

Giving up his powers for reasons despite Lois's biggest turns on being super powered men in capes,

People criticising scraping Zod's face against glass in MOS but ignore Superman punching kryptonians through building in Superman 2,
People pretend Superman didn't punch bad guys through buildings in broad daylight during the Superman animated series and those who do concede that point, justify that it's OK for Superman to do so because he needed to let loose and that's why setting fire to tankers on a busy bridge is fine too
Don't get me started on Batman killing and how I literally posted a audio interview with Jonathan Nolan saying their Batman's no kill rule is not logically consistent, Chris Nolan admitted it made no sense but it was shot and filmed so fuck it. But when BVS says many times Batman's killing is a new thing, people insist it makes no sense because they want to live the lie Batman must not kill. It's fucking stupid. I have faith people are just too stubborn to concede defeat than to admit they don't fucking get it. I mean I could point out that people understood Klaw kept his head down despite the BP chasing him. This is despite the plot hole in the BP movie claiming Klaw was persona non grata in Wakanda, he was only let off with a warning to stop being a naughty boy and branded if you go by AoU, though it is a bit of plothole for someone who is public enemy number 1 being let free. Not totally pertinent i admit but still.

Oh and if you can't admit that an exhausted Wonder Woman binding Doomsday with her lasso that stopped Doomsday's heat vision and Superman using his Superspeed and Superstrength to impale him, makes logical sense then you are just too stubborn to concede clear points.

I have posted bulletpoints of the many Superman/Lex Luthor shit the characters exhibit, i have watched the Moviebob video on problems with BVS and pointed out the outright lies he espouses and rebutted the common misconceptions. I think I like arguing on the internet too much. But I thin the main reason a lot of these complaints piss me off is that we will get worst movies as a result. Suicide Squad is too dark? Let's butcher the editing, crow bar in jokes and weirdly placed Eminem and release it. I say this as someone who doesn't hate SS but i can see some of the problems.

Then to conclude with JL, people complained BVS was too long, too dark, batman killed and Lex's motivation, so they made the film insanely short, forced levity, had Batman let criminals get away and made the villlain's motivation be as paper thin as that guy in Guardians 1 except WB haven't garnered enough good will with audiences to get away with dumb shit like dance battles to distract the big bad. I say this as a guy who mostly liked Guardians.

I could probably go on and on but honestly this is a waste of time.

Make these movies with the number one goal of making people care for the characters, and you would have a higher grossing JL movie.

There is a reason that WW doesn't get scalded for being a murdering machine like Superman or Batman because the priority of her movie was to make her as likeable as possible and the plot serviced that rather then putting characters in to service a plot.

Plain and simple. MoS and BvS did everything in their power to make the audience not care for the characters. Because all Snyder cared for was getting his plot across.
 

Sibersk Esto

Changed the hierarchy of thread titles
Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,768
The people in here saying "just toss them in for a cameo!" seem to have no idea how the film industry works.
 

Chuck Noblet

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,090
A. Prove Wonder Woman was exhausted.
B. Explain why Superman couldn't have called over Diana in all the time he was longingly gazing into Lois' eyes and have her take over so that he could recover.

Any moron could have not done the dumb thing Clark did and sacrifice himself pointlessly, and it's made even worse when they make a flaccid attempt to show that Superman's death did have a negative effect on the world and crime and all that. So Clark not only was stupid in killing himself, but he hurt others by doing so.
Putting someone else in danger of getting killed/injured, total supes move lmao.
 

Playco Armboy

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
3,406
Putting someone else in danger of getting killed/injured, total supes move lmao.

Diana was doing better than he was against Doomsday, had no weakness against Kryptonite, and would have been in a more effective position to nail Doomsday with the spear if Superman at full power was distracting the beast.

There's no excuse for it. It's just terrible writing.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
7,321
Daredevil is still fucking fantastic, it certainly made me care about comic book shit from a non caring perspective. Rest of the TV shows...not so much.
 

Chuck Noblet

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,090
Diana was doing better than he was against Doomsday, had no weakness against Kryptonite, and would have been in a more effective position to nail Doomsday with the spear if Superman at full power was distracting the beast.

There's no excuse for it. It's just terrible writing.
Clark wouldn't do that tho. He has no idea who she is, what her weakness and strengths are, where her powers are derived from, or like literally anything about her. Sure, that moment (among many others) could be reworked and changed for the better. It's not great as is, but imo supes isn't gonna throw a stranger at his problem.
 

Bleepey

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
1,152
A. Prove Wonder Woman was exhausted.
B. Explain why Superman couldn't have called over Diana in all the time he was longingly gazing into Lois' eyes and have her take over so that he could recover.

Any moron could have not done the dumb thing Clark did and sacrifice himself pointlessly, and it's made even worse when they make a flaccid attempt to show that Superman's death did have a negative effect on the world and crime and all that. So Clark not only was stupid in killing himself, but he hurt others by doing so.

Watch the scene again. He did, she was straining from holding Doomsday and just ate eye beams at point blank range. Also she was far away and to my knowledge Superman ain't Blackbolt and even if he was, Doomsdat is superfast and strong.Also Superman was tired in the scene too. Are you criticising Superman for being selfless? This is getting cyclical
 

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,599
I used to want them to be in the movie... at least for a quick cameo. If it could be worked in without being jarring.

Then the fucking shows became horrible. DD1, JJ1 are both really good. DD2 and the Defenders are both ok. Everything else is slow paced unwatchable butt.

If I were Feigie I would ask that they stop using the phrase "the incident" and just be their own universe at this point. A universe of butt.
 

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,599
Dare devil is the only one who should have been a big MCU character of Spider-Man power tier.

I think the problem with DD is 100% of the association of that character was a *really* bad movie. And then Elektra happened and doubled down on that.

I think now that they will have access to all of Fox's assets + Spiderman there is really no room for him, but he could still make a nice buddy cop duo with Spidey or Dr. Strange... and I'm assuming with the FF back in house NYC may become more of a focal point like it is in the comics.

If the Netflix shows were just 8 fucking episodes long I think these series would be a good resting place for these characters.

I think it's why DC hasn't put Green Lantern in their universe yet as well. I mean, they've now put all of their characters in really shitty movies, but you know what I meant :p
 

Bleepey

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
1,152
The only way it up is if you incorporate the tv shows. If you don't then the timeline works perfectly fine if you only pay attention to the movie themselves and not the marketing and what not.



Make these movies with the number one goal of making people care for the characters, and you would have a higher grossing JL movie.

There is a reason that WW doesn't get scalded for being a murdering machine like Superman or Batman because the priority of her movie was to make her as likeable as possible and the plot serviced that rather then putting characters in to service a plot.

Plain and simple. MoS and BvS did everything in their power to make the audience not care for the characters. Because all Snyder cared for was getting his plot across.

People having no preconceived notions to judge their opinions on. Look at how Wonder Woman's mum didn't get any shit for telling Wonder Woman to stay away from the world of men, but JK being unsure about whether Clark should expose his powers to save the kids on the bus is an unforgivable sin. If I said how can Wonder Woman grow up to be a good person when her parents taught her to be selfish and stay hidden from the problems of the world I'd be repeating the same asinine talking point you'd hear about Jonathan Kent's cynicism At the end of the day Clark still chose to save the kids on the bus I could copy and paste the same argument with regards to BP, how can T'Challa learn to be a good man and help people and help out in the world when the only thing he was taught by his father was isolationism

*considering how Superman is criticised for the collateral damage when 99% of it is Zod and he makes several attempts to take the battle away abc audiences criticise him for it, and I even remember people trying to argue Superman snapping his handcuffs was a powermove right ignoring the fact he literally gave himself up to Zod seconds later on a meta level JK was right
 

geomon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,008
Miami, FL
I probably own more comics than 99% of people on here. I actually preferred Marvel more than DC growing up and I actually like a lot of MCU movies. What I don't like however are stupid arguments. I don't get the mental gymnastics people go through to justify things such as why: Christopher Reeves engaged in cold blooded murder of Zod with literally a wink and a smile is OK but neck snapping a warlord who promised genocide is unforgivable. I recall Kevin Smith and supposed Superman superfan Ralph Garman debating MOS and he was saying Superman should never kill and Kevin Smith reminded him Zod was killed in Superman 2 and he just was shut silent and then said he still didn't like it.

Participated in premeditated violence against the trucker in the original film is fine but walking away and smashing a car like he did in his first issue and on the front cover is verboten.

Giving up his powers for reasons despite Lois's biggest turns on being super powered men in capes,

People criticising scraping Zod's face against glass in MOS but ignore Superman punching kryptonians through building in Superman 2,
People pretend Superman didn't punch bad guys through buildings in broad daylight during the Superman animated series and those who do concede that point, justify that it's OK for Superman to do so because he needed to let loose and that's why setting fire to tankers on a busy bridge is fine too
Don't get me started on Batman killing and how I literally posted a audio interview with Jonathan Nolan saying their Batman's no kill rule is not logically consistent, Chris Nolan admitted it made no sense but it was shot and filmed so fuck it. But when BVS says many times Batman's killing is a new thing, people insist it makes no sense because they want to live the lie Batman must not kill. It's fucking stupid. I have faith people are just too stubborn to concede defeat than to admit they don't fucking get it. I mean I could point out that people understood Klaw kept his head down despite the BP chasing him. This is despite the plot hole in the BP movie claiming Klaw was persona non grata in Wakanda, he was only let off with a warning to stop being a naughty boy and branded if you go by AoU, though it is a bit of plothole for someone who is public enemy number 1 being let free. Not totally pertinent i admit but still.

Oh and if you can't admit that an exhausted Wonder Woman binding Doomsday with her lasso that stopped Doomsday's heat vision and Superman using his Superspeed and Superstrength to impale him, makes logical sense then you are just too stubborn to concede clear points.

I have posted bulletpoints of the many Superman/Lex Luthor shit the characters exhibit, i have watched the Moviebob video on problems with BVS and pointed out the outright lies he espouses and rebutted the common misconceptions. I think I like arguing on the internet too much. But I thin the main reason a lot of these complaints piss me off is that we will get worst movies as a result. Suicide Squad is too dark? Let's butcher the editing, crow bar in jokes and weirdly placed Eminem and release it. I say this as someone who doesn't hate SS but i can see some of the problems.

Then to conclude with JL, people complained BVS was too long, too dark, batman killed and Lex's motivation, so they made the film insanely short, forced levity, had Batman let criminals get away and made the villlain's motivation be as paper thin as that guy in Guardians 1 except WB haven't garnered enough good will with audiences to get away with dumb shit like dance battles to distract the big bad. I say this as a guy who mostly liked Guardians.

I could probably go on and on but honestly this is a waste of time.
reeves-1491747781.gif
 

Spikematic

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,363
I just want Coulson. He deserves to be in the last movie at least. His death in the original was a major catalyst and it has served it's purpose and then some. I want Cap, Thor and Tony to see him alive. I want him to confront Loki. Anything!
 

element252

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
719
I used to want them to be in the movie... at least for a quick cameo. If it could be worked in without being jarring.

Then the fucking shows became horrible. DD1, JJ1 are both really good. DD2 and the Defenders are both ok. Everything else is slow paced unwatchable butt.

If I were Feigie I would ask that they stop using the phrase "the incident" and just be their own universe at this point. A universe of butt.

What about The Punisher?

The only Netflix characters, I'd like to see in the films even for a 10 second cameo are Luke Cage and Daredevil. Luke Cage is or was an Avenger in the comics.
 

sad but rad

Banned
Nov 7, 2017
752
I probably own more comics than 99% of people on here. I actually preferred Marvel more than DC growing up and I actually like a lot of MCU movies. What I don't like however are stupid arguments. I don't get the mental gymnastics people go through to justify things such as why: Christopher Reeves engaged in cold blooded murder of Zod with literally a wink and a smile is OK but neck snapping a warlord who promised genocide is unforgivable. I recall Kevin Smith and supposed Superman superfan Ralph Garman debating MOS and he was saying Superman should never kill and Kevin Smith reminded him Zod was killed in Superman 2 and he just was shut silent and then said he still didn't like it.

Participated in premeditated violence against the trucker in the original film is fine but walking away and smashing a car like he did in his first issue and on the front cover is verboten.

Giving up his powers for reasons despite Lois's biggest turns on being super powered men in capes,

People criticising scraping Zod's face against glass in MOS but ignore Superman punching kryptonians through building in Superman 2,
People pretend Superman didn't punch bad guys through buildings in broad daylight during the Superman animated series and those who do concede that point, justify that it's OK for Superman to do so because he needed to let loose and that's why setting fire to tankers on a busy bridge is fine too
Don't get me started on Batman killing and how I literally posted a audio interview with Jonathan Nolan saying their Batman's no kill rule is not logically consistent, Chris Nolan admitted it made no sense but it was shot and filmed so fuck it. But when BVS says many times Batman's killing is a new thing, people insist it makes no sense because they want to live the lie Batman must not kill. It's fucking stupid. I have faith people are just too stubborn to concede defeat than to admit they don't fucking get it. I mean I could point out that people understood Klaw kept his head down despite the BP chasing him. This is despite the plot hole in the BP movie claiming Klaw was persona non grata in Wakanda, he was only let off with a warning to stop being a naughty boy and branded if you go by AoU, though it is a bit of plothole for someone who is public enemy number 1 being let free. Not totally pertinent i admit but still.

Oh and if you can't admit that an exhausted Wonder Woman binding Doomsday with her lasso that stopped Doomsday's heat vision and Superman using his Superspeed and Superstrength to impale him, makes logical sense then you are just too stubborn to concede clear points.

I have posted bulletpoints of the many Superman/Lex Luthor shit the characters exhibit, i have watched the Moviebob video on problems with BVS and pointed out the outright lies he espouses and rebutted the common misconceptions. I think I like arguing on the internet too much. But I thin the main reason a lot of these complaints piss me off is that we will get worst movies as a result. Suicide Squad is too dark? Let's butcher the editing, crow bar in jokes and weirdly placed Eminem and release it. I say this as someone who doesn't hate SS but i can see some of the problems.

Then to conclude with JL, people complained BVS was too long, too dark, batman killed and Lex's motivation, so they made the film insanely short, forced levity, had Batman let criminals get away and made the villlain's motivation be as paper thin as that guy in Guardians 1 except WB haven't garnered enough good will with audiences to get away with dumb shit like dance battles to distract the big bad. I say this as a guy who mostly liked Guardians.

I could probably go on and on but honestly this is a waste of time.
gettem bleepey

wonderwoman.gif
 

Phamit

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,958
They act like TV-Shows and Movies are in the same universe because it's sounds nice on paper, but in reality it's not going to happen. Maybe one day when Perlmutter or/and Feige are gone.
 

Yasuke

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
19,865
The only way it up is if you incorporate the tv shows. If you don't then the timeline works perfectly fine if you only pay attention to the movie themselves and not the marketing and what not.

Nah. Homecoming throws a wrench in the movie timeline a bit by claiming to be eight years after Avengers. Watching Iron Man 3 this last week, there was a throwaway line I can't remember about the space between that movie's events and Avengers that further confused me given Homecoming claiming to take place in 2020.

It all amounts to nothing as comic timelines are always a condensed mess anyways, but Homecoming was the first time audiences stopped and went "wait, what?" together.

There is a reason that WW doesn't get scalded for being a murdering machine like Superman or Batman because the priority of her movie was to make her as likeable as possible and the plot serviced that rather then putting characters in to service a plot.

....that's not really the reason. Not the primary one, anyways.
 

element252

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
719
Nah. Homecoming throws a wrench in the movie timeline a bit by claiming to be eight years after Avengers. Watching Iron Man 3 this last week, there was a throwaway line I can't remember about the space between that movie's events and Avengers that further confused me given Homecoming claiming to take place in 2020.

It all amounts to nothing as comic timelines are always a condensed mess anyways, but Homecoming was the first time audiences stopped and went "wait, what?" together.



....that's not really the reason. Not the primary one, anyways.

Homecoming does not take place in 2020. What Homecoming is suggesting is that The Avengers takes place in 2009 or possibly 2010. But since Homecoming is set a few months after Civil War it takes place in 2016. So my guess is The Avengers is set in 2009. I know Iron Man 2, Incredible Hulk,and Thor all take place in the same week as described in Fury's Big Week, which was some promotional material released by Marvel Studios and you have the prelude comics that show this.

The problem is if The Avengers takes place in 2009 or 2010, then how does Iron Man 3 fit in? Does it take place in 2013 still? Because that means years have passed since The Avengers which does not vibe well with the film due to Stark still experiencing PTSD from the events of that film. But then they do drop all of that in The Avengers sequel.
 

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,599
What about The Punisher?

The only Netflix characters, I'd like to see in the films even for a 10 second cameo are Luke Cage and Daredevil. Luke Cage is or was an Avenger in the comics.

Horribly paced show that spun it's wheels and went no-where in a hurry. A few cool moments, some neat character stuff but all of it went on way too long. At 8 episodes I would have probably liked it. As is, it's an unwatchable mess that just drolls on and on and on and on. Oh boy, I hope he and his buddy hang out in the fucking garage talking to each other for another 40 minutes about family. Or maybe him and his army buddy will talk for 20 minutes about how they are brothers.

I had the same issue with Luke Cage. Both shows at 6-8 episodes had content and character interaction to be great. At 13 episodes they couldn't hold my attention at all.
 

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,599
The Avengers which does not vibe well with the film due to Stark still experiencing PTSD from the events of that film. But then they do drop all of that in The Avengers sequel.

I think you can chalk that up to Age of Ultron kind of being half-assed and phoned in by Whedon. It ignored the hooolee fuck out of character motivation for most of the movie and ignored most of the characters back-stories and arcs from the stand-alone movies.
 

element252

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
719
Horribly paced show that spun it's wheels and went no-where in a hurry. A few cool moments, some neat character stuff but all of it went on way too long. At 8 episodes I would have probably liked it. As is, it's an unwatchable mess that just drolls on and on and on and on. Oh boy, I hope he and his buddy hang out in the fucking garage talking to each other for another 40 minutes about family. Or maybe him and his army buddy will talk for 20 minutes about how they are brothers.

I had the same issue with Luke Cage. Both shows at 6-8 episodes had content and character interaction to be great. At 13 episodes they couldn't hold my attention at all.

I agree both of those shows could have trimmed the fat, especially Luke Cage. I liked The Punisher though, and was tuned in throughout. Luke Cage I kinda lost interest after episode 7 or 8 and had to force myself to finish it.
 

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,599
I agree both of those shows could have trimmed the fat, especially Luke Cage. I liked The Punisher though, and was tuned in throughout. Luke Cage I kinda lost interest after episode 7 or 8 and had to force myself to finish it.

Luke Cage also killed off the interesting bad guy with good motivation at the halfway point and then went on some weird fucking tangent about a preacher and bastards that should have been a separate season completely.
 

Galkinator

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,115
If this was written when DD S1 came out I'd be pretty disappointed, but honestly now I don't give a shit and would rather they stay in their Neftlixverse
 

Ploid 6.0

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,445
It would upset me to see Iron Fist in there. I'd rather Colleen Wing represent Iron Fist in anything dealing with the show.
 

Yasuke

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
19,865
Homecoming does not take place in 2020. What Homecoming is suggesting is that The Avengers takes place in 2009 or possibly 2010. But since Homecoming is set a few months after Civil War it takes place in 2016. So my guess is The Avengers is set in 2009. I know Iron Man 2, Incredible Hulk,and Thor all take place in the same week as described in Fury's Big Week, which was some promotional material released by Marvel Studios and you have the prelude comics that show this.

The problem is if The Avengers takes place in 2009 or 2010, then how does Iron Man 3 fit in? Does it take place in 2013 still? Because that means years have passed since The Avengers which does not vibe well with the film due to Stark still experiencing PTSD from the events of that film. But then they do drop all of that in The Avengers sequel.

Which directly contradicts them originally telling us Avengers took place in 2012. There's a reason Feige felt compelled to speak on the timeline after all the questions arose following Homecoming. We had confirmation in the past that "Fury's big week" (Iron Man 2, Thor, Cap's revival) took place in 2011, and Avengers was set in the following year.
 

element252

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
719
Luke Cage also killed off the interesting bad guy with good motivation at the halfway point and then went on some weird fucking tangent about a preacher and bastards that should have been a separate season completely.

What was the name of the second villian? I think it was Diamondback or something. I laughed when I saw that ridiculous costume he had on and the fight between the two in the street was horrible. They built up Cottonmouth and then just killed him off, by his sister pushing him out a window. I would say Luke Cage was ok overall, but not complete trash like Iron Fist was.
 

Alienous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,655
I probably own more comics than 99% of people on here. I actually preferred Marvel more than DC growing up and I actually like a lot of MCU movies. What I don't like however are stupid arguments. I don't get the mental gymnastics people go through to justify things such as why: Christopher Reeves engaged in cold blooded murder of Zod with literally a wink and a smile is OK but neck snapping a warlord who promised genocide is unforgivable. I recall Kevin Smith and supposed Superman superfan Ralph Garman debating MOS and he was saying Superman should never kill and Kevin Smith reminded him Zod was killed in Superman 2 and he just was shut silent and then said he still didn't like it.

So why dismiss it as a 'stupid argument'. People might not be able to elucidate why they had an issue with it, but they still had an issue with it. Superman throwing Zod off-screen =/= watching Superman snap Zod's neck when it comes to people's impressions, clearly. Things like tone and visuals, rather than descriptions, matter.

Participated in premeditated violence against the trucker in the original film is fine but walking away and smashing a car like he did in his first issue and on the front cover is verboten.

Giving up his powers for reasons despite Lois's biggest turns on being super powered men in capes,

People criticising scraping Zod's face against glass in MOS but ignore Superman punching kryptonians through building in Superman 2,
People pretend Superman didn't punch bad guys through buildings in broad daylight during the Superman animated series and those who do concede that point, justify that it's OK for Superman to do so because he needed to let loose and that's why setting fire to tankers on a busy bridge is fine too
Don't get me started on Batman killing and how I literally posted a audio interview with Jonathan Nolan saying their Batman's no kill rule is not logically consistent, Chris Nolan admitted it made no sense but it was shot and filmed so fuck it. But when BVS says many times Batman's killing is a new thing, people insist it makes no sense because they want to live the lie Batman must not kill. It's fucking stupid. I have faith people are just too stubborn to concede defeat than to admit they don't fucking get it. I mean I could point out that people understood Klaw kept his head down despite the BP chasing him. This is despite the plot hole in the BP movie claiming Klaw was persona non grata in Wakanda, he was only let off with a warning to stop being a naughty boy and branded if you go by AoU, though it is a bit of plothole for someone who is public enemy number 1 being let free. Not totally pertinent i admit but still.

Again, with Batman killing - people had an issue with it. Why is it easier to believe that people have some sudden, unreasonable bias than it is to believe how it appeared on screen evoked a different reaction from people. I had less of an issue with Batman killing in older films, than with him killing in BvS, for a variety of reasons. Even subtle things like the most comic-accurate looking Batman ever put to screen being the least like his archetypal personality, even in works like The Dark Knight Returns.

Oh and if you can't admit that an exhausted Wonder Woman binding Doomsday with her lasso that stopped Doomsday's heat vision and Superman using his Superspeed and Superstrength to impale him, makes logical sense then you are just too stubborn to concede clear points.

I have posted bulletpoints of the many Superman/Lex Luthor shit the characters exhibit, i have watched the Moviebob video on problems with BVS and pointed out the outright lies he espouses and rebutted the common misconceptions. I think I like arguing on the internet too much. But I thin the main reason a lot of these complaints piss me off is that we will get worst movies as a result. Suicide Squad is too dark? Let's butcher the editing, crow bar in jokes and weirdly placed Eminem and release it. I say this as someone who doesn't hate SS but i can see some of the problems.

Then to conclude with JL, people complained BVS was too long, too dark, batman killed and Lex's motivation, so they made the film insanely short, forced levity, had Batman let criminals get away and made the villlain's motivation be as paper thin as that guy in Guardians 1 except WB haven't garnered enough good will with audiences to get away with dumb shit like dance battles to distract the big bad. I say this as a guy who mostly liked Guardians.

I could probably go on and on but honestly this is a waste of time.

The complaints don't lead to worse movies. The complaints, filtered through directors who struggle to understand the source material, lead to worst movies. You can make a movie that isn't as long or dark as Batman v Superman, and has more levity, without automatically getting a mediocre movie like Justice League that blindly tried to address those complaints.
 

element252

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
719
Which directly contradicts them originally telling us Avengers took place in 2012. There's a reason Feige felt compelled to speak on the timeline after all the questions arose following Homecoming. We had confirmation in the past that "Fury's big week" (Iron Man 2, Thor, Cap's revival) took place in 2011, and Avengers was set in the following year.

Maybe Sony or Marvel fucked up and accidently put 8 years instead of 4. I don't know, but they need to release an official timeline eventually.
 

Yasuke

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
19,865
Maybe Sony or Marvel fucked up and accidently put 8 years instead of 4. I don't know, but they need to release an official timeline eventually.

Well, yeah. Which is what I'm saying. That title card in Homecoming is the one error, and I feel like it's just something that slipped past Feige's watchful eye. One probable typo fucked up everyone's perception of the timeline lmao
 

adrem007

Banned
Nov 26, 2017
2,679
Oh boy, I hope he and his buddy hang out in the fucking garage talking to each other for another 40 minutes about family. Or maybe him and his army buddy will talk for 20 minutes about how they are brothers.

LOL

But how dare you compare my boy Frank to Luke Cage, LC deserves to be in it's own tier of shittyness

Also all these people saying that netflix stuff is better than mcu, lord give me strength
 

Ehoavash

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,303
Hah glad I never invested in these shows. Daredevil season 1 honestly bored me so I quit halfway. Didn't watch any of the rest.

I wonder when Disney creates it's online service, will these marvel shows still go on or will marvel cancel them and either reboot the shows on Disney service or finally give Daredevil the MCU treatment
 

Stooge

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,599
Hah glad I never invested in these shows. Daredevil season 1 honestly bored me so I quit halfway. Didn't watch any of the rest.

I wonder when Disney creates it's online service, will these marvel shows still go on or will marvel cancel them and either reboot the shows on Disney service or finally give Daredevil the MCU treatment

If DD1 bored you run for the hills. All of these series are too long. DD1 is well paced compared to the rest.
 

caliph95

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,547
Honestly regardless of the mixed quality of the tv shows them making a cameo changes nothing about the shows

Plus the movie is already jam packed and it's clear by now even if they're are groundbreaking classics Feige isn't going to bother
 

Earendil

Self-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
255
Honestly, I'd be much more excited at the prospect of Coulson's SHIELD showing up for a cameo, but that's definitely not happening, for pretty much exactly the same reasons.

(Well, those and the fact that SHIELD's story is in a pretty intense place right now, and probably won't wrap around to tie up with where the world's at in the movies until the season - potentially series - finale, if that.)

I'd love to see Coulson and Daisy as a small cameo in the background. Won't happen though.
 
OP
OP
pulga

pulga

Banned for alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,391
why the fuck are you nerds talking about mos and bvs

LET IT GOOOOOO LET IT GOOOOOOO
 

Bleepey

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
1,152
So why dismiss it as a 'stupid argument'. People might not be able to elucidate why they had an issue with it, but they still had an issue with it. Superman throwing Zod off-screen =/= watching Superman snap Zod's neck when it comes to people's impressions, clearly. Things like tone and visuals, rather than descriptions, matter..

Crushing someone's hands, using super strength to throw them against a wall and watch them drown to death in arctic conditions is OK with a lot of people apparently. I have said many times that tone matters a lot to people, it's why people can praise JK as a character in the Reeves film when his main contribution is to die, tell him to do more than play sport and tell Clark he was worried the govt will take him away. But people would have you believe the latter point is non existent because a John Williams score helps you ignore it (sort of like why casual murder with a wink and a smile is a OK when heroic music is playing) All of these things are found in JK in MOS (he is destined for great things, worry about the govt) but because he as a father is worried his son might be taken away and he is unsure that whilst his son can do so much he realises the world wouldn't immediately welcome him with open arms.

Again, with Batman killing - people had an issue with it. Why is it easier to believe that people have some sudden, unreasonable bias than it is to believe how it appeared on screen evoked a different reaction from people. I had less of an issue with Batman killing in older films, than with him killing in BvS, for a variety of reasons. Even subtle things like the most comic-accurate looking Batman ever put to screen being the least like his archetypal personality, even in works like The Dark Knight Returns..

People will praise Nolan's Batman and will swear up and down he never killed. Let's not pretend and lie to ourselves that there are people who would swear that Bale didn't kill. Also people will often call batfleck a murderer but not so much Bale

The complaints don't lead to worse movies. The complaints, filtered through directors who struggle to understand the source material, lead to worst movies. You can make a movie that isn't as long or dark as Batman v Superman, and has more levity, without automatically getting a mediocre movie like Justice League that blindly tried to address those complaints.
Doesn't rebut my argument that people are judging characters based on past characterisations and refuse to see a story for what it is. If someone can argue that a Superman can't be heroic when his father exhibits trepidation about him showing himself to the world which is an argument I have seen many, many times. But then will praise Wonder Woman/Black Panther where Hippolyta/King T'chaka taught their children that no good can come from exposing themselves to the corrupt world then the only reason I can conclude is that people are coming in with their biases. The really ironic thing is that people often praise characterisations that don't really exist, Superman casually murdered, JK was never a paragon of optimism in what people will often cite as the defacto standard of how he was portrayed, if you can show me footage of him not talking about him worrying about his son being taken away and was optimistic in the Reeves film I;'ll gladly concede the point. Chances are you won't find it cos it doesn't exist.