Ten bucks says the funeral is for Agent Carter or her daughter. (Longshot joking prediction: it's for Black Widow so Marvel doesn't have to deal with the "where's the Nat merch" question any more.)
Speaking of Black Widow merchandise:
This is beyond messed up. What the fuck Hasbro.
This is likely on the similar level as to why Mattel committed to not making any Beware the Batman toys or why the whole DC Nation was nuked. Girls don't buy toys and boys don't want to buy toys of girls (my old RGB Jennine figure begs to differ but whatever) it's stupid bit there you have it.
Of course, /co/ is spazzing out about this.
The big question is this: if they do snag her to direct either Black Panther or Captain Marvel, will things turn into another Ant-Man situation where Marvel thinks the tone of “her” film isn't “in line” with Marvel’s vision and all but forces her to quit?
Because Marvel probably doesn’t want another situation like that on their hands.
I'm with Bob on this, where are all the other (cooler) girls?!
Ugh, Moviebob is awful, even if some of the points he makes are good (but other people make them better without being so bad).
I think her skill with biopics would make her good for Black Panther. It doesn't have to be a rehash of Selma, but her ability to write rounded and morally grey characters is just the right match for a great hero-king. I'm personally hoping for the film to have some Game of Thrones-lite political intrigue, and Freeman being Everett Ross would be a perfect entry point for that.
I was thinking Wakanda should be more scifi than that. Maybe make it like Dune or something.
Also I hope they get proper Swahili tutors or maybe a linguist fluent in regional African languages to make things sound less Bulungi.
I got around to watching Daredevil finally. I really like it so far, 4 episodes in.
Here's an interesting piece on Age of Ultron's character arcs.
Finished it. Damn that was dark and extremely well written.
Only problem is the countless interrogation scenes. I would've appreciated less repetitive "You work for Fisk, tell me everything" scenes.
That's the tone of Daredevil for you, it was a very nice Fisk. The thematic of his suit getting lighter was well done.
Started watching Agents of SHIELD now. Watching the first episode, it's ok. I don't like how overly quirky the cast is, or how cheesy some of the dialogue is, but it at least has high production value.
First half of the first season is not the greatest, but around the point where Winter Soldier starts affecting it and onward it becomes a lot better, and Season 2 is consistently solid, if not for everyone.
Yah know what I found most disappointing about Age of Ultrom.
Hulk did not have a line this time... Talking HULK IS BEST HULK!
Agreed. AOS starts out slow, as they're doing a lot of world building to extend S.H.I.E.L.D. beyond what was previously shown in the movies in the first couple of episodes, but it does become much better.
As for the quirky characters, >>42897, those temper out about the same time as the show starts to become really good. You still have characters and quirks, just not nearly as pronounced.
That's like trying to compare apples and oranges. They're just too different by nature.
I don't think they are. I mean yeah one's based in TV animation and one's based in live action film, but they both seem to try to take the best aspects from the comics and bring them together for an idealized adaptation, rather than just doing their own thing. Plus this will end at some point, like the DCAU did.
I'd say the DCAU is still the reigning king of adaptations, but a lot of its advantages over the MCU such as better villains, being spread less thinly (and thus more consistent characterization and writing), and emphasis on strong writing and dialogue over flashy action sequences are a product of its medium.
Its a real shame. I want to like AoS I really do. But the idea of "Not Angel" being the big bad next season. I can't even muster to watch the finale. I mean I really like Coulson. But I just think they give don't him enough to work with.
Is the MCU not friends with Netflix any more.
For Avengers 1, all the movies we missed were up as if to help us catch up.
Now there's nothing for what we've missed between that and Avengers 2.
>Is the MCU not friends with Netflix any more.
That would be odd, considering they are makling MCU material.
Those that aren't Disney material it's kinda hard to parse things out now.
>The Mary Sue
>"your fave is autistic"
I get the value of autistic representation, and it would be really interesting and good for visibility if he genuinely was, but I'm tired of all this "this guy showed a tic once, therefore he must be autistic and if you disagree you're a bigot" logic that's popular on Tumblr and such. I'm willing to give it a pass here because the author is genuinely autistic, and the article on the whole is not terrible, but it's essentially the same shit that goes on when a girl character is called trans-coded just because she's interested in sports or tech instead of baking, or a boy is trans-coded because he's not afraid to wear makeup or show his emotions, as if gender roles are that baked in and having a problem with stereotyping makes you transphobic. I get they mean well, but all this particular approach tends to achieve is reinforce that sense of absolutism more than anything else.
Also, the point that they make about Bolivar Trask is something that Peter Dinklage himself is pretty vehemently against as harmful. And a lot of other people with autism would object to being called "disabled", though that's a more semantic issue I don't feel like delving into. At least they're right about Loki being overrated schlock.
I did recognise a lot of autistic traits in Fisk, which doesn't of course mean he's autistic (I'm something of an aspie myself so this may just be confirmation bias talking), but the sheer specificity of the traits D’Onofrio presented suggested a creative team who knew what autism was and tailored Fisk's depiction with the disorder in mind. The problem with this interpretation is that the show doesn't present these traits as positives, they go to the core of what made Fisk such a monstrous villain: his psychological need to reorder the world into neat, sanitised little boxes so it can no longer make him feel bad. Goodness knows I'm prey to such thoughts every now and then (although I'm neither criminal genius nor a ten-ton mammoth who can kill a man with his bare hands, so I think the world is safe from me), but how much of Fisk's character can be put down to "autism" and how much can be put down to "being an emotionally stunted man-child with a god complex"?
Not to criticise D’Onofrio's portrayal at all, his Fisk is one of the highlights of an already outstanding series. It reminded me of Forest Whitaker's portrayal of Idi Amin in The Last King of Scotland, the way they depicted the infantilising influence of absolute power, both socially and in its rawest physical form.
I am becoming increasingly apprehensive about how Jessica Jones is going to end up being received when it comes out.
Assuming that they don't temper the Purple Man's skeeviness, and why would they it's basically what Alias was about, I feel like it's going to get a lot of internet backlash. Like, Game of Thrones grade. Especially since it's David Tennant.
Might as well link this thing I just typed up here >>42982
But I've already seen that kind of vitriol aimed towards it, as if by portraying her as having been through a lot of abuse Marvel is trying to make a general statement against all women, as opposed to "sometimes violence against women is milked a little too eagerly but at the same time sometimes shit just happens" and the fact that refusing to deal with such topics ever is just as bad.
He's going to play the rapiest character this side of Rapey the Clown.
There are only a two instances where rape in Game Of Thrones was a problem, both times were off book and didn't...do anything, they just threw rape in because the showrunners on those episodes were being weird creeps.
Rape when it has a narrative significance has never once been a problem.
Not really. I've seen quite a few people on Tumblr give flak towards Martin himself for choosing to depict Westeros as having misogyny in the first place rather than portray it as an egalitarian society, because they literally think the fact that Martin included it means he approves of it on some level, or because it will brainwash readers into acting like this in real life. The same way listening to metal turned a whole generation into Satanists.
And since this is a Marvel thread, I've also seen innumerable slams at Whedon for being a bigot because he included explicit depictions of misogyny, homophobia, or rape in his shows like Buffy or Dollhouse, and made Loki call Black Widow a "quim" in the Avengers, even though in context it's painfully clear to anyone with half a brain that the reason Whedon put it there isn't because he approves of them but the total opposite. Like, how the fuck does the fact that Xander is afraid of man cooties means Whedon hates gays when you've got characters like Willow and Tara who were revolutionary for their time right there? The backlash against Jessica Jones is pretty much inevitable at this point.
I really shouldn't even be following these people except it's extremelyl difficult to find fandom blogs that aren't also loaded with social justice posts, and even that would've been fine if so many of them weren't so goddamn close-minded, ignorant, or extreme.
I mean what did he do in the past to merit
>Especially David Tennant
Or do you just mean that it's because he's really famous?
Because he has a very large fangirl base that might react poorly to it.
Or hell, maybe they'll take it as a Fifty Shades of Purple and declare it OTP, fuck if I know.
So just like the "mewling quim" line, which only got popular because Loki's fangirls are dumb, not because of some nefarious plot to revive an old slur on the writer's behalf.
>Some people may look at my casting as political correctness or an attempt to meet a racial quota, or as part of the year of “Black Film.” Or they could look at it as a creative choice by the director, Josh Trank, who is in an interracial relationship himself—a reflection of what a modern family looks like today.
>Sometimes you have to be the person who stands up and says, “I’ll be the one to shoulder all this hate. I’ll take the brunt for the next couple of generations.” I put that responsibility on myself. People are always going to see each other in terms of race, but maybe in the future we won’t talk about it as much. Maybe, if I set an example, Hollywood will start considering more people of color in other prominent roles, and maybe we can reach the people who are stuck in the mindset that “it has to be true to the comic book.” Or maybe we have to reach past them.
>To the trolls on the Internet, I want to say: Get your head out of the computer. Go outside and walk around. Look at the people walking next to you. Look at your friends’ friends and who they’re interacting with. And just understand this is the world we live in. It’s okay to like it.
>“I’ll be the one to shoulder all this hate. I’ll take the brunt for the next couple of generations.” I put that responsibility on myself
Come the fuck on. It is cool that he is taking a stand againstr the trolls, but that statement is ridiculous.
I’m all for him playing the role and I think he’s probably going to be one of the few good things about that film, but holy shit, he is not Martin Luther King Jr. and he’d do well to stop acting like he’s doing some sort of brave stand for civil rights or some shit. He’s playing a character in a film adaptation of a comic book, not sitting at a Whites-Only lunch counter in protest of racism.
And I'm not saying the racist bullshit he's receiving over his playing the role is good or justified or anything like that. But holy shit, Mike, you're not staring down the rifle of a Klansman. Get a grip.
I still think it's retarded that we live in a world where casting white characters with non-white actors is seen as progressive and yet the opposite is called whitewashing.
“Reverse white-washing” was the reason some assholes got up in arms about the casting of Johnny Storm in the F4 reboot: they felt Johnny's whiteness was somehow essential to the character; if he’s black, he somehow isn’t the Human Torch. But there’s no real reason Johnny can’t be black/the adopted brother of Sue. The racial makeup of Johnny Storm’s character doesn’t actually inform his character or the stories told about him, so why should it matter if he’s black?
By contrast, if Johnny had been black in the comics and turned white for the film adaptation, it’d be easy to argue that whoever made the decision used some sort of racist idea (e.g. “black superheroes just don’t draw audiences to theaters”) to justify the decision. The change from black to white would inherently have negative racial connotations surrounding it because it would have to come from a way of thinking that shortchanges black actors/characters; it would imply that the character just couldn’t be black for…“reasons”.
We tend to fall back on whiteness as a “default” without thinking whether a character needs to actually be white for a story to work. Mike Jordan being cast as Johnny Storm proves that a character who was white in the past doesn't necessarily need to stay white if their being white isn't all that important to the character.
Not really, there is a severe slant towards giving all the plum jobs to white actors, even if they have no talent whatsoever, and the usual excuse is that their characters are already white to begin with. Rewriting roles to be more diverse is one solution for the problem, though it's a rather weak one IMO. I'm personally of the opinion that racelifting in general is unnecessary and better solved by adapting more diverse original characters which never had a history of being white in the first place.
What if the role didn’t have racelifting in the script? Johnny Storm's character isn't really informed by race, so if the F4 reboot producers thought Mike Jordan fit the part better than other actors who auditioned for the role, who’s to say they specifically wanted a black guy for Human Torch? Johnny could theoretically have been Japanese-American or Arab-American or even Native American based on who turned in the best audition; his racial identity doesn’t matter at all.
Now, there are instances where whiteness is something of a required trait. Take Iron Man and Batman: they’re both examples of the privileges afforded to someone by both wealth and whiteness. Steve Rogers needs to be white because of his specific history as an American World War II soldier. But theoretically, Superman could be played by John Boyega and still be the exact same character because Superman's whiteness isn't an inherently valuable part of his character.
I'm against unnecessary racelifting, too. But merely looking at a character and asking if they need to be white for a story to work isn’t racelifting—it’s fighting back against the idea of whiteness as a “default” setting for characters.
>I'm personally of the opinion that racelifting in general is unnecessary and better solved by adapting more diverse original characters which never had a history of being white in the first place.
And the convenient part of that is that if you *do* happen to be a racist, by publically espousing that philosophy you get to avoid having to use minorities at all by only adapting the "bankable" heroes, who are just so happen to be mostly white men. You can just claim you're staying "true to the character" and laugh your way all the way to the next Klan meeting.
Isn't Superman supposed to be a metaphor for Judaism though? By looking indistinguishable from the "norm", but actually being secretly something else. In the far future a Latino Superman might work out, but being black already makes you stand out on its own.
Excessive hype machine, the MCU is losing its novelty since the first movie already did the whole "large cast of characters thing", mediocre international reviews putting a damper on turnout, and/or tangible evidence of the benefits of diverse casting on box office profits.
Like I know they weren't counting on it, but this really puts Civil War in a good position as it is pretty much tailored to those criticisms.
Superman is a Jesus metaphor, yes—but if you’re gonna take the Bible at its word in regards to where everything took place, Jesus was most likely black or “Arabic” in terms of skin color/ethnicity. A Black Superman really isn’t 100% out of the question when you take that into account, y’know?
(I don’t think it’ll ever happen, comics or otherwise, but it is theoretically possible.)
Superman is often used as a Christ allegory by many writers, but his original concept was based more on Moses. He's a very heavily Jewish character.
Pretty sure Siegel and Shuster intended Superman to be a metaphor for Ashkenazim living in America. I think the messiah overtones came along later from writers who were actual Christians. On a side note, the only people who seriously believe Jesus was black are loopy Afrocentrists. He definitely wasn't "white", but serious historians think he was a Arab Semite, not black.
Also there has been a black Superman in Multiversity. He was alright, I guess.
A black Superman would be unrealistic if everyone is expected to look up to him as a hero rather than a threat.
Wright's Ant-Man sounds like the movie people would expect from Marvel (and explains Whedon's perfect Marvel movie comment). Honestly can't understand why Marvel would prefer Reed's serious (and generic) Ant-Man film. Especially when this was being billed as a comedy.
I wouldn't be surprised if the change came from Disney proper. They aren't happy unless things fit into a nice cookie cutter. Marvel has gotten away with a lot, but now Disney is trying to eek out every dollar from the movies so they need to be "safe".
knowing his previous work. Kinda glad it isn't that now. His stuff is fine but it just doesn't feel super. Its more satire.
He is supposed to be Tibetan. On the one hand it will sidestep the "white savior" and "inscrutable Oriental" elements that altogether that have dogged Doctor Strange's backstory, but on the other hand it's an example of said horribly unnecessary racelifting and the Ancient One's Tibetan background does form part of their character.
I'd have preferred her to be Umar, but it would be interesting having a not-so-young woman playing her, especially after the big blowout surrounding Maggie Gyllenhal and casting.
>big blowout surrounding Maggie Gyllenhal and casting.
What's that about?
Its interesting, I've seen some that I think grew into their looks when they went past thirty like Laura Prepon and Lucy Lawless. Latter I'm kinda pissed they didn't make her full time on Agents of Shield and regulated to one bit and flashbacks
>Latter I'm kinda pissed they didn't make her full time on Agents of Shield and regulated to one bit and flashbacks
Yeah, I'm disappointed in that, too. :(
Having Coulson hang around a bunch of dullards instead of attractive lethal women. Maybe he didn't come back to life and this is his hell. Being around a bunch of emotionless tossers. Oh hey in the last episode they remembered that Skye is a hacker. Cripes this show.
The problem was never that Reynolds did or did not understand Deadpool, but that the "powers that be" did not.
Ryan Reynolds is a comic book loving dork, and if there are any problems with him with regards to comic book roles he's played, it usually ain't on him.
This Deadpool movie is something he's wanted to do FOREVER.
>“With Deadpool, it’s a lot like going to prison for the first day,” Reynolds said. “You got to walk up and hit the biggest guy you see to establish a bit of cred. With Deadpool, early on you have to establish that moral flexibility. There’s a gamble to it — you’re going to lose a few people right at the beginning but you take the gamble and know that eventually you’re going to win them back. You won’t lose the hard-core fans of the character, they already know who he is. We have to play to a broader audience than that. As an actor you have to be willing to do something like … back in Vancouver we used to call it a [nasty] burger. ‘You gotta eat the [nasty] burger to get to the cookies.’ And yes, I want to write a cookbook about that…”
>“The comics are very inconsistent in the writing,” Reynolds said. “All the different writers, different voices, but at the core of the character his heart is really interesting. He’s the funniest guy you’ll ever meet, too, and for me that’s exciting but it’s not as hard as capturing that moral flexibility, which is so important. He hasn’t really experienced the full spectrum of human emotion the way most people do.”
I can see him getting to the end and starting to where his past sins start to weigh on him. A vengeance that just turns stale and cold in his mouth.
It's Crossbones. The costume is cringeworthy but his actor seems to be having fun hamming it up going by his Twitter. If the rumors are true even his storyline is full edge since he's basically out to reclaim his "pet" who got loose at the end of the previous movie.
Come on guys, what were you expecting? It's Crossbones, the guy wears black and has a Crossbones motiff going on between the mask and the shirt, there is so much you can do with that. And yes he is edgy as hell, complaining about that would be like complaining that Cap is too patriotic or that Tony Stark is too rich.
I guess those gloves abd the armor are to give him an extra oomph while fighting Cap, considering that he is just a normal guy and Cap owned him HARD in The Winter Solider.
Honestly it makes way more sense for him to be that way than someone like Joker. Comics Crossbones wasn't much different you know.
PUNISHER CONFIRMED FOR DAREDEVIL SEASON TWO
Marvel has cast Jon Bernthal as Frank Castle.
At the actor? Well, it's not like he wrote The Walking Dead, so you can't really blame him for that.
I don't watch Walking Dead, what was so bad about him there?
Chiwetel Ejiofor had been in the running for the film for a long time, but most people expected him to be Brother Voodoo rather than Baron Mordo. Guess they're really gunning for interesting casting choices to counterbalance the backlash against Cumberbatch.
>to counterbalance the backlash against Cumberbatch.
The non existant backlash. The only people who bitched are the same crowd that would bitch regardless of who gets chosen.
A lot of it is from the people who hate Cumberbatch because he's disgusting looking (I agree), overexposed in "nerd" properties (I kind of agree) or because they think he's overrated/not that good of an actor (I definitely don't agree). And of course the band of nutters who claim that Doctor Strange was outright whitewashed, because he had almond-shaped eyes in the comics (well, so does Cumberbatch).
I think he can play well the broody doctor who had his hands mauled and goes on a quest of self and its up being Sorcerer Supreme.
Rumors of a Spider-Gwen movie in the works.
Not sure how well that would work considering it's not in continuity with the Gwen everybody already likes, although the AU nature might make it work after all. Spidey's already supposed to be dead so they can probably keep Emma Stone and all the other aspects of the no-longer-canon ASM films.
The first Thor really benefited from the Shakespearean elements Branagh brought to the table, so here's hoping he comes back for the third.
First film still wasn't that great, though it was at least better than the second. I blame the Earth scenes in both though. If the film is entirely on Asgard it could be actually good.
Never heard of this kid. Is he any good?
that is the most baby baby-faced baby man I've ever seen.
Which will play with the Avengers gag of them offering him a spot and revealing that he's still a kid.
The Thing and Spider-Man are now both Billy Elliot.
The key to superheroism is apparently Ballet.
Haha, oh wow. I guess Broadway is the place to look for future MCU castings then.
Honestly, going ballet for Spider-Man isn't a bad idea. They're going to be the closest thing to being able to actually pull off Spidey contortions in real life.
So people are coming back from preview screenings for Ant-Man saying it's actually not half bad. A lot of them saying that it's better than Avengers 2 in fact.
As one of the few mad souls who actually enjoyed Avengers 2, this fills me with confidence.
Few projects emerge from development hell with anything resembling quality. Jurassic World was one, but I'm glad we haven't hit the annual quota for these surprises just yet.
Plenty of people liked Avengers 2, lets get real. I know us nerds love to pretend we are what makes these movies work or not, but in fact our presence is minuscule.
Avengers 2 was good. It just wasn't great and didn't live up to people's ridiculous expectations.
While the MCU's heavyhanded influence often stifles the directors and causes the films to be too similar, at the same time it's also a really good form of quality control that makes sure they all at least reach a baseline. Even Thor 2 which I consider the worst one was still OK-ish, although the studio basically handled it themselves after they scared off Jenkins. The real worry I had was whether Ant-Man would be able to stand out on its own or if it would just be another fun but forgettable film.
So this is kinda cute. Apparently they're starting some sort of meta MCU news channel.
>“I guess I'll declare my independence from this rumor on 4th of July [and] Essence weekend!” said DuVernay, today. “I'm not signing on to direct Black Panther. I think I’ll just say we had different ideas about what the story would be. Marvel has a certain way of doing things and I think they’re fantastic and a lot of people love what they do. I loved that they reached out to me.”
>Ava DuVernay also confirmed meeting with the star of the Black Panther film, Chadwick Boseman, who is currently filming for the character's cinematic debut in Captain America: Civil War. “I loved meeting Chadwick and writers and all the Marvel execs,” she said. “In the end, it comes down to story and perspective. And we just didn't see eye to eye. Better for me to realize that now than cite creative differences later.”
Aww too bad. I heard part of it stems from the fact that she wanted to create an original mythology around the character to suit her planned narrative, while Marvel (naturally) wants to stick closer to the comics on this one.
While I favor the latter side because I'm a big fan of the lore established by the Christopher Priest run, I can see her point and neither one is particularly wrong for it.
’tis a shame, but damn, you gotta wonder if Marvel's tight control over how it does things will backfire sooner or later. (I think "sooner". Phase Three will probably have Marvel's first actual bomb—assuming Ant-Man does well, anyway.)
From what people are saying, Ant-Man is actually really, surprisingly, good, and is expected to do decently due to this positive word of mouth.
That'll probably be Doctor Strange, considering the odd casting choices and the not so great track record of the director and writer. Granted, the Russos made several bad films and their successes were comedies, not dramas.
I don't even like Marvel movies that much, but it is odd to me that people almost want to see them fail at some point. If Marvel Studios has a flop, I doubt it's going to be because they outright did something terrible with said movie, but more of the superhero bubble finally starting to burst.
I always assume serious message directors look at these offers from superhero movie factories and go "haha no", so I'm kind of shocked DuVernay gave it proper consideration. But then I forget how integral Jon Favreau and Kenneth Branagh were in forming the MCU, so it's good that Marvel isn't forgetting how crucial these sorts of directors are to its business, even if it is smothering them somewhat.
It's mostly just Jumpman. The sane people among us can admit the MCU has plenty of things wrong with it without obsessing over them or wanting the whole thing to come crashing down.
Considering how well Marvel films do and how many people see them, she probably saw it as a chance to put a blockbuster on her resume and still tackle some serious issues even if it's a little "fluffy" for her.
Marvel probably reached out to her because of all the criticism the MCU's got for its lack of diversity, both in-film and in staff. Some of it deserved, some of it not so much (e.g. the calls that Steve Rogers should've been acted by someone black or Jewish, "Doctor Strange was whitewashed!", or that Ant-Man stole Black Widow's movie and should be boycotted in protest when it was in development since 2006). Now that she's a superstar they probably thought having her would help quell the complaints, and probably make them be seen as more legitimate than just popcorn flicks.
Point to a statement I've made where I wished a Marvel Studios film would financially fail. Otherwise, stop bullshitting.
Eh, given how long movie people telling Marvel that they "cant make a movie out of THAT" I'm cool with them telling to fuck off when they want to change stuff to much.
They have earned it.
And there are still tons of arcs I want to see.
Armor Wars anyone?
Also isnt the point of Miles Morales that he gets inspired by Peter Parker?
So ofcoure they are going to have him show up first, calm you tits internet!
So is it basically confirmed that Bucky Cap is going to be a thing now, or at least it's going to set up for it.
In all honesty that's what I'm expecting. That or he he stays as the Winter Soldier outright except on the side of good. It's unlikely Captain America will die in Civil War since he's been confirmed for both Infinity Wars. So has everybody else I think.
Marvel could kill Steve off in Civil War and still bring him back for the Infinity War flicks. Remember, we're gonna get into the metaphysical/supernatural shit with Doctor Strange (UNLESS MARVEL DOES SOME SHITTY "IT'S ACTUALLY SCIENCE" BULLSHIT, DON'T DO THAT BULLSHIT TO US FEIGE) and it's possible that Thanos's "relationship" with Death could somehow end up bringing Steve back from the grave in Infinity War.
But yeah, I ain't puttin' bets on Steve dying.
It would also just be a really anticlimactic way for Civil War to end considering how vastly different it's already shaping up to be from the comics. While the philosophical gap between the pro- and anti- regulation sides may linger throughout Phase 3, I'm betting the actual team division will only last for the first two acts before they reunite against Baron Zemo.
Marisa Tomei is the new Aunt May.
I gotta wonder: in the next Spidey reboot, will Aunt May be in her friggin' twenties?
Well, ever since the her Ultimate Comics counterpart, Aunt May has been more and more depicted in media as middle aged instead of a woman in her 80s (or late 70s at best), and Tomei is 50.
You know, this actually makes me wonder, why 616 Aunt May and Uncle Ben were so old when they received teen Peter on their home? I mean, that would mean there was a huge age gap between Ben Parker and Pete's dad.
Pete's dad (I had to google to learn his name is Richard) could have already been middle-aged when Peter was born. Also, , but the Wikipedia article on Peter's parents mention Ben being Richard's "much older brother."
Wait, Pete's dad and Ben were brothers? I assumed Ben and May were Pete's Great Uncle and Great Aunt and he just CALLED them "Aunt" and "Uncle" for brevity. That's how I do with my great uncles and aunts. I didn't realize they were supposed to be the same generation as his parents.
It's weird but yeah. Guess there's some bizarre inverse comic book time shenanigans there somehow.
Deaging Aunt May cuts down on just how fucked Peter is, though- Without her being a billion years old and on dozens of medications for her many, many ailments, he's got way less money suck from his crappy job.
Though he's now under twenty so it makes a bit of sense. And still Uncle Ben dying and likely whatever income he had going out the window brings its own set of problems.
He still looks a lot less fucked up than I was expecting though I guess you can only do so much when he's being played by Ryan Reynolds. And too much makeup probably gets in the way. Anyway looks pretty hype though I wish there was more fourth wall breaking.
Fox really should’ve released that redband trailer last night. Dumbasses should be all over top of all the buzz.
well as little CGI as possible and maybe just enough so that he can get the mask on and off without it tearing it all to pieces.
shame /co/ is being its modern shitty self about..everything.
Wasn't as informative as I'd like but doesn't look half bad and the previous two movies turned out solid. Cool to see they're using Storm's mohawk design this time around.
I assume this would mean Wade's face is gonna get VFX'd up.
I AM THE ROCK OF THE ETERNAL SHORE
CRASH AGAINST ME, AND BE BROKEN!
So deliciously cheesy and yet badass. Fans shit a lot on ol' blue lips for "never winning" in the comics(which is odd to me, since "never winning" is what all villains usually do), but nobody can deny he was awesome in the 90's X-Men. The guy was THE big bad of the series, every time he appears the team felt like it was in a real, mortal danger. In fact, he DID wipe out an entire team of X-Men in direct combat, they only were saved due time-travelling shaneningans.
Plus, that episode which was basically Apocalypse trolling Archangel into thinking he had a chance at destroying him, was pure gold. What a spiteful sack of shit, like a good villain should be.
>So deliciously cheesy and yet badass.
“I am as far beyond mutants as they are beyond you!” is still my favorite quote from that show.
Will everybody hurt me if I admit I think this actually looks...kinda good?
Kinberg did a lot of reshoots earlier in the year. It's possible he may have pulled an Ant-Man with this film.
Visualwise he looks terrible, but then again so did the old Doom, and who knows what his personality is going to be like.
No, but I still want it to fail so we get the FF stuff in MU.
Because they would give us the Real Deal Doom.
For all the shit that goes down in /co/ there is some interesting analysis of the trailers. Mainly taking note of missing effects, mistimed effects, bad cgi in general and comparisons of the older trailers with the newer ones in which they stripped the 3D effect CGI.
Also the overall fact that this one alone didn't get leaks and that the panel was horrible. I really feel bad for the film actually.
Also from the trailers it looks like they do zero effects to change Ben's voice.
1:53-1:55 Minute Mark.
Denny's Did more work.
Forget the graphic but the MCU already has joint hold of Skrulls (so Secret Invasion is totally possible come Phase 4 or whatever). They only don't have access to Super Skrull.
Magneto and Psylocke look pretty great though, surprising considering how stupid comic leotards look IRL.
But then again if his powers include shapeshifting he could pull a Freiza and change into more powerfull forms as the movie goes on.
Well, really it's as much that he's the wrong colour as anything else. In the comics, his skin is gray and his lips and clothes are what are blue.
They basically reversed things to the X-Force Archangel colour scheme.
Just saw Ant-Man. Actually pretty good. Liked it way, way, way more than Guardians of the Galaxy which I thought was only soso. The jokes were funnier, the visuals were more interesting (man that Microverse scene, and the main character is a lot more likeable. Cross is yet another forgetable Marvel villain but I can let it slide for this kind of film, and I'm really glad Hope Pym will become the Wasp in the future.
It's in the realm of Thor 2 for me in that it's just kinda there. Yeah it was funny, but it had a slow buildup and took itself a bit too seriously in some parts. Actually the film's tone as a whole was all over the place. It swapped from comedy hijinks to dramatic dialogue about the Pym family in a heartbeat.
For the first half of the movie, Ant-Man doesn't even do anything. It feels like they ran out of stuff to do with the overall concept and filled the rest of the movie with a lot of boring generic thriller drama. I also noticed that a lot of scenes shown in the trailers leading up to it were completely missing from the final product.
The writers for the upcoming Vacation reboot are working on the upcoming Spider-Man reboot.
>A couple of weeks ago word got around that Vacation writer-directors John Francis Daley and Jonathan M. Goldstein were in talks to script Spider-Man, after losing out on the directing job to Jon Watts (Cop Car). Now the pair have finally confirmed their involvement, and have started to talk a little bit about their vision for the wisecracking webslinger.
>The key word there is wisecracking — from the sounds of it, this Spidey will be wittier and funnier than his big-screen predecessors have been.
Yeah, about that...
Ah the modern "comedy" replacing naivete with idiocy on ontop of being needlessly trashy. Ending rather sums it up for it all literally murdering the classic bit from the original. Wouldn't put it past this film to have the original driver show up looking for her daughter cue flatbed carrying her trashed car with her mangled corpse inside hand hanging out. But she gets distracted by Hemsworth cock.
I know they did the sequel to cloudy but other than the monsters the film was kinda dull. If this is their idea of grade a humor I hope they get axed after the first draft.
I'm super confused right now. I'm assuming you're talking about Vacation.
Yes and how that style of modern comedy probably won't translate well into Spider-man. His beats aren't supposed to be comically tragic.
People on Tumblr are freaking the fuck out right now and calling it ableism or erasure. I haven't parsed the arguments long enough to figure out whether they have a point or not, but my first thought is when it comes to it Deadpool probably isn't the best guy to have for mental illness representation.
I've seen both sides, and there are fair points to be made in both cases. Deadpool is a well-liked (by the audience), funny character who is schizophrenic but not made unable to function by his illness, and there aren't a lot of people like that in media.
...but on the other hand, he locked an old blind woman who was effectively his best friend in a room full of sharp, pointy objects to punish her once. And it was implied to be something he had done to her before, because she was terrified of it. And this was not treated as a wacky fun thing, it was treated as exactly as horrible as it sounds.
So yeah. I'm not sure I would consider him to be positive representation for schizophrenics. This is probably for the best, all told.
Really? I saw tumblr go on about how that was a positive thing saying stuff how it was more likely people with mental health afflictions are victims of violence more often than perpetrators and such.
Dyou ever think maybe tumblr might have more than one school of thought cos that idea's crossed my mind more than once.
Deadpool appeared a bit insane in the trailer. I think this "no schizophrenia" thing actually means he won't have those two voices in his head, which is a relatively new development for the character.
Finally saw Ant-man.
Freasher then Avangers 2 and I'm a sucker for cool bug stuff so I'd say it better.
And now its time to read your spoilers!
Didn't say that was the only opinion Tumblr had, but the particular circles I follow are overwhelmingly on the side of "it's a bad decision that's harmful to the disabled community" side of things, except none of them have bothered to elaborate (at least yet) on why exactly beyond "Fox should know better". >>43495's explanation makes a lot of sense, but that and what you pointed out though is basically why I lean towards getting rid of Deadpool's schizophrenia being a good thing.
I'm guessing it means bye-bye yellow boxes ;_;
I hope the Ant-Man sequel is flat-out called The Wasp instead of Ant-Man 2 or whatever. It's already a less goofy title and similar enough to Green Hornet to not be weird. Plus Scott just isn't interesting enough to be the star again and Hope more than deserves it. Don't think this needs to be spoiled because everyone at Marvel Studios flat-out said she'd become Wasp even before the movie came out.
And they show her fucking suit mid-credits.
The only problem I have with it is that its color is mainly red, blue and silver.
And everyone else already fucking uses them!
Atlest they have tons to pick from.
But then again (movie)Yellowjacked has a better Wasp look then she could ever have(without looking like a badguy).
Thats why AngryJoe kept calling him Wasp during his review.
I hate that movie Wasp has that dumbass reverse stinger on her head. I get they don't want her to be confused with Yellowjacket but his costume was great and what her outfit should've looked more like.
Haven't watched the movie yet, but damn, that's one sweet looking costume.
Don't get why her arms are exposed when they talked about how dangerous Pym particles can be but I assume it's just incomplete and it's going to change when she actually enters the fray.
>I'm guessing it means bye-bye yellow boxes ;_;
That's a good thing.
The yellow boxes were the first step on the road to full on Daniel Way tier Deadpool.
Wow. It's not a guarantee of bad quality but that's not exactly confidence inspiring, especially with Miles Teller's comment. Way to drain any remaining hype the movie has.
Do they not have premiers for movies anymore? Did the cast just skip it? "Dave and Busters was giving out free tokens, far better night."
That is the best "trailer of a trailer" thingie in the history of ever.
Granted, there isn't much competition there, but still credit where credit is due.
I thought they're going to compare it like Guardians of the Galaxy more than the Thor movies. Which still sucks. Also I want to waifu Luis now.
Every time I think about how bad the FF reboot is probably going to be I remind myself that this film still looks great.
That's what happens when you get a movie made out of love of the story/characters versus love of screwing over your licenser.
The director explained it. The trailers had a lot of jokes about how dumb or lame Ant-Man was, which works well as trailer soundbytes, but in the the actual movie would just detract from the plot or reflect badly on the main character.
Early Twitter buzz for Fantastic Four seems to be positive.
That means nothing. Early buzz was positive for Green Lantern, too.
Didn't pay much attention to Green Lantern, after I saw that hideous CGI costume. However, apparently Amazing Spider-Man 2 received mix buzz before its premier. So it's not completely useless.
Early buzz for Age of Ultron was positive too. If you talk to an average person on the street or Tumblr they'll act like it was the worst thing ever and an assault to human decency.
For what it's worth I thought it was OK. Had good stuff, but a lot of it got waylaid by Whedon's personal excesses.
Early buzz tends to come from the people who felt the strongest in their love or hate. You're not going to see many in-between attitudes. And all the backroom drama indicates that Fant4stic is shaping up to be functional but forgettable rather than outright MST3K bad, especially if the stories about the ghost-directed reshoots are true.
F4 reviews are slowly pouring in.
Aaaaaaaaand yep, looks like I was right about that.
Dat Deadpool trailer. Hnnngh. I hope the full movie turns out good. (Also: best use of that DMX song since Rick & Morty.)
That's the same one that was shown at Comic Con right? Yeah it's really good stuff.
the Comic Con trailer had a bit more footage, like Negasonic saying her name and Wade's reaction to it.
It's apparently a bottle episode on bland set with boring CGI run amok battles scattered on.
On the bright side, for all the racists (or the occasional apologists blaming racism for the bad reception) most of the critics seem to agree on Reg E. Cathey and Michael B. Jordan being some of the only good things in the Fantastic Four remake. At least Creed is looking good.
Weren't you the guy who was saying all the behind the scenes drama for this film were just bullshit rumors a while ago, and that Ant-Man was going to be shit? Or am I thinking of some other namefag?
Wow, those 4Chan posts are sounding more and more legit. Trank confirmed for whiny pissbaby.
>Weren't you the guy who was saying all the behind the scenes drama for this film were just bullshit rumors a while ago
Because the perfect way the judge a film before release is rumors with questionable credibility.
>and that Ant-Man was going to be shit?
While my feelings over Wright leaving the film has been clear, I've never downright said it would be shit, nor mocked anyone who loved it. Regardless of quality, Ant-Man is the first Marvel film I refused to watch because of the Wright ordeal.
Interesting timing. Most likely they'll trade the FF rights for the X-Men TV rights plus maybe 100 million. Would probably be the best deal for both parties.
For the record I never said Fantastic Four was necessarily going to be shit if the rumors about Trank being an asshole were true (which they apparently are). Just that Trank was looking like an asshole and if the movie ended up being good it wasn't because of anything he did but because of more qualified people stepping in to save it. But if what Trank's saying means anything, excessive Fox meddling may have caused the film to become even worse instead.
X-Men would work so much damn better as a series, anyway. (As would Spider-Man.) I could see Marvel doing that exchange.
An X-Men series could never top the magnum opus that is Generation X.
Most superhero things work better as a series.
Which is why it's so infuriating when everything goes all event crazy, because it breaks things up in a way that everything turns into a series of set ups for the next big 'movie' style interruption of the narrative.
Jesus this is mad, even for MovieBob.
You know, I think Trank would've been fine if the film wasn't dragged legs kicking into being about the Fantastic Four instead of just Chronicle 2.
Funny I coulda sworn you were saying the rumors themselves were confirmed to be false, despite that not being the case, and the evidence at the time suggesting they were more on the side of credible than not.
Someone made an interesting point on /co/. Fantastic Four would work better as a period piece like First Class. Set them sometime in the '60s during the height of the Space Race. Like it was to start with. If Marvel gets it then they could interact with the rest of their retro stable of heroes.
I've seen that before in other places too, but if that's the case I'm not sure how they could be reintegrated with the rest of the MCU. IMO they're not the kinds of characters who are any good at leading their own films anymore. Just like in the comics, they're more interesting as side characters than as leads for their own series.
Though I think they could, harken back to the idea that the Avengers Initiative/Program is a thing they had been trying to get people to be on board with for decades. Then at some point in the '80s after one encounter maybe with Kang, they and the entire Baxter Building just up and vanished. Stark/Avengers tower was built on the old foundation in part to study the energies that it left behind.
I like the idea of them becoming peers of Hank Pym. Make him feel less like the odd one out when it comes to the times, and it would be a great opportunity for Janet to get screentime after Wright royally screwed her over.
Max Landis on the whole situation.
>During the shooting of the film, I had almost no input, but I was lucky in that the studio and Josh stuck astonishingly tight to my script. But again, even this is a fluke. It was an original idea, a dark character movie with a first time director. Fluke. Freak of nature. But I didn’t know that and I’m sure Josh didn’t know that either. In the five years since I sold Chronicle, I’ve learned the hard way.
>You take huge hits in this industry, creatively, but that’s only after you’ve been given the opportunity to take huge swings, which is rare. A movie like Fantastic Four, an assignment with a lot riding on it, was always going to have a tremendous amount of cooks in the kitchen. People always ask me when I’m gonna write a superhero movie. I have. I’ve gotten those jobs. They’re very intense and stressful.
>As a writer, I’ve been lucky to work on many, many projects, and seen how different and how hard each road can be, for five and a half years. Josh didn’t get that chance, and his second major project, after one with total freedom, was one with intense oversight. So I don’t think anyone’s wrong or right, necessarily, and I don’t imagine anyone cares about my opinion. But I do think it’s important to say that if you’re not prepared going in to not FIGHT like hell, but WORK like hell, it’s gonna get ugly.
>No one is trying to make a bad movie. This job is only very occasionally romantic. Don’t let it own you, try not to let it hurt you. Because sometimes it’s so much fucking fun. But it’s still a job.”
In sure he believes that and that Trank and the cast believe, but Fox... No.
He was always pretty terrible, but now it's blatant how hard he's trying to make it Pixels Review: 2.
I think you're giving rather generous interpretations to what critics have said, I thought they said "there are some good ideas in here, but none of them are executed well, and the last half is abysmal.
Not to mention at the end of the day the movie has about as much to do with the source material as a bottle of warm piss has to do with the ocean.
Oh geez. I'm surprised though, a difference of five million is considered that significant for three days of time when the film is out for at least a whole month?
Fox likely wanted Fant4stic to have a good opening weekend since the dropoff for Weekend #2 was gonna be huge once the word-of-mouth factor came into play. Anything lower than Fox’s estimates will disappoint the studio—especially since that means the film will need to do that much better overseas just so it can make back the filming budget. (No way this film turns a profit, not with critics are savaging it and both the director and the stars all but saying it sucks ass.)
Latin American markets, Mr. Stone.
Latin American markets.
Fant4stic isn’t showing in China, so Fox needs to pray for performance in that market to go really, really well.
I've seen some opinions from a few Brazilian viewers and they seem to hate it as much as we do.
A problem I see, Fox may be in a dick measuring contest with Marvel (though I'm starting to think Marvel is increasingly unaware of it) But the fans really just want to be part of it and not be treated like crap. Trank burned the entire bridge down when he came out against the Marvel base at the start of all of this and its just gotten worse from there. Its interesting to see what Fox does with a budget along the same lines as Ant-Man. Utterly ruin everything but being utterly half ass about it.
>though I'm starting to think Marvel is increasingly unaware of it
You are wrong. Marvel are being amazingly petty dicks about everything too, going so far as to cancel the Fantastic Four comic, and all licensed X-Men goods (even the ones not based on the movies)
The X-Men thing is true, but the Fantastic Four comics cancellation had as much to do with the terrible sales. Seriously people in general don't seem to care about them because they're either too boring, cheesy, or outdated and the movies aren't helping.
They should stick them in a space age period piece I think. Its where they came from, thrived and should stay.
>Seriously people in general don't seem to care about them because they're either too boring, cheesy, or outdated and the movies aren't helping.
The last time I saw hype for FF was when Ultimate Reed went evil.
I've been hearing the argument lately that FF are just hard to adapt in live action form. The Incredibles is the most popular example of FF done right, but that's in animation. Reed's stretchy powers are a challenge to make look real, without it looking cheesy. I can't think of a live action equivalent to it.
I don't think it’s the “live action” aspect so much as it is the “not fitting in with modern times” aspect.
It doesn't have to be without the charm of the classic comics. As said it would work great as a contemporary in the time of Peggy, Hank and Jan. First Super Powered Family. They attempt to recruit them. Reed gives it some thought then gives a speech about what has happened to them, the powers they've been given and why he thinks it would be wrong to become anything close to a tool of the government.
Then some encounter in the '70s with Kang caused the entire Baxter Building to vanish. Stark/Avengers tower was built on that location. Some more cosmic hijinks and we can bring them back into MCU about the same age a everyone else. Cap can bond with them being people outta their time.
Or they could make a Doctor Doom movie.
And finally have a villain that pepole wont call crap.
I still dont get that, I have injoyed most of the MCU bad guys.
People tend to exaggerate how bad the villains are but they're just functional and not very interesting. Part of it has to do with the format. You've got the protagonists and the enemies fighting for 2 hours of screentime, and the MCU's selling point is its heroes. The TV shows don't have this problem for obvious reasons.
Which is why Kingpin is one of the highlights of the Daredevil series.
Other movies are able to write up entertaining and unique villains. Even with the focus on heroes, it's clearly a weak point. Dr. Doom wouldn't magically fix that though, he's been in as much crap as every other villain.
Other movies can stray outside a given “formula” for their genre and stand alone as their own story. MCU films have to worry about connecting everything and staying within Marvel’s formula for Four Quadrant Box Office Happy Fun Time Success.
One thing this movie did is get me to think about Johnny, who other than being Ben's foil usually has little other purpose. Going forward if it ever happens again I say he could be tweaked giving him more gearhead standing. Reed can make the science but he doesn't have an eye for design and engineering. And that is here Johnny would come in. Not a genius but he knows his way around a workshop bench and can build anything given the opportunity.
> Reed can make the science but he doesn't have an eye for design and engineering.
But he is both. That's his entire thing, he is superhumanly smart, to a ridiculously impossible extent, a multidisciplinary superscientiest. Reed needs to be good at everything science and engineering and be able to build anything on his lab or else you can't really sell him as the smartest superhuman on earth. Especially after seeing Tony Stark cooking up new elements, building crazy technology and bringing life to a sentient robot (who may be the most powerful being on earth) in the Marvel Studios films, Reed just being a smarter Stephen Hawking would leave people saying "meh".
Its not so much he cannot build it but he just doesn't have an eye for designing with Style. Reeds designs are very functional and utilitarian. But Johnny has the designers eye so he can tweak it so it has Class, and a cup holder.
Be like Reed designs the first FantastiCar "The Flying Bathtub" and it takes Johnny with the more artistic mind to make it look cool. Which isn't that far from the truth of how it went in the comics. I'm just saying make it more obvious where Johnny has a talent that works with the team.
Wow... That's harsh.
To this day it's still the best adaptation yet. Hilarious low budget and special effects aside it's not even that bad. It's got the only decent Doom for one.
One good thing with the new FF movie.
This was on sale and full of fun!
Like that time Reed lost all there money on stocks and they had to make a movie for the sub-mariner that turned out to be a trap involving fire proff natives and a fucking real-life cyclop.
Also their second fight with Dr.DOOM ends with him jumping on to a meteor and flying off into deep space.
Issues later he just shows up in the marvel office to have THE Lee and Kirby lure Reed into a trap by calling him to talk about the script.
Fucking love it.
Thought of some fixes
>Reed Sue and Johnny working on the machine
>Government wants to send one of "our boys" along.
>Enter Astronaut and Friend Benjamin Grimm
>Victor doesn't like the idea of them stealing his spotlight
>Rifits the one man prototype with Reeds modified design so he can be first
>Victor gets there and starts digging around collecting things to showcase his greatness
>Messes around a little too much awaking "something" and in a panic rushes back to his teleporter just as Reed and company embark.
>Collison of the two forces causes the new platform to explode and the four to be bathed in unknown energies
>Victor is blown through, horribly scarred and burned. Crawls into a servo assisted combat suit prototype and makes his escape yelling "RICHAAAAAARDS"
>the four adapt and learn to use their new powers as an anomalous signal starts broadcasting from deep space.
So are Cape Flicks ever going to get past the origin story as the starting place for every Super Hero? Other than surface details there's very little difference amongst the origins of most superhero origins, other than the characters themselves--and they can be shown off just as effectively with a more interesting story. A "Team" origin story is at least a little bit better, but even that is almost always "They start off butting heads but must learn to work as a team to fight a threat too big for any of them to fight alone!"
Because it seems to me that part of the problem with so many new Superhero franchises/reboots is retreading a story that isn't THAT amazing to begin with. For the three people in the audience who don't already know the story of that particular team, you could give the Fantastic Four's entire origin story in five to ten minutes and move on to an actually interesting story involving them. Same thing with Spider-man. Superman and Batman you don't even have to bother with! They're part of modern mythology. Literally everyone knows Superman and Batman's origin stories. There is zero reason to have told us those again when they were rebooted.
It just seems like there are much better stories that they could be telling with a lot of these characters than their origin stories. I can think of very few comics where the origin story is the thing that made anyone like those characters or their stories. Off the top of my head, it's pretty much just Runaways--and that's mostly because if you see the entire arc with the Pride as their origin story, it's pretty much where the story peaked.
For what's worth, it seems that the new Spider-man reboot won't be an origin story.
The MCU has introduced a "no more origin stories" rule, which makes sense since it already has multiple long-running series that it can introduce new characters in and spin off pretty much at will (Black Panther is set to be introduced in Civil War and I'm pretty sure Captain Marvel will come into being during the events of the first Infinity Saga film). It has the luxury of having got its origin stories out of its system half a decade ago, though, so it's hardly a poster boy for avoiding origin stories if the secret to doing so is "become a cultural juggernaut the likes of which the human race has never seen".
It's funny that the 1989 Batman movie jettisoned the origin story and did very well for itself, yet so few superhero franchises followed its example (the Affleck Daredevil film and the first X-Men movie arguably came close, but apart from them my mind's drawing a blank). It's a hard conundrum to solve, how do you introduce a superhero without wasting precious running time introducing them?
You do it like Incredible Hulk did: make it the opening of the damn film so you can give people a general summary behind the character before going into the film proper. I imagine Marvel’s eyeing such an approach for its future “first movie for a new character” movies.
Marvel Studios already said they're not going to do anymore. The main reason Ant-Man is is because it was pushed back, but future movies like Doctor Strange, Black Panther, and Captain Marvel won't be. >>43674 already explained Black Panther and Captain Marvel's schticks, and I suspect Doctor Strange will either rely on flashbacks or frontload it into the first fifteen minutes then skedaddle onto the main plot.
Man if it's true they got real talent like Matt Vaughn and Drew Goddard involved to salvage the thing, then what the fuck was up with that third act?
Brought in with no knowledge of how to handle the material or what needed to be done. Just dropped on the whole mess and told "fix it, and we've got a sequel lined up to take that into account." So it was a smelly mess on both sides of the thing. Fox not giving a damn and Trank pretty much doing same and just using it as an excuse to make a sequel tied to his earlier film.
I do have concerns about this kinda thing going into the more lore heavy parts of this in X-men, but they seem to "care?" about it a little more or at least have producers and directors that give a shit.
I like that, Civil War being the big test to see how that works.
>Trank pretty much doing same and just using it as an excuse to make a sequel tied to his earlier film.
That's a bit of an ugly write off of that first half of the movie.
I just can't help but think what an interesting movie this could've been as a straight up sci fi body horror driven film as opposed to an attempt at launching "Fox's Avengers."
Well that is possibly what comes from his original shooting script, then Fox descended upon him before they got rolling and started altering everything and adding and taking other pieces out. Fox cut three of the action set pieces he had lined up among other things. Really a lot of this sounds like Airbender level interference, least what may have happened from those sources.
They also kind of did it with Hank in Ant-Man. Didn't need to show scenes of him inventing the Pym Particles and ant helmet, they mostly got the point through in dialogue and the old 80s film reel. For characters like Strange. Black Panther, Ant-Man in general, Captain Marvel, and the Inhumans though, you absolutely have to show something more concrete, unlike with the Hulk. But they don't need to include a lengthy training montage or draw out the scenes of them actually getting their powers.
Yeah, Daredevil mostly avoided that trap by including the training montage with the origins of Matt’s “blindsight” ability and such that was frontloaded into the film. It doesn’t even show him deciding to become Daredevil or getting the suit or whatever; he’s just already Daredevil once the frontloading ends and the movie’s story begins. That left open the plothole of how he gets all those things he uses as Daredevil, though—and Marvel can’t make a glaring oversight with something that important.
My guess is that Marvel will shoot for a GOTG-style opening where the origin is frontloaded before the opening title sequence, which’ll leave open a way to transition into the opening title sequence and start the movie’s story.
>That left open the plothole of how he gets all those things he uses as Daredevil
What things? That Melvin dude made him the costume and most likely also the custom billy clubs, so what else is there to explain?