steesh07 Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Just watched "The Prisoners" and was really surprised how much I liked it, was a great film. Sort of guessed who the abductor was but then changed my mind throughout, was a brilliant film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Paul Rudd is Henry Pym! I'm ecstatic!<p> </p><p> <a href="http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/180849-paul-rudd-is-marvel-studios-ant-man" rel="external nofollow">http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/180849-paul-rudd-is-marvel-studios-ant-man</a></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Paul Rudd is Ant Man, but Michael Douglas is Henry Pym. Rudd will be playing Scott Lang. </p><p> </p><p> Assuming they fold Ant Man into the third Avengers film, they've already got Banner and Stark as genius scientist types. Maybe they'll focus on the reformed thief side of Lang's character. </p><p> </p><p> Douglas should give a relatively weak Marvel character a but of 'umph' at the box office too...my guess is that he gets killed off at the end of the movie.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="brashleyholland" data-cite="brashleyholland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Paul Rudd is Ant Man, but Michael Douglas is Henry Pym. Rudd will be playing Scott Lang. <p> </p><p> Assuming they fold Ant Man into the third Avengers film, they've already got Banner and Stark as genius scientist types. Maybe they'll focus on the reformed thief side of Lang's character. </p><p> </p><p> Douglas should give a relatively weak Marvel character a but of 'umph' at the box office too...my guess is that he gets killed off at the end of the movie.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yea I was just reading about this. Douglas casting is strong. He really was brilliant as Liberace and the man's a proven actor capable of just about any role big and small as long as it's in his age range. I think him and Rudd with Edgar Wright's script and direction is going to be really perfect for the Marvel universe. It'll be different but honestly I think they need different right now.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="steesh07" data-cite="steesh07" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Just watched "The Prisoners" and was really surprised how much I liked it, was a great film. Sort of guessed who the abductor was but then changed my mind throughout, was a brilliant film.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The Hugh Jackman movie? Yea it surprised me it was really good. He was very solid in it and the supporting cast was phenomenal. From n acting standpoint those guys all understood the ebb and flow of suspense.</p><p> </p><p> I don't want to get too spoilery but I felt te ending was just right. It wasn't super bleak for bleak's sake but they didn't relent and give us some unbelievables corny happy ending that typically rins these kinds of morality-challenging films. </p><p> </p><p> Because we Americans only like to be conflicted during the runtime of the film. We need everything wrapped up nice by the end so we feel o.k.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 <p>Walter Mitty was supposed to be Ben Stiller's oscar. It got horrible reviews and no one saw it. </p><p> </p><p> Simple Jack happened in real life.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tha Black Phenom Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 <p>So Batman/Superman has been delayed until 2016. Tis a shame, but at least they'll have more time to work on it.</p><p> </p><p> Also, I've heard a lot of mixed feelings on American Hustle, the more negative side claiming it as Oscar-bait. I'm debating on going to see it myself, any thoughts?</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RKOwnage Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="bigtplaystew" data-cite="bigtplaystew" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Walter Mitty was supposed to be Ben Stiller's oscar. It got horrible reviews and no one saw it. <p> </p><p> Simple Jack happened in real life.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I heard it was pretty good, but didn't see it. Great reference.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Tha Black Phenom" data-cite="Tha Black Phenom" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>So Batman/Superman has been delayed until 2016. Tis a shame, but at least they'll have more time to work on it.<p> </p><p> Also, I've heard a lot of mixed feelings on American Hustle, the more negative side claiming it as Oscar-bait. I'm debating on going to see it myself, any thoughts?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I saw American Hustle and liked it a lot. The biggest criticism I've heard is that the accents weren't very good. I don't know, I thought the movie was pretty good, definitely worth a watch.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Tha Black Phenom" data-cite="Tha Black Phenom" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Also, I've heard a lot of mixed feelings on American Hustle, the more negative side claiming it as Oscar-bait. I'm debating on going to see it myself, any thoughts?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I thought it was good nothing great but good. One thing I do have to say is man oh man did Amy Adams look hot in that movie. I mean you would think Jennifer Lawrence would be the sex symbol in that movie and while that thought would be right as well, Amy Adams just looked beyond hot in that movie.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="bigtplaystew" data-cite="bigtplaystew" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yea I was just reading about this. Douglas casting is strong. He really was brilliant as Liberace and the man's a proven actor capable of just about any role big and small as long as it's in his age range.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This, when I was watching him play Liberace I actually forgot that I was watching Michael Douglas play him. I know that sounds odd but that was how good he was in that role. I mean every time Matt Damon was on the screen I knew I was watching Matt Damon but Michael Douglas was so great in that movie that it was like I was watching the real Liberace.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Okay lol, I was just saying that I always found Marvel's universe extremely confusing, comic book wise and cinematic wise, I don't think anyone can disagree with that after reading what I bolded there. I guess that just means that The Justice League will have a lot more star power in it considering DC/Warner Brothers owns the rights to make any movie with their receptive character in it. Meaning more popular superheros will be able to participate in the film.<p> </p><p> -Batman(Affleck)</p><p> -Super-Man(Cavill)</p><p> -Green Lantern(Reynolds)</p><p> -Wonder Women(Gadot)</p><p> -The Flash(Unknown But Movie Confirmed In 2016)</p><p> -Martian Manhunter(Unknown)</p><p> -Aquaman(Unknown)</p><p> -Cyborg(The Rock? Portraying The Last Person In The Film.)</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I doubt Reynolds will be back to play the Green Lantern again. I have a feeling they'll use John Stewart if he's included to separate themselves from the Ryan Reynolds bomb.</p><p> </p><p> Where was the Flash movie confirmed? All I've ever seen confirmed was the tv show with Grant Gustin starring as the Flash and they've already said that the Arrow/Flash TV shows aren't in the same continuity. </p><p> </p><p> I think Rock would be a better Black Adam honestly, but Black Adam wasn't a member of the Justice League.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazorbeak Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <p>Following Jaysin from the WWE thread:</p><p> </p><p> I get what you're talking about and you make a bit more sense, but this is still pretty baffling to me.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wolverine and Spiderman have been apart of the comic book's adaptation of The Avengers for decades. Same with The Thing. Each movie has been a direct adaptation of a comic book story meaning that they could all intertwine with each other in the near future if and since they were comic book story adaptations.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> For almost <em>one</em> decade. Bendis added the two in New Avengers in late 2004. Thing joined a reboot of the team years later. And Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are special cases, no, no other character could "intertwine" if the character's film rights are already held by a studio. Not without paying way more than pretty much any one character is worth. I mean, Spider-Man's nice, but would Avengers 2 make an extra 500 million because Spidey showed up? Because Universal would probably want a number that crazy.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>^Really? I always found the fact that The X-Men being mutants and having Wolverine join the Avengers absolute a cluster of you know what. Doesn't that make them all Mutants as well? That opens a whole can of worms that hurts my brain. For one, why weren't they fighting with the X-Men during their many wars with humans when they tried to kill off all the Mutants in the world? I at least found that Batman really didn't exceed his boundaries of going outside Gotham for the most part while the other superheros did the same for their respective territories/areas/cities. Superman was really the only guy to go from city to city protecting the World from everything, and that was because he was in my opinion, the greatest Superhero ever created. He was also like the first superhero to meet other respective superheros and that was because he was the guy saving earth from everything. While in Marvel everyone protected the earth from destruction once or twice, you'd think they'd meet once or twice doing what they were doing.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No, it doesn't make them "all" mutants? Why would it? The Avengers have basically always been pro mutant, with Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch being early members, but they're a super hero team, not a political action group. They don't go around fighting the X-Men's battles for them. Everybody just lived in the same shared universe and did their own thing, they weren't constantly running into each other until recently.</p><p> </p><p> And Batman has been part of the Justice League since forever, and regularly shows up on their floating spaceship headquarters when he's not beating up evil clowns. </p><p> </p><p> And again, DC continuity is/was a super confusing mess. Basically they had multiple parallel earths to explain why Batman was a retired old man who fought crime in the 40's in some stories, and a 30 year old crimefighter in his regular Batman books- they were set on different planets. Long story short, they completely relaunched everything in the 80's to make things more like Marvel (only one planet), then did it again a few years ago to reset everything for new readers.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delv213 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I doubt Reynolds will be back to play the Green Lantern again. I have a feeling they'll use John Stewart if he's included to separate themselves from the Ryan Reynolds bomb.<p> </p><p> Where was the Flash movie confirmed? All I've ever seen confirmed was the tv show with Grant Gustin starring as the Flash and they've already said that the Arrow/Flash TV shows aren't in the same continuity. </p><p> </p><p> I think Rock would be a better Black Adam honestly, but Black Adam wasn't a member of the Justice League.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well they've been talking about making a Flash movie for over a decade, and it's apparently rumored in the same article that revealed Batman vs Superman would be happening in the Man Of Steel.</p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/superman-batman-film-set-comic-589521" rel="external nofollow">http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/superman-batman-film-set-comic-589521</a></p><p> </p><p> As for Reynolds reprising his role as Hal Jordan, I don't think either party wants him to be apart of any future sequels, Reynolds already discussed wanting to distance himself from it, I'm sure Warner Brothers weren't happy with how the movie did either. Although, Green Lantern 2 has also been rumored to happen. Maybe they'll go with John Stewart to takeover the role of The Green Lantern in the movie?</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 No sequel is happening for Green Lantern and that's been confirmed a million times over. If there's a new GL, it's a reboot. That article is old and was done before the live action Flash series was announced. Not only that, but it was before they announced Arrow isn't apart of the Man of Steel universe. Which is disappointing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delv213 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <p>lazorbeak, lol. I find it more comforting that Batman is the only guy to be in two places at once in the entire DC Universe considering all his villains aren't trying to do anything besides harm Gotham, when the rest of the Marvel Universe is protecting the earth from total destruction on more then one occasion. I know Marvel introduced parallel universes to try and cover for their numerous plot holes, but still it's hard to follow.</p><p> </p><p> As for the Wolverine part, I always assumed Wolverine was part of the Avengers for a longer time because of his introduction through Hulk comics? My mistake, I was always clueless to these cross promoting schemes that Stan Lee came up with. Spider-Man was apart of the Avengers in the 90's though apparently, and Beast of all people was apart of the Avengers in the 1970's, which I find rather amusing. Anyways I don't want to discuss the small inacuracies of things that have little to no continuity. Since each team is usually apart of their own parallel universe.</p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://marvel.wikia.com/List_of_Avengers_members" rel="external nofollow">http://marvel.wikia.com/List_of_Avengers_members</a></p><p> </p><p> Regardless, I still find DC rather better when it comes to continuity all jokes aside. Just a preference.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterded Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>lazorbeak, lol. I find it more comforting that Batman is the only guy to be in two places at once in the entire DC Universe considering all his villains aren't trying to do anything besides harm Gotham, when the rest of the Marvel Universe is protecting the earth from total destruction on more then one occasion. I know Marvel introduced parallel universes to try and cover for their numerous plot holes, but still it's hard to follow.<p> </p><p> As for the Wolverine part, I always assumed Wolverine was part of the Avengers for a longer time because of his introduction through Hulk comics? My mistake, I was always clueless to these cross promoting schemes that Stan Lee came up with. Spider-Man was apart of the Avengers in the 90's though apparently, and Beast of all people was apart of the Avengers in the 1970's, which I find rather amusing. Anyways I don't want to discuss the small inacuracies of things that have little to no continuity. Since each team is usually apart of their own parallel universe.</p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://marvel.wikia.com/List_of_Avengers_members" rel="external nofollow">http://marvel.wikia.com/List_of_Avengers_members</a></p><p> </p><p> Regardless, I still find DC rather better when it comes to continuity all jokes aside. Just a preference.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Continuity for the major comic companies tends to be a joke. That is what ends ups happening when you have tons of characters tons of comics and characters either don't age or age extremely slowly. I mean DC has reset total continuity 3 times now. That being said in Marvel we have seen multiple time lines in which mutant prejudice has lead to mutant genocide and never one story about what the non-mutants did. Which goes hand in hand with normal heroes doing nothing about mutant prejudice at all in most x-men stories. Though recently marvel has been trying to better explain the relationship between mutants and other heroes going as far as suggest Captain America may be prejudice. Both have their issues and like you said it comes down to preference.</p><p> </p><p> Funny thing about Wolverine. He originally was going to be a wolverine who was turned in to a man. His big nemeses Sabertooth was originally just a serial killer and not a mutant at all. When the retcon him to be mutant and Wolverines rival the original idea was he was going to be his father (thought that got squashed before it ever happen).</p><p> </p><p> On the Rock in a DC movie note. I would rather have him be John Stewart than Cyborg.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazorbeak Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I know Marvel introduced parallel universes to try and cover for their numerous plot holes, but still it's hard to follow.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>As for the Wolverine part, I always assumed Wolverine was part of the Avengers for a longer time because of his introduction through Hulk comics? My mistake, I was always clueless to these cross promoting schemes that Stan Lee came up with. Spider-Man was apart of the Avengers in the 90's though apparently, and Beast of all people was apart of the Avengers in the 1970's, which I find rather amusing. Anyways I don't want to discuss the small inacuracies of things that have little to no continuity. Since each team is usually apart of their own parallel universe.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Spider-Man was only a reserve member, he was always too busy to commit to the team. Beast joined the Avengers in the 70's when the X-Men book had been canceled, before it was re-started with the new team (Storm, Colossus, Nightcrawler and Wolverine). It's really not that complicated. And the whole idea is it's a <em>shared</em> universe.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Regardless, I still find DC rather better when it comes to continuity all jokes aside. Just a preference.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Again, DC had to completely start over and consciously copied what Marvel was doing.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delv213 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>No sequel is happening for Green Lantern and that's been confirmed a million times over. If there's a new GL, it's a reboot.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm glad I was unaware they put a sequel on the back burner, I just don't know if they could make an adequate movie in time before the expected 2017+ Justice League Movie, since Reynold's Green Lantern movie just recently flopped. Most decent actors stay away from a movie franchise that flopped that badly. There's always a chance they wait until after The Justice League movie comes out before they attempt to have a reboot of The Green Lantern movie series. Kinda how Iron Man 3 did better then both previous Iron Man movies because of the gigantic success of The Avengers release the year prior.</p><p> </p><p> Oh, and you have no clue how badly I'm hoping for a reboot just like everyone else.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delv213 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <p><a href="http://www.thecomicboard.com/forum/showthread.php?12812-Do-the-X-Men-fit-in-well-with-the-Marvel-Universe" rel="external nofollow">http://www.thecomicboard.com/forum/showthread.php?12812-Do-the-X-Men-fit-in-well-with-the-Marvel-Universe</a></p><p> </p><p> ^ Just read that, it's not an unpopular opinion. Like I said numerous times, it's my opinion that the Marvel Universe was always very hard to follow when accounting the X-Men specifically. Anyways, I won't change my belief and I don't care to argue on a subject, I have little to no regard for obvious reasons. I enjoy the X-Men, I just find it rather bemusing regardless when accounting for their "shared universe". Your opinion is rather biased towards defending Marvel, which I don't have a problem with except your trying to denigrate my comprehension. It's all personal predilection people!</p><p> </p><p> It's the old X-Box vs PS2/N64 vs Sega argument we all enjoyed as children!</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazorbeak Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><a href="http://www.thecomicboard.com/forum/showthread.php?12812-Do-the-X-Men-fit-in-well-with-the-Marvel-Universe" rel="external nofollow">http://www.thecomicboard.com/forum/showthread.php?12812-Do-the-X-Men-fit-in-well-with-the-Marvel-Universe</a><p> </p><p> ^ Just read that, it's not an unpopular opinion. Like I said numerous times, it's my opinion that the Marvel Universe was always very hard to follow when accounting the X-Men specifically. Anyways, I won't change my belief and I don't care to argue on a subject, I have little to no regard for obvious reasons. I enjoy the X-Men, I just find it rather bemusing regardless when accounting for their "shared universe". Your opinion is rather biased towards defending Marvel, which I don't have a problem with except your trying to denigrate my comprehension. It's all personal predilection.</p><p> </p><p> It's the old X-Box vs PS2/N64 vs Sega argument we all enjoyed as children!</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Is the "obvious" reason that you don't have an educated opinion on the subject? I don't mean to be "denigrating" your "bemusement," but you've made it painfully obvious you don't really know anything about the subject at hand, and don't really <em>want</em> to hear about it. Yes, I'm biased towards Marvel, but all those things I said were facts. You're talking about "plot holes" indiscriminately and Wolverine somehow making the Avengers mutants, and movie characters intertwining regardless of legal rights, and everybody on this forum has been pretty patient about it.</p><p> </p><p> Long story short, I have no problem with you having an opinion, but as I pointed out in my first post, that opinion is extremely baffling, for reasons that have already been explained to you. It's not a personal preference; DC continuity is exactly like Marvel's, except more confusing, especially when dealing with older, no longer current continuity. It's exactly like Marvel's because DC consciously decided to copy Marvel's style of continuity.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I'm excited about Days of Future Past, but Apocalypse being the next movie? I really hope it's a retelling of Age of Apocalypse. It's by far my favorite storyline. *Edit* The ending of Days of Future Past could easily set it up. They can even rip off the ending of Wolverine & The X-Men where the surviving team looks up to see Apocalypse's spire thing over New York with Cyclops and Havok at his side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delv213 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><strong>Is the "obvious" reason that you don't have an educated opinion on the subject? I don't mean to be "denigrating" your "bemusement," but you've made it painfully obvious you don't really know anything about the subject at hand, and don't really </strong><strong><em>want</em></strong><strong> to hear about it. </strong><strong><strong>Yes, I'm </strong></strong><strong><strong><span style="text-decoration:underline;">biased</span></strong></strong><strong><strong> towards Marvel</strong></strong><strong>, but all those things I said were facts. You're talking about "plot holes" indiscriminately and Wolverine somehow making the Avengers mutants, and movie characters intertwining regardless of legal rights, and everybody on this forum has been pretty patient about it.</strong><p> </p><p> Long story short, I have no problem with you having an opinion, but as I pointed out in my first post, that opinion is extremely baffling, for reasons that have already been explained to you.<strong> It's not a personal preference; DC continuity is exactly like Marvel's, except more confusing, especially when dealing with older, no longer current continuity. It's exactly like Marvel's because DC consciously decided to copy Marvel's style of continuity.</strong></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Oh, so you're a bigot now? Hilarious, and yes it is all <em>personal predilection</em>. I was actually uninformed when it came to different studios owning the rights to Marvel's movies, I naturally assumed they'd all be under the Disney/Marvel Studios since you know DC/Time Warner owns all the rights to their own characters, I would've assumed Disney would've never passed on making their own Spider-Man/X-Men movies since those franchises make good money. Secondly, I wasn't aware these deals were made before Disney's purchase of Marvel's intellectual properties. My mistake, at least I don't predispose another to showing he's not an imbecile like some people. Thirdly, it's not out of the rheum of possibility that a Wolverine or Spider-Man could be added to The Avengers movie franchise. <strong><span style="text-decoration:underline;">Anything is possible in movies, since it's not actually real</span></strong>! Jaysin alluded to that and I acknowledged this point immediately, and knowing that he was correct in the most sense of the word, I reluctantly agreed, and moved on. Yet you must further the argument by being presumptuous and for what? I've yet to understand why so many board members must pick on the nonconformists in the world? I said specifically my opinion and all opinions have biases to them, that's what makes them all <em>personal predilection</em> or an opinion in dumb down terms.</p><p> </p><p> Anyways, you tend to skip my points because of your pompous, self absorbed nature of always being right? Did me standing up for myself bother you that much that you had to ridicule the big words I used? You're not writing stuff to a child good sir! Every person is entitled to an opinion, apparently you neglect that and continue and try to make me feel inconsequential. All because my opinion is to you, and I quote "baffling".</p><p> </p><p> I've said numerous times I don't care/want to debate you for obvious reasons quoted above in bold. It's all <em>personal predilection</em>, like I said when giving you a link to a forum that had the same debate. Superhumans and Mutants have too many similarities, yet they live in the same world and one is discriminated and the other is praised, why wouldn't the similarities lead to similar prejudice and lead to both groups fighting in every single war when their very well being was on the line? Don't the humans consider anyone with superpowers to be Mutants? Did you even look at the link I sent you, or were you too busy trying to make me out to be some sort of pestilence because I said some big words?</p><p> </p><p> I have nothing against you at all, in-fact, I'll likely forget who I even argued with about this tomorrow when I wake up. I just don't like it when someone tries to turn something personal for no reason. Anyways, I hope we can let this small argument over personal biases go and just admit that we both took it too far and discuss movies, specifically X-Men. </p><p> </p><p> If you want to discuss this PM Me. I don't want to argue about stuff that's all opinionated.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm excited about Days of Future Past, but Apocalypse being the next movie? I really hope it's a retelling of Age of Apocalypse. It's by far my favorite storyline.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Does that mean we get to see Lucas Bishop in more of a role in the next film? I selfishly hope for Cable to be prominently featured with his back-story covered. I always loved that Apocalypse saga of the old Fox Kids Cartoons!</p><p> </p><p> DEADPOOL!</p><p> <a href="http://s151.photobucket.com/user/delvecchio213/media/tumblr_ln062e38hk1qls0mho1_500_zps7f7f7045.png.html" rel="external nofollow"><span>http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s138/delvecchio213/tumblr_ln062e38hk1qls0mho1_500_zps7f7f7045.png</span></a></p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djthefunkchris Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Is the "obvious" reason that you don't have an educated opinion on the subject? I don't mean to be "denigrating" your "bemusement," but you've made it painfully obvious you don't really know anything about the subject at hand, and don't really <em>want</em> to hear about it. Yes, I'm biased towards Marvel, but all those things I said were facts. You're talking about "plot holes" indiscriminately and Wolverine somehow making the Avengers mutants, and movie characters intertwining regardless of legal rights, and everybody on this forum has been pretty patient about it.<p> </p><p> Long story short, I have no problem with you having an opinion, but as I pointed out in my first post, that opinion is extremely baffling, for reasons that have already been explained to you. It's not a personal preference; DC continuity is exactly like Marvel's, except more confusing, especially when dealing with older, no longer current continuity. It's exactly like Marvel's because DC consciously decided to copy Marvel's style of continuity.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You have historical knowledge of both that I don't think delv213 could possibly catch up on. His opinion to me seems more modern then the one you have (as an example). I can see both points.</p><p> </p><p> When Marvel first started hitting it big, they had characters that had real problems (Spider-Man having trouble paying the bills, Tony Stark and alcoholism, etc.). Although not necessarily unheard of before then, most definitely never explored to the depth Marvel did with it. Spider-Man and other characters exploded with popularity, and DC had to "Marvelize" their characters to keep up with the times. Kind of a farewell golden age, hello Silver age... And DC ended up throwing all their Golden Age (Justice Society) into Earth 2 (which Barry Allen discovered, and it's weird to call the first heroes, heroes of Earth 2, and the Silver age (pretty much the same characters now) as the Earth 1 characters. There were other earths as well, where their kids took over their roles and stuff like that... However, far as that goes, Marvel did the same thing. Earth 616 is what most of us grew up with (Mainstream), </p><p> </p><p> DC has aquired rights of characters (like Plastic Man, Captain Marvel, Black Adam, etc.) and then threw them into their own little universe (Earth S for Captain America for example). However, Marvel like DC, also have many other realities (or parallel universes), such as Earth 1610, 8096, 101001, 120703, and like 15 or so all together. </p><p> </p><p> Modern DC is probably easier to keep up with then modern Marvel. Delve into the histories though, and Marvel has definitive dates you can still use today, where DC has moved them up or back depending on who's writing the story. </p><p> </p><p> However, Marvel gets just as messy as DC from the start of the Fantastic Four onward, history wise. You can debate both and find what your looking for to discredit either one, depending on which side you are biased with... and pretty much can just google it without doing much homework at all, and find anything pro or con on both.</p><p> </p><p> I am not current, but I was current up to around 2010 at one time when I was doing quite a bit of research on both. I found huge holes and loops, and unexplained and therefore unusable material in both. I had an easier time dealing with DC then Marvel, only because I couldn't fathom using the actual dates Marvel has put as definitive when it comes to some people's age and such... Fantastic Four for example, would have been created around 1969 (Just by their age at the time, and how their birthday's would make say The Thing around 30 or so when it happened, being a good 80 plus years old right now just doesn't compute....). Superman was first created in the 30's, so they threw him in a different universe, although if you read the comics, you never noticed you were actually reading about a different Superman.... because they did all that AFTER it was a problem with readers that DC characters didn't age (To explain.. Hey, they aged, but they live here, not there).</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 I'd be ok with more Bishop. Omar Sy, the guy playing the role at least looks the part. I'm more excited at the prospect of Mr Sinister. He's probably my favorite X-Villain. He's the only comic book character to ever genuinely creep me out. Well, he did when I was a kid and I was raised on horror movies. They could easily use DoFP time hopping crap mixed with AoA time issues to bring Cyclops back and rectify the age issues with him and Havok. At least I hope so. I'd like them to actually be the brothers they're supposed to be. There's also the possibility of adding Cable and X-Man. I'd prefer them to go all out and do an entire trilogy based on Age of Apocalypse, but I'm ok with them condensing the story if it's done right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayW Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I've said numerous times I don't care/want to debate you for obvious reasons quoted above in bold. It's all <em>personal predilection</em>, like I said when giving you a link to a forum that had the same debate. Superhumans and Mutants have too many similarities, yet they live in the same world and one is discriminated and the other is praised, why wouldn't the similarities lead to similar prejudice and lead to both groups fighting in every single war when their very well being was on the line? Don't the humans consider anyone with superpowers to be Mutants?</div></blockquote><p> I'm not entirely sure this is the case. In the Marvel Universe it seems that the humans fear the super heroes, be it they are mutants or just super powered, or what. The only two that spring to mind that I don't ever recall having issues with general population are Captain America and Iron Man. Even before Iron Man revealed himself to be Tony Stark, I don't really remember there being any animosity from civilians.</p><p> </p><p> But you went through you'd find a lot of the characters are constantly having to not only face their enemies but the prejudice of the people too, X-Men being the most obvious. It's something me and my friends have had many a debate over, when you compare the two major comic book companies. Marvel tend to set their heroes up almost as wild west outlaws - people fear them, not all the people, but a great deal. DC, on the other hand, set their heroes up as out and out heroes - saviours, if you will. With the major exception being Batman, who the GCPD want to bring in on vigilante chargers.</p><p> </p><p> Or at least that's how I see it. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Marvels-Kurt-Busiek/dp/078514286X?tag=donations09-20" rel="external nofollow">'Marvels' by Kurt Busiek</a> is a pretty good example of this 'love / hate' relationship the civilians of the Marvel Universe have with their super heroes. I recommend it.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <p>I think eventually we'll see Marvel/Disney, Fox and Sony do some shared stuff - but not quite yet.</p><p> </p><p> With Fox and Sony seeing how successful Marvel have been with a shared universe, and attempting to build their own franchises within the licensed material they have (X-Men, X-Force and Fantastic Four for Fox and Spider-Man, Venom and Sinister Six for Sony), I think it's only a question of time before Fox and Sony could see the benefitial exponation from having eg. Wolverine and Spider-Man show up in an Avengers movie.</p><p> </p><p> Not many people know this, but the Oscorp building from The Amazing Spider-Man was actually supposed to show up in The Avengers - but they couldn't get the computermodel ready quite in time, so they had to scrap the idea again. But the agreement to feature it was in place.</p><p> </p><p> Of course, there's a difference between featuring buildings and featuring characters/actors - but it's a start. And just having Stark Enterprises show up in X-Men or The Baxter Building in Spider-Man would go a long way to give the illusion of a big, shared universe.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="delv213" data-cite="delv213" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Superhumans and Mutants have too many similarities, yet they live in the same world and one is discriminated and the other is praised, why wouldn't the similarities lead to similar prejudice and lead to both groups fighting in every single war when their very well being was on the line? Don't the humans consider anyone with superpowers to be Mutants?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> They've had stories covering this subject before.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I selfishly hope for Cable to be prominently featured with his back-story covered. I always loved that Apocalypse saga of the old Fox Kids Cartoons</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Given that they are working on an X-Force movie, I think it's a safe bet that you'll get to see both Cable and Deadpool again before too long. And with the introduction of Apocalypse as a villain, that could be a perfect setup.</p><p> </p><p> If it were up to me, I'd have them setup Acopcalypse (and possibly Sinister in a smaller role) as the villain in an X-Force movie - and then do the Age of Apocalypse storyline with characters from both X-Men and X-Force, bringing back dead and less-profiled characters. And Liv Schreiber's Sabretooth, please.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.