The Avengers/Marvel movies

SmytheKing said:
The shame of it is that when Civil War comes around, the reasoning for the whole split rings a little hollow without seeing these sorts of things. Having movie after movie where these superfights contain the loss of civilian live would give it more teeth.
Click to expand...

This is why I liked MOS a lot. Yes the collateral damage was over done, but that's what happens when aliens fight each other over a major city. For those that had a problem with superman killing zod in mos, the Christopher Reeves' movies did the same. Supes threw zod, Ursula & non down the abyss after taking their powers away.
 
SmytheKing said:
The shame of it is that when Civil War comes around, the reasoning for the whole split rings a little hollow without seeing these sorts of things. Having movie after movie where these superfights contain the loss of civilian live would give it more teeth.
Click to expand...

FWIW, there were civilian casualties in Age of Ultron. They were onscreen. They did not get played up, but they were there.

Not to mention Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver's backstory.
 
Dave said:
This is why I liked MOS a lot. Yes the collateral damage was over done, but that's what happens when aliens fight each other over a major city. For those that had a problem with superman killing zod in mos, the Christopher Reeves' movies did the same. Supes threw zod, Ursula & non down the abyss after taking their powers away.
Click to expand...

I didn't specifically have problems with the massive damage in MoS. I did have a problem with Superman not attempting to draw the fight away from the city. Nor, did I have a problem with him offing Zod, but to suddenly have a change of conscience to save one family after a complete disregard for previous destruction was silly.
 
LetTigerIn said:
I didn't specifically have problems with the massive damage in MoS. I did have a problem with Superman not attempting to draw the fight away from the city. Nor, did I have a problem with him offing Zod, but to suddenly have a change of conscience to save one family after a complete disregard for previous destruction was silly.
Click to expand...

I see your point. But then again, Zod didn't give him much of a choice where the battle was taking place. You also have to consider this was the first battle. I think the plan all along was to visit this scenario in the next film. From the bvs trailer, it looks as if that will be the main theme.
 
In regards to casualties/collateral damage I saw a LOT of reviews where they seemed to think that it was Marvel sticking it in the eye of DC/WB and kinda saying 'our heroes save lives'. I think that may be reading too much into it, but I figured it was good for the discussion. As far as MOS, I dunno that Supes thought that much about anything other than kicking Zod's ass. Now, in my eyes, you can chalk that up to 'rookie mistake', and, to me, that seems more realistic as far as these superheroes having a learning curve. After all, he is an alien. If you remember the first Iron Man, didn't he do a LOT of killing(implied or not)? But those were foreigners, so that's ok?
 
LetTigerIn said:
FWIW, there were civilian casualties in Age of Ultron. They were onscreen. They did not get played up, but they were there.

Not to mention Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver's backstory.
Click to expand...

Oh sure. The thing is that we saw Iron Man "kill" more dudes in that workshop room 10 minutes into the movie than we saw civilians get toasted. Also, with regards to the backstory stuff, that was only implied. Just like the first Ironman really. Would be nice to see more repercussions so you feel conflict when you have to pick sides in Civil War. Right now you're going to have a lot of folks wondering why the Superhero Registration Act is needed since all you generally see is them saving the good people and whupping the baddies.
 
jerseydevil said:
In regards to casualties/collateral damage I saw a LOT of reviews where they seemed to think that it was Marvel sticking it in the eye of DC/WB and kinda saying 'our heroes save lives'. I think that may be reading too much into it, but I figured it was good for the discussion. As far as MOS, I dunno that Supes thought that much about anything other than kicking Zod's ass. Now, in my eyes, you can chalk that up to 'rookie mistake', and, to me, that seems more realistic as far as these superheroes having a learning curve. After all, he is an alien. If you remember the first Iron Man, didn't he do a LOT of killing(implied or not)? But those were foreigners, so that's ok?
Click to expand...

Totally agree. In fact, that stuff was why I really enjoyed it. Imagine you suddenly found out you could fly. How would you do it? How would you land? Actually showing that (or spidey trying to climb walls or neo trying to jump across a building) sticks with you and really brings home that they're going to make mistakes and superheroes aren't always sound decision makers.
 
SmytheKing said:
Oh sure. The thing is that we saw Iron Man "kill" more dudes in that workshop room 10 minutes into the movie than we saw civilians get toasted. Also, with regards to the backstory stuff, that was only implied. Just like the first Ironman really. Would be nice to see more repercussions so you feel conflict when you have to pick sides in Civil War. Right now you're going to have a lot of folks wondering why the Superhero Registration Act is needed since all you generally see is them saving the good people and whupping the baddies.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree that the repercussions should be tangible rather than downplayed, especially considering the mentioned MCU storylines. I just find it curious that there were indeed onscreen casualties in Age of Ultron that get forgotten or excused, while there were, granted, massive, but not really onscreen casualties in MoS that have people aghast. This seems to support your point as well.
 
jerseydevil said:
Kevin Feige Promises No “Dark Turns” in the MCU
http://collider.com/kevin-feige-promises-no-dark-turns-in-the-mcu/

See, this is why it's getting boring. When 'right will always prevail' it kinda takes all the guesswork out of it.
Click to expand...


It's a handcuff of a story philosophy, but I don't see it as tantamount to boring. It doesn't preclude death, destruction and despair. It does hamper utter hopelessness in certain ways, but it didn't prevent Daredevil from being gritty. Marvel's had a great batting average so far, but I don't expect everything will continue to be a complete gem. Sometimes the villain is Proteus and sometimes it's Arcade, but either story can still be good or bad.

In a way, it may be what has made the MCU refreshing to this point, because dark and brooding, honestly, has been more often a crutch than an asset for quite a while.

Plus, sometimes I am just interested in seeing little things hitting each other.
 
I was reading a few forum boards today in which the Age of Ultron was debated. One point that I had not thought about till reading a post involved the Vision. The fact that in this movie he is "powered" by one of the Infinity Jems in his forehead may well have eliminated the chance to have Adam Warlock show up later on in the planned Infinity War movies. If thats the case I will be very disapointed.
 
Not to rehash that diversity vs blatant attempt to cash in and exploit conversation...but when does diversity cross the line to being pandering?

Marvel Courting SELMA Director Ava DuVernay for BLACK PANTHER or CAPTAIN MARVEL
http://collider.com/marvel-wants-ava-duvernay-to-direct-black-panther-or-captain-marvel/

She's African American...AND A WOMAN...SCORE!!!!!!!!! Is she really the best person for the job? They better make sure beforehand, because if they do like DC did with Michele Maclaren on Wonder Woman they will face a ton of criticism. I am neither saying she is or isn't qualified...the thing that gets me is how media outlets will fawn all over this as 'such a brave, forward thinking step for Marvel'. What if she directs the first real failure? What then? It's all so silly. Courtney the wonder pony could stand behind the camera for Marvel at this point...I'm not that sure a director really has that much control over the finished product.
 
jerseydevil said:
Not to rehash that diversity vs blatant attempt to cash in and exploit conversation...but when does diversity cross the line to being pandering?

Marvel Courting SELMA Director Ava DuVernay for BLACK PANTHER or CAPTAIN MARVEL
http://collider.com/marvel-wants-ava-duvernay-to-direct-black-panther-or-captain-marvel/

She's African American...AND A WOMAN...SCORE!!!!!!!!! Is she really the best person for the job? They better make sure beforehand, because if they do like DC did with Michele Maclaren on Wonder Woman they will face a ton of criticism. I am neither saying she is or isn't qualified...the thing that gets me is how media outlets will fawn all over this as 'such a brave, forward thinking step for Marvel'. What if she directs the first real failure? What then? It's all so silly. Courtney the wonder pony could stand behind the camera for Marvel at this point...I'm not that sure a director really has that much control over the finished product.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was talking about. She just directed a movie that was nominated for Best Picture and her credentials are being questioned. What qualifications did Joss Whedon have to direct a 200 million dollar film before The Avengers? What about Jon Favreau getting to be the guy to head the MCU's flagship? No one questioned them and said, "He's only made silly TV shows and his last one barely made it a season!" It's not like they said they wanted Tyra Banks to direct it. This lady actually has experience directing a big movie.
 
jerseydevil said:
Not to rehash that diversity vs blatant attempt to cash in and exploit conversation...but when does diversity cross the line to being pandering?

Marvel Courting SELMA Director Ava DuVernay for BLACK PANTHER or CAPTAIN MARVEL
http://collider.com/marvel-wants-ava-duvernay-to-direct-black-panther-or-captain-marvel/

She's African American...AND A WOMAN...SCORE!!!!!!!!! Is she really the best person for the job? They better make sure beforehand, because if they do like DC did with Michele Maclaren on Wonder Woman they will face a ton of criticism. I am neither saying she is or isn't qualified...the thing that gets me is how media outlets will fawn all over this as 'such a brave, forward thinking step for Marvel'. What if she directs the first real failure? What then? It's all so silly. Courtney the wonder pony could stand behind the camera for Marvel at this point...I'm not that sure a director really has that much control over the finished product.
Click to expand...

As opposed to all the other movies pandering to straight, white males? C'mon.
 
adgy-san said:
As opposed to all the other movies pandering to straight, white males? C'mon.
Click to expand...

I do not see hiring a straight white male 'pandering'. It just is the norm. Like it or not...it is what it is. Smytheking should agree with me on this. The story shouldn't be OOOOH Marvel is gonna hire an African American woman to direct their already formed inconsequential superhero flick. But it will be. And that is where I agree with him. It SHOULDN'T be a big deal. It's all kind of sideways. And this ill conceived notion that a woman needs to direct a female superhero movie, or an African American needs to direct BLACK Panther...it's overly sensitive. I don't have a problem with anyone being hired, as long as they are being hired for their ability and not what demographic they fall into.

I NEED to clarify. It appears that you guys assume I am against the hiring...I am absolutely not. I think it's amazing that she is going to follow up an important movie with a silly silly thing. I am against the story being the color of her skin, or the fact she sits to pee. If she is the person for the job...then best of luck.
And why...is it for only those two movies? Is she NOT qualified to direct the next THOR flick? That's where the pandering part starts to factor in.
 
Last edited:
jerseydevil said:
I do not see hiring a straight white male 'pandering'. It just is the norm. Like it or not...it is what it is. Smytheking should agree with me on this. The story shouldn't be OOOOH Marvel is gonna hire an African American woman to direct their already formed inconsequential superhero flick. But it will be. And that is where I agree with him. It SHOULDN'T be a big deal. It's all kind of sideways. And this ill conceived notion that a woman needs to direct a female superhero movie, or an African American needs to direct BLACK Panther...it's overly sensitive. I don't have a problem with anyone being hired, as long as they are being hired for their ability and not what demographic they fall into.

I NEED to clarify. It appears that you guys assume I am against the hiring...I am absolutely not. I think it's amazing that she is going to follow up an important movie with a silly silly thing. I am against the story being the color of her skin, or the fact she sits to pee. If she is the person for the job...then best of luck.
And why...is it for only those two movies? Is she NOT qualified to direct the next THOR flick? That's where the pandering part starts to factor in.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I'm not even speaking specifically about you or anyone. It's a general thing that, when someone gets hired and they aren't part of the norm, as you stated, the subject is always about a studio pandering or something. You'll notice that most articles that bring up the "good" of her being hired are doing it in a "hey this is a good thing that she's getting a chance to show her chops when traditionally that group hasn't" way where the negative is generally a "this movie is going to suck because they're hiring her/him ONLY because of his race/religion/sexual orientation and not because they're any good" way.

It's about the context of the discussion and one is dismissing a person literally because of their demographics while the other is giving an atta boy to a studio for doing something outside of the box. No one is saying that Black Panther/Captain Marvel is going to be good BECAUSE of the director, but there are plenty who will assume it would have better if they didn't pick someone "only" because they were black. That sort of opinion needs to die. It's useless and dated.

Also, as far as picking a woman to direct a female superhero movie? The general thought is that she'd have a better understanding of what a female would go through. Personally, I think it's more important to hire a female writer for the movie since that's what the story is going off of, but I understand the thought behind it. To the inevitable question of, "Shouldn't it go to the person best qualified?" I say yes. How do we know she isn't though?
 
jerseydevil said:
I do not see hiring a straight white male 'pandering'. It just is the norm. Like it or not...it is what it is. Smytheking should agree with me on this. The story shouldn't be OOOOH Marvel is gonna hire an African American woman to direct their already formed inconsequential superhero flick. But it will be. And that is where I agree with him. It SHOULDN'T be a big deal. It's all kind of sideways. And this ill conceived notion that a woman needs to direct a female superhero movie, or an African American needs to direct BLACK Panther...it's overly sensitive. I don't have a problem with anyone being hired, as long as they are being hired for their ability and not what demographic they fall into.

I NEED to clarify. It appears that you guys assume I am against the hiring...I am absolutely not. I think it's amazing that she is going to follow up an important movie with a silly silly thing. I am against the story being the color of her skin, or the fact she sits to pee. If she is the person for the job...then best of luck.
And why...is it for only those two movies? Is she NOT qualified to direct the next THOR flick? That's where the pandering part starts to factor in.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree and I should have been more clear that I don't have an issue with anything you've said or are saying. I spend too much time on comic book message boards and am maybe becoming a bit over-sensitive about this whole pandering issue, so when I see it mentioned, I just see red. You know? Every time Marvel announces a new female-centered book, these bitches whine about pandering, as if Marvel and everyone isn't still putting out books that feature white men as the lead in 98% of their product. It shouldn't have been directed at you. It's nerd rage.

I'm tempted to go on my rant, but I think SmytheKing has been stating it all very well, so I'll just say that as long as it isn't at the expense of the quality of the film, I have zero problem with them specifically hiring a black person to direct Black Panther. Or a woman to direct Wonder Woman/Captain Marvel. I think minorities have been (and still are to an extent) given less opportunities to direct "big" movies and if studios want to start rectifying that for the sake of good PR, I don't see the harm in it. As long as it isn't at the expense of the end result.

But, like you said, something tells me Marvel Studios is going to have enough creative control over the films that the end result should be relatively static, regardless of director.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Share this page

Back
Top