Movies to dread
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
Walter said:
I'd agree with you, but I absolutely adored Ant-Man and Winter Soldier (Civil War and GotG were good, too). The rest...not so much.
I think the inherent problem is that WB/DC are just streamlining the shit out of everything and not learning from their (obvious) mistakes. Regardless, I still enjoy the films they've put out, but realistically...they could be better.
Some Marvel films were pretty good, I remember watching Guardians Of The Galaxy in cinema's and overall, I had a good time. Good soundtrack, humorous scenes and some touching moments. However, Avengers 2 was something I'd class as mediocre. In fact I barely remember anything from the film, but who knows. Maybe I should watch it a second time and see if I change my mind.
New Suicide Squad movie looks somewhat suspicious, but I'm still going to be the fool who is going to watch it in the cinema anyway
New Suicide Squad movie looks somewhat suspicious, but I'm still going to be the fool who is going to watch it in the cinema anyway
residentgrigo
Excitement and Enjoyment!
I can play both teams. I "liked" every single MCU movie but IR2 and Thor 2 (executive interference 100% "saved it"... topical) were at the very edge. The highlights that will survive the test of time:
Iron Man 1/3, Avengers 1/2, Guardians and Ant-Man. Cap 2 was even nearly as good as "that" Nolan movie. The ending just lacked balls. (The new Daredevil show is even even the best live action comic adaptation yet.) I just like both franchises for different reasons but Kevin Feige needs to go. The crazy drama on his watch is starting to sink in and the Marvel Creative Committee (aka. comic writers) got fired in 2015. Their actual comic line borderline went to shit late year, which are my real concern. Regardless of the 10+ bil. in the bank. Everyone, besides whoever approved Cap 3´s script, can stay.
I just want new producers. I will be there for Marvel on opening week too.
There are no movies besides crimes caught on camera that i "dread", that is pointless.
Part 2 (i am done, no worries):
Dave Gibbons 100% endorsed the Watchmen film. You know, the "other guy". He ain´t a fan of the further recent WB Watchmen projects, i am mixed on them, but Zodd bless the Watchmen Toaster.
Alan though is currently busy refusing credit on the Marvelman reprints, his Watchmen before Watchmen, and worshiping a snake god. What a trooper... The film is nearly identical to the comic, to a degree that it endangered Zack´s career. Ebert even wrote an interesting 4/4 review for the (flawed) TC, look it up.
. I will care the moment the writer and dirctor get announced and Vic is a bigger character than Tony Stark was before 2008. WB should care, Geoff Johns does care, for over a decade. The half black side of me cares too.
Iron Man 1/3, Avengers 1/2, Guardians and Ant-Man. Cap 2 was even nearly as good as "that" Nolan movie. The ending just lacked balls. (The new Daredevil show is even even the best live action comic adaptation yet.) I just like both franchises for different reasons but Kevin Feige needs to go. The crazy drama on his watch is starting to sink in and the Marvel Creative Committee (aka. comic writers) got fired in 2015. Their actual comic line borderline went to shit late year, which are my real concern. Regardless of the 10+ bil. in the bank. Everyone, besides whoever approved Cap 3´s script, can stay.
I just want new producers. I will be there for Marvel on opening week too.
There are no movies besides crimes caught on camera that i "dread", that is pointless.
Part 2 (i am done, no worries):
Dave Gibbons 100% endorsed the Watchmen film. You know, the "other guy". He ain´t a fan of the further recent WB Watchmen projects, i am mixed on them, but Zodd bless the Watchmen Toaster.
Alan though is currently busy refusing credit on the Marvelman reprints, his Watchmen before Watchmen, and worshiping a snake god. What a trooper... The film is nearly identical to the comic, to a degree that it endangered Zack´s career. Ebert even wrote an interesting 4/4 review for the (flawed) TC, look it up.
Well, Aaz. He was in the biggest ongoing DC comic of the 80s, on Super-friends, 2 giant toons+ more, in a lot of games, toon films, Smallville (who wasn´t, i still hate it), he has been a key character for DC since 2011 and his Rebirth books looks great. Ray Fisher looks to be the real deal too and they cast Mr. Skynet as his father
. I will care the moment the writer and dirctor get announced and Vic is a bigger character than Tony Stark was before 2008. WB should care, Geoff Johns does care, for over a decade. The half black side of me cares too.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Walter said:
Perfect sixes!
I think the difference is that even the blandest of Marvel movies have some redeeming popcorn entertainment value, so even when they're not very good they still might be enjoyable. They're usually at least pleasantly watchable though full of empty calories (the exceptions being Thor 2 and Iron Man 2+3). That's not a bad baseline to have when you're also producing genuinely well done, standout superhero fare like the original Iron Man, The Avengers, Winter Soldier, GotG, and now Civil War. Those five movies, and frankly most of the Marvel canon except the aforementioned exceptions, are better than anything to come from DC in the same time-span other than Nolan's Batman films, which is why they should have capitalized more on them if possible (maybe Bale could not be tempted). BTW, you know what you get if you combine Marvel's more casual approach with DC's super-seriousness? Singer's X-Movies! Perfect sevens; the middle way. =)
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Eluvei said:
Sounds like it, because even being generous I think it's middle of the road among the Marvel movies at best.
Eluvei said:Shit's just an undercooked, slightly incoherent Shane Black mishmash, what's not to like?
All that? I mean, I wouldn't like it just for that anymore than for it being Iron Man or Marvel, otherwise it's just serving a different film fetish. But I get it, I almost didn't include it with those other two, which weren't even good enough to be perceived as quirky fun. I'd heard some good things going in though, like you alluded to, and was pretty underwhelmed. Tony's journey was nothing special and has been done better in Iron Man 1, The Avengers movies, Civil War, etc (I saw IM3 last too, which may have hurt). Plus, the way they shit all over The Mandarin, while a funny reveal in the film itself, struck me as a throwback to the old way of doing things where they didn't know how to translate something to the screen so they just turned it into something it's not. The true villain(s) and plot were kind of a snooze that didn't justify it either. Just my two cents.
residentgrigo said:
It must be hard pretending to be a kind of comic book expert while so obviously failing to recognize what makes the good ones good.
residentgrigo said:
I guess it wasn't clear enough that this was a rhetorical question, so to clarify: I don't give a rat's ass about Cyborg.
Griffith said:
Agreed, I was pretty disappointed with how they handled The Mandarin, which is the villain I was most looking forward to. Why couldn't it have been a brilliant Chinese scientist-turned-evil using magic-like nanotechnologies controlled by rings? He'd have been someone who would have outmatched Stark's own tech, sticking to the Favreau way. And then there was all this noise about how doing The Mandarin would be racially insensitive or something, but not having any Asian actor in the mix was the worst possible way to go about it.
Griffith said:
I see this as a huge plus in a megafranchise like Marvel's, and I wish it happened often. Ant-Man was an uglier, less interesting Iron Man, and from the looks of it, Doctor Strange will be a prettier, slightly more interesting Ant-Man, so for a franchise that still needs to put really similar shit out every year, if at least the sequels manage to belong to different genres, I'll automatically like them more than the more generic superhero stuff, regardless of how successfully it works. So basically, I guess I liked it "just for that."
Overall, I think you're being fair, I'm not really saying it's a well constructed movie or anything, and though I haven't watched Civil War yet, I agree that Tony's character journey isn't great. To me, it's basically a collection of scenes I really like, and things I usually enjoy in Shane Black movies, so yeah, it's just serving a different fetish.
Aazealh said:
As someone that isn't familiar with the original character, I just thought the Mandarin thing was a decent twist/gag. I don't blame anyone for thinking it sucked though, and the whitewashing is unforgivable. In fact, I don't blame anyone for saying that anything in any Marvel movie sucks.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
Oburi said:
Oooo, gonna have to disagree with you 100% on that one. The ultimate cut was fantastic and about as loyal to the source material as anyone could get without it feeling bloated and pretentious.
Johnstantine said:
You're at an unfair advantage here, because the cost of fully engaging in such a discussion is having to watch Watchmen again — far too high a price. But just off the cuff, I'm not sure how any editing could ameliorate the tone-deafness of that movie.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
Walter said:
Can't really speak for others, but I took the plunge on a whim and really enjoyed it. Felt more cohesive and complete.
Not for the faint of heart due to the length, and not for those who just don't want to look back. Shame, though. Such a wonderful cut.
residentgrigo
Excitement and Enjoyment!
The exact differences how Watchmen is different, Theatrical Version to Director's Cut: http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=1860304
and Director's Cut to Ultimate Cut, length 215 min.: http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=3541900 (triple dipping to get the whole movie out was greedy)
I have NO idea how a better adaptation could have been made, especially regarding the tone (the Philip Glass sequence could have been directed by Bergman, best scene in a comic movie), and the failed film by Terry Gilliam sound insane. Film Silk Spectre became worse by becoming a more powerful character and Ozymandias / the ending make less sense but the last 2 changes were consistent for the whole film, so they work. Anything else is nitpicking and the Under the Hood doc. + the Motion Comic were the cherry on top. The film already started to get a giant reassessment over time, so i am good. 9,5/10 I still remember reading the TPB before a major operation. A book so good, you remember where you were when you 1st read it! 10/10 (I remember where i 1st read DKR and Berserk too.)
Watch The Killing Joke toon to see how to get a Moore adaptation wrong, my Imdb review is in the WWW link. It was my most awaited film of the year...
The rumored Watchmen / Snyder HBO project is thus something i would "look forward to". Before Watchmen: Minutemen, Silk Spectre and Moloch were the good ones. (Rebirth too.)
and Director's Cut to Ultimate Cut, length 215 min.: http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=3541900 (triple dipping to get the whole movie out was greedy)
I have NO idea how a better adaptation could have been made, especially regarding the tone (the Philip Glass sequence could have been directed by Bergman, best scene in a comic movie), and the failed film by Terry Gilliam sound insane. Film Silk Spectre became worse by becoming a more powerful character and Ozymandias / the ending make less sense but the last 2 changes were consistent for the whole film, so they work. Anything else is nitpicking and the Under the Hood doc. + the Motion Comic were the cherry on top. The film already started to get a giant reassessment over time, so i am good. 9,5/10 I still remember reading the TPB before a major operation. A book so good, you remember where you were when you 1st read it! 10/10 (I remember where i 1st read DKR and Berserk too.)
Watch The Killing Joke toon to see how to get a Moore adaptation wrong, my Imdb review is in the WWW link. It was my most awaited film of the year...
The rumored Watchmen / Snyder HBO project is thus something i would "look forward to". Before Watchmen: Minutemen, Silk Spectre and Moloch were the good ones. (Rebirth too.)
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
residentgrigo said:
Quoted for posterity because this is truly an astounding statement. You want Kevin Feige gone for spearheading all these movies you claim to like and for making 10 billion dollars because Marvel's comics, along with most of the industry, are in the toilet. Yes, clearly for his unprecedented success he needs to be replaced with Zack Snyder and everything will be better for it.
residentgrigo said:
I think the results of "Zack's" career are what endangers his career.
Aazealh said:
Yep, same boat, and if we're being honest Aquaman too.
Aazealh said:
Yeah, they haven't improved much in that regard judging by Doctor Strange. The whole argument for not stereotyping parts or even race swapping roles has backfired to, "Well, they're just a white person now."
Eluvei said:I see this as a huge plus in a megafranchise like Marvel's, and I wish it happened often. Ant-Man was an uglier, less interesting Iron Man, and from the looks of it, Doctor Strange will be a prettier, slightly more interesting Ant-Man, so for a franchise that still needs to put really similar shit out every year, if at least the sequels manage to belong to different genres, I'll automatically like them more than the more generic superhero stuff, regardless of how successfully it works. So basically, I guess I liked it "just for that."
GotG dude. That's way more a James Gunn movie than just another Marvel flick; too bad they couldn't work that out with Edgar Wright in the end because yeah, though it's a little different, Ant-Man's still pretty medicore. The big question is if Gunn will have more or less creative freedom given the success of the first. We saw what happened with Whedon.
Eluvei said:
Hater!
Johnstantine said:
It's so wonderful a cut it's like a fine objective example of the technique? How about make a good movie in two hours or less? THAT'S a wonderful cut. Did you see BvS extended cut? I'd still like to see the truncated cut where they keep it to Batman and Superman and cut the rest of the shit out. That might have worked!
residentgrigo said:
I'm giving this post a very scientific 9.746 points out of 10... million.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
Griffith said:
If that's what you need for a wonderful cut, then props to you. You have my full support.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
It's just basic economy of story and the purpose of editing in most mediums to begin with, otherwise why "cut" at all? Just use every frame filmed! It's like all these filmmakers today can't hack it so now it's the style du jour for even popcorn movies to be 3 hour bloatfests. Now, there's no reason a longer cut can't be better for reasons besides length, I'm just dubious that throwing everything and the kitchen sink in is the solution in these cases; usually it doesn't even address the problem. I hear it about Watchmen (I am curious though), they tried the same sell with BvS after it underwhelmed, but to paraphrase Sir Lawrence Olivier, "Try editing."
Oburi
All praise Grail
I wasn't kidding when I compared Snyder's Watchmen to the first Berserk movie because they both have the same problem. Even though the Ultimate Cut of Watchmen is better than the theatrical and the Black Freighter animated comic being integrated into the movie was pretty cool, the movie still can't hold up next to the source material. Even with a shot for shot, panel for panel copy of the book what's missing is everything between the lines, the meaning behind the scenes and the characters themselves. It doesn't matter how close it comes to looking like the comic because in the end the movie doesn't capture the essence of what's happening in the scenes and the characters don't feel like how they are suppose to, even though they may look and sound like they should.
When Watchmen first came out I actually saw it in the theater and I really liked it. I'm not a big comic book guy, I didn't grow up loving super heroes (except for Burton's Batman, obviously any 90's kid grew up with that) and I had never read the book. So for me, I thought it was cool because I was already sick of super hero movies back in 2009, so this was something different and I became a fan. Then the Ultimate Cut came out and I really enjoyed it even more. A 3 hour anti-superhero movie with great animated segments woven in and a sweet soundtrack and it came in a beautiful box set (I will defend the packaging for this box set still, which rivals even the Lord of The Rings Extended Box Sets. It's better than most classic movie sets that deserve this level of care and craft such as Once Upon a Time in America, Apocalypse Now, or even Star Wars).
However, I also watched the motion comic that came with it and that was equally as impressive and made me realize just how much I was missing. So just like with the 90's Berserk anime series, this prompted me to go out and buy the graphic novel. I've since read it several times over and now I can't help but be frustrated with the movie on so many levels, even some very simple and easy tweaks that they could have made to at the very least, get a little bit closer to the spirit of the book. But it's clear they were completely unable to do that. One easy example of this, without bringing up the big ending debate, is the final scene between Jon and Adrian in the book which is such a critical and important scene, it's the final scene for both these characters in the story and it wraps up a lot everything that just happened and it's missing in the movie. It would have only taken a few minutes but instead they needed something more dramatic so they have some of Jons final lines directed at Laurie and then have them share one final kiss before he leaves. DAWW. And of course because they missed out on the great "Nothing ever ends" line they had to finagle it by having Laurie say it to Dan with an awkward "I know what Jon WOULD HAVE said. He WOULD HAVE said ..." , yea, had they not fucked around with those scenes earlier. The whole movie is like this, literally every scene. I understand when adapting a movie sacrifices and changes must be made but if you're going to compromise to that degree and still call it a faithful adaptation, you really can't get mad when people call bullshit. And just like Berserk, if you really love the comic I don't see how you can honestly get behind all these adaptations and not see through the visual aesthetic and realize that they're not really all that faithful and they don't really hold a candle to the source. I understand everyone is different and of course people can enjoy whatever they want. We have some respected members here even that enjoy these recent Berserk animes. That's totally fine, but they aren't faithful. Gut's from the manga is not the same Gut's from those movies and Adrian Veidt in Watchmen is not the same character in the movie.
When Watchmen first came out I actually saw it in the theater and I really liked it. I'm not a big comic book guy, I didn't grow up loving super heroes (except for Burton's Batman, obviously any 90's kid grew up with that) and I had never read the book. So for me, I thought it was cool because I was already sick of super hero movies back in 2009, so this was something different and I became a fan. Then the Ultimate Cut came out and I really enjoyed it even more. A 3 hour anti-superhero movie with great animated segments woven in and a sweet soundtrack and it came in a beautiful box set (I will defend the packaging for this box set still, which rivals even the Lord of The Rings Extended Box Sets. It's better than most classic movie sets that deserve this level of care and craft such as Once Upon a Time in America, Apocalypse Now, or even Star Wars).
However, I also watched the motion comic that came with it and that was equally as impressive and made me realize just how much I was missing. So just like with the 90's Berserk anime series, this prompted me to go out and buy the graphic novel. I've since read it several times over and now I can't help but be frustrated with the movie on so many levels, even some very simple and easy tweaks that they could have made to at the very least, get a little bit closer to the spirit of the book. But it's clear they were completely unable to do that. One easy example of this, without bringing up the big ending debate, is the final scene between Jon and Adrian in the book which is such a critical and important scene, it's the final scene for both these characters in the story and it wraps up a lot everything that just happened and it's missing in the movie. It would have only taken a few minutes but instead they needed something more dramatic so they have some of Jons final lines directed at Laurie and then have them share one final kiss before he leaves. DAWW. And of course because they missed out on the great "Nothing ever ends" line they had to finagle it by having Laurie say it to Dan with an awkward "I know what Jon WOULD HAVE said. He WOULD HAVE said ..." , yea, had they not fucked around with those scenes earlier. The whole movie is like this, literally every scene. I understand when adapting a movie sacrifices and changes must be made but if you're going to compromise to that degree and still call it a faithful adaptation, you really can't get mad when people call bullshit. And just like Berserk, if you really love the comic I don't see how you can honestly get behind all these adaptations and not see through the visual aesthetic and realize that they're not really all that faithful and they don't really hold a candle to the source. I understand everyone is different and of course people can enjoy whatever they want. We have some respected members here even that enjoy these recent Berserk animes. That's totally fine, but they aren't faithful. Gut's from the manga is not the same Gut's from those movies and Adrian Veidt in Watchmen is not the same character in the movie.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
Great explanation and comparison, Oburi.
Being a lifelong comic fan, it would have been incredibly shortsighted of me to even think the adaptation would be perfect. I went into it knowing I would have to take it as its own thing, so I never really had an issue with comparing the two. I still don't even compare them.
As for you initial comparison, well that just kind of flew over my head. Apologies for that=)
Being a lifelong comic fan, it would have been incredibly shortsighted of me to even think the adaptation would be perfect. I went into it knowing I would have to take it as its own thing, so I never really had an issue with comparing the two. I still don't even compare them.
As for you initial comparison, well that just kind of flew over my head. Apologies for that=)
residentgrigo
Excitement and Enjoyment!
@Griffith The problem with Kevin Feige is that this sub apparently agrees that he created "PRISTINE levels of mediocrity". I don´t but that´s your conclusion, i ain´t worshiping that.
The amount of quality directors Disney burned though by now is staggering. Patty Jenkins even ran off to WB for her big return, as her Thor 2 fell though. (Dat Wonder Woman trailer, i wanted Gal as Diana since I saw Fast 5.) The end result of that mess was "PRISTINE levels of mediocrity", there i agree!
Feige´s benevolent dictatorship ultimately lead to The Fantastic Four comic line being cancelled aka. Marvel´s First Family. The current X-men line is a mess due to infighting inside the MCU tv and film division. Don´t get me started on SHIELD, good riddance to that one. The Marvel comics proper (the biggest US comic publisher) is starting to hurt, while Rebirth is giving fans what they want after a somewhat messy 2015-16. One of them is 100% learning from mistakes, the other one though… Cap3 only happened because of BvS, they even had to balls to admit that, respect. BUT that also means that they are driving without a map…
Half the internet now blindly blames Isaac Perlmutter for all sorts of crap (I don´t, besides his anti-diversity stance), yet he saved Marvel in the post-bankruptcy years in the 90s. I knew who these 2 were LONG before the MCU (Disney also came later) and Feige did Spiderman and X-men before that. I now have a cinematic Iron-man franchise where only the 1st movie reflects the source material, as Disney refused to address alcoholism. IR 2 was scheduled to be about, you saw we got. Comic Tony is also a futurist but that has never been addressed in the films too and so on.
Frank Miller´s Batfleck thou was mixing pain-killers with alcohol 1st thing out of bed in UC BvS. Post Crisis (1986) Superman is now in the movies, with 1 to 1 dialogue, but what do i know about the work WB is doing. It´s not that these are making money hand over fist, or that the film slate drew by at least 3 movies + 1 show (Krypton) since the big CW announcement in March.
John Ostrander (SS), Frank Miller (BvS, also Zack´s 300 while i am @ it) + Dan Jurgens (BvS + MoS) and even Dave Gibbons (Watchmen) all liked these adaptation but what do they know? All sorts of DC writers are starting to speak up this week, as they now see where the wind is blowing from...
In conclusion: Both companies are doing more things right than anyone should expect. I further read thousands of issues (easily over 10.000) from both. I suspect a 60/40 spit in DC´s favor with the big 2 and i also know nearly all adaptations inside and out. Even some of the 1940s offerings. I will always prefer the adaptation that sticks closer to the source material and the DCEU now wins by a landslide.
Fox is doing a better job of that than Disney too (just give FF back). The MCU thus wins by an honorable bronze medal. All are winners and i hope that the Valiant deal will get off the ground, big fan.
PS: 90S Aquaman is one of the reasons i grew long hair. Momoa + Wan (please save Macross too!) + Peter David´s Aquaman. Now that´s a winning formula and it won´t be an origin film. Horror inspired King Arthur under the see, can´t wait. A childhood dream come true even!
The amount of quality directors Disney burned though by now is staggering. Patty Jenkins even ran off to WB for her big return, as her Thor 2 fell though. (Dat Wonder Woman trailer, i wanted Gal as Diana since I saw Fast 5.) The end result of that mess was "PRISTINE levels of mediocrity", there i agree!
Feige´s benevolent dictatorship ultimately lead to The Fantastic Four comic line being cancelled aka. Marvel´s First Family. The current X-men line is a mess due to infighting inside the MCU tv and film division. Don´t get me started on SHIELD, good riddance to that one. The Marvel comics proper (the biggest US comic publisher) is starting to hurt, while Rebirth is giving fans what they want after a somewhat messy 2015-16. One of them is 100% learning from mistakes, the other one though… Cap3 only happened because of BvS, they even had to balls to admit that, respect. BUT that also means that they are driving without a map…
Half the internet now blindly blames Isaac Perlmutter for all sorts of crap (I don´t, besides his anti-diversity stance), yet he saved Marvel in the post-bankruptcy years in the 90s. I knew who these 2 were LONG before the MCU (Disney also came later) and Feige did Spiderman and X-men before that. I now have a cinematic Iron-man franchise where only the 1st movie reflects the source material, as Disney refused to address alcoholism. IR 2 was scheduled to be about, you saw we got. Comic Tony is also a futurist but that has never been addressed in the films too and so on.
Frank Miller´s Batfleck thou was mixing pain-killers with alcohol 1st thing out of bed in UC BvS. Post Crisis (1986) Superman is now in the movies, with 1 to 1 dialogue, but what do i know about the work WB is doing. It´s not that these are making money hand over fist, or that the film slate drew by at least 3 movies + 1 show (Krypton) since the big CW announcement in March.
John Ostrander (SS), Frank Miller (BvS, also Zack´s 300 while i am @ it) + Dan Jurgens (BvS + MoS) and even Dave Gibbons (Watchmen) all liked these adaptation but what do they know? All sorts of DC writers are starting to speak up this week, as they now see where the wind is blowing from...
In conclusion: Both companies are doing more things right than anyone should expect. I further read thousands of issues (easily over 10.000) from both. I suspect a 60/40 spit in DC´s favor with the big 2 and i also know nearly all adaptations inside and out. Even some of the 1940s offerings. I will always prefer the adaptation that sticks closer to the source material and the DCEU now wins by a landslide.
Fox is doing a better job of that than Disney too (just give FF back). The MCU thus wins by an honorable bronze medal. All are winners and i hope that the Valiant deal will get off the ground, big fan.
PS: 90S Aquaman is one of the reasons i grew long hair. Momoa + Wan (please save Macross too!) + Peter David´s Aquaman. Now that´s a winning formula and it won´t be an origin film. Horror inspired King Arthur under the see, can´t wait. A childhood dream come true even!
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
First of all, I throughly enjoyed reading this roller coaster ride of a response. Secondly, I think it comes down to disagreement over the quality of the films from these respective studios. First, I didn't agree Marvel only produces mediocrity, just that it's their baseline, which is actually an incredible achievement in this film landscape. Their mediocrity is better than most people's best efforts in the superhero genre, and they've managed to almost single-handedly standardize it and give it consistently and credibility. It doesn't seem amazing anymore when someone makes a decent superhero movie, and now we come to expect as much or even more, so in that way Marvel is a victim of their own successful formula, and how they deal with that will be their challenge going forward.
On the other hand, speaking of victims of Marvel's success, the DC cinematic universe can't even reach the level of mediocre; and we'll just have to agree to disagree that Synder's Murderman and Batfleck are the pinnacle of quality and faithful adaptation (maybe as setup for an Injustice arc). They take big, ambitious swings to try and hit home runs, but as the reviews and box office shows, the results aren't there. They're not even settling for the triples, doubles and singles Marvel sometimes puts out seemingly by design to cap it off with a grand slam here and there. Instead DC keeps striking out trying to hit a grand slam with nobody on base (I hope this extended baseball analogy wasn't completely wasted on everyone here =). WB/DC had a stronger footing back when they weren't trying to be Marvel, but just letting Christpher Nolan produce top quality, sometimes transcendent Batman movies. It's all been downhill since then and they can't even claim those past achivements as part of their canon. Right now Wonder Woman is the best thing they've got, and their best hope for reversing their fortunes. It's just one good movie away, but the current braintrust hasn't shown they can execute one yet.
Fox is somewhere in-between, which used to be no-man's land. Total failures with Fantastic Four, hit and miss with their X-movies; both bolstered by and beholden to their history and relative success (did anyone care about Apocalypse?). But now there's hope, Deadpool shows they at least found a team that was able to go outside the usual parameters of those films to do something to truly compete with and even outshine the Marvel machine. Was it one-time luck or can they reproduce their success? That's the only thing that really sets Marvel apart, and the reason why getting rid of Feige is probably the last thing they'll do, whatever it means for their other properties and mediums.
On the other hand, speaking of victims of Marvel's success, the DC cinematic universe can't even reach the level of mediocre; and we'll just have to agree to disagree that Synder's Murderman and Batfleck are the pinnacle of quality and faithful adaptation (maybe as setup for an Injustice arc). They take big, ambitious swings to try and hit home runs, but as the reviews and box office shows, the results aren't there. They're not even settling for the triples, doubles and singles Marvel sometimes puts out seemingly by design to cap it off with a grand slam here and there. Instead DC keeps striking out trying to hit a grand slam with nobody on base (I hope this extended baseball analogy wasn't completely wasted on everyone here =). WB/DC had a stronger footing back when they weren't trying to be Marvel, but just letting Christpher Nolan produce top quality, sometimes transcendent Batman movies. It's all been downhill since then and they can't even claim those past achivements as part of their canon. Right now Wonder Woman is the best thing they've got, and their best hope for reversing their fortunes. It's just one good movie away, but the current braintrust hasn't shown they can execute one yet.
Fox is somewhere in-between, which used to be no-man's land. Total failures with Fantastic Four, hit and miss with their X-movies; both bolstered by and beholden to their history and relative success (did anyone care about Apocalypse?). But now there's hope, Deadpool shows they at least found a team that was able to go outside the usual parameters of those films to do something to truly compete with and even outshine the Marvel machine. Was it one-time luck or can they reproduce their success? That's the only thing that really sets Marvel apart, and the reason why getting rid of Feige is probably the last thing they'll do, whatever it means for their other properties and mediums.
Griffith said:
As a long time comic fan (obsessed man child kind of fan) I agree with you 100% on everything stated. I honestly can't grasp someone not seeing the logic in what you say.