NikeTalk › NikeTalk Forums › The Lounge › General › MARVEL C U Thread - GOTG2 05/05 - THOR:Ragnarok Teaser Trailer Out
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MARVEL C U Thread - GOTG2 05/05 - THOR:Ragnarok Teaser Trailer Out - Page 3

post #61 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadaqwest View Post

Marvel better be glad superman batman movie was pushed back cause that wouldve took away all marvels buzz even though i dig marvel over dc films
Nah Avengers 2 would've still done better. DC is the one that had to push their movie back and have the history of bad movies not named Batman.

Plus when you look at it overall there's way more Marvel movies coming out than DC and that'll continue from here on out.
Edited by Master Zik - 3/10/14 at 4:14pm
post #62 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadaqwest View Post

Marvel better be glad superman batman movie was pushed back cause that wouldve took away all marvels buzz even though i dig marvel over dc films

I would believe majority of the buzz would be the negativity fans will have with the casting. I really don't think Marvel is worrying about any live action DC film.

post #63 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fozzy Badfeet View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jadaqwest View Post

Marvel better be glad superman batman movie was pushed back cause that wouldve took away all marvels buzz even though i dig marvel over dc films
I would believe majority of the buzz would be the negativity fans will have with the casting. I really don't think Marvel is worrying about any live action DC film.

Word. Marvel's gotta be feeling like WCW in 97' right now.
post #64 of 37368
Avengers will more than likely have te highest opening weekend ever, they're not worried about ****. Luckily with this Joss won't have that IM3 effect.
post #65 of 37368

Some of you in this thread are just plain dumb :lol

 

Get familiar with the back stories before you spew nonsense about things you have no idea about.>D

                                                                METS/JETS/KNICKS/RANGERS      
Reply
                                                                METS/JETS/KNICKS/RANGERS      
Reply
post #66 of 37368
You comic geeks be spazzing out.
post #67 of 37368

I'm reading that they're calling Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch Inhumans. Seems like the most logical way to bring mutants into this universe without being able to call them that.

post #68 of 37368

I just want to see the costumes of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch.

post #69 of 37368
Cant wait
post #70 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by tay1 View Post
 

I'm reading that they're calling Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch Inhumans. Seems like the most logical way to bring mutants into this universe without being able to call them that.

Which is completely fine. Although, I do need to read up on everything related to Inhumans. 

post #71 of 37368
Marvel is killing it right now.

And to think, DC had a jump start on Marvel and should be DEEP into their universe by now. I mean the OG Batman movie came out in 1989. laugh.gifmean.gif

Batman Begins came out in 2005... 9 years ago. eek.gif

How did DC **** up their movie universe so damn badly? I don't get it. They had superhero movies on lock for a minute and just kept rebooting. How many Superman movies have they dropped and not kept the story flowing? Some boneheaded boardroom decisions going on over there.
WTB AF1'S SZ 14
Reply
WTB AF1'S SZ 14
Reply
post #72 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brolic Scholar View Post

Marvel is killing it right now.

And to think, DC had a jump start on Marvel and should be DEEP into their universe by now. I mean the OG Batman movie came out in 1989. laugh.gifmean.gif

Batman Begins came out in 2005... 9 years ago. eek.gif

How did DC **** up their movie universe so damn badly? I don't get it. They had superhero movies on lock for a minute and just kept rebooting. How many Superman movies have they dropped and not kept the story flowing? Some boneheaded boardroom decisions going on over there.

 

It's simple: DC/WB had/has no plan.

 

GL was a flop. They put all their faith in Nolan and that paid off well, but they grasped at straws with Superman.

 

To be honest, MOS was just decent. The fact that they're putting all their faith in Snyder now is ridiculous; the inclusion of Batman in the new MOS sequel is basically DC/WB trying to maximize box office #s. The casting of Affleck/Eisenberg still has people on edge.

 

Marvel succeeded because they had a plan (also called Phases). It doesn't hurt that they snagged great actors (RDJ, Sam Jackson, etc.) and directors (Whedon, most notably).

 

How can DC catch up? To be honest, it'll be pretty tough, but a few ways include:

 

1.) Grabbing any bankable actors they can get before Marvel literally employs most talented and up-and-coming actors

2.) Drafting up a plan similar to Marvel's: cohesive storylines, targetted directors/industry folks who know the background stories, and efficient execution

3.) Watch the money pile up while building out a universe that makes sense

post #73 of 37368
Thread Starter 
DC didn't f' up, they just wasn't thinking about extending their universe. I mean we all know Nolansverse can't have supernatural or magical being in it, it was more "realistic".

Acting like DC had planned a JLA film since the '89 Batman film, hell why not go back as far as 1978 when the first Superman film come out? Superman tv show have been on since he 50's and Batmans since the 60's, DC just never had plans to create a unified world til like maybe a decade or so ago and back then when they started talking about a Batman & Superman film, it just went no where and they tried to just make it to a single hero films but they ended up with Nolans Begins.


And they rebooted Batman and Superman once. laugh.gif Why does DC get all this crap on them, first people keep saying they keep making bad Superman films as if they make them every other year? Supeman IV and Returns (which wasn't a reboot but a continuation of Donners Superman) were 19 years apart and they eventually rebooted 7 years later.

Now they keep rebooting their films when Batman was just rebooted in Begins and no other time? They aren't even rebooting Batman in the Superman vs Batman film, Batman just exist already. You aren't going to see another origins story.


Seriously, people just want to crap on DC as much as possible. roll.gif
post #74 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by rck3sactown View Post

Still cracks me up that he came to Sacramento laugh.gif

IKR!?!
wish i had gone tho... no one else wanted to get tix eyes.gif
post #75 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

DC didn't f' up, they just wasn't thinking about extending their universe. I mean we all know Nolansverse can't have supernatural or magical being in it, it was more "realistic".

Acting like DC had planned a JLA film since the '89 Batman film, hell why not go back as far as 1978 when the first Superman film come out? Superman tv show have been on since he 50's and Batmans since the 60's, DC just never had plans to create a unified world til like maybe a decade or so ago and back then when they started talking about a Batman & Superman film, it just went no where and they tried to just make it to a single hero films but they ended up with Nolans Begins.


And they rebooted Batman and Superman once. laugh.gif Why does DC get all this crap on them, first people keep saying they keep making bad Superman films as if they make them every other year? Supeman IV and Returns (which wasn't a reboot but a continuation of Donners Superman) were 19 years apart and they eventually rebooted 7 years later.

Now they keep rebooting their films when Batman was just rebooted in Begins and no other time? They aren't even rebooting Batman in the Superman vs Batman film, Batman just exist already. You aren't going to see another origins story.


Seriously, people just want to crap on DC as much as possible. roll.gif

Nah. I was a HUGE Batman fan back in the day and I'm not interested in just crapping on DC.

Superman Returns might as well have been a reboot. It's supposed to take place after Superman II, but ignore Superman III and IV? mean.gif That's just dumb. And you might as well say that after Batman Returns, the next movie was a reboot. Batman Forever was garbage. Let's be honest. It didn't even feel like the same universe as the first two.

I'm not saying that DC was supposed to have this huge plan mapped out for a universe, but why did they keep ******* with what was working? Batman (1989) and Batman Returns were GREAT movies. If they had followed that formula, one that established a great version of Batman and kept making movies that flowed from that universe, then at this point the progression into a team of characters would have been natural. Now it just feels forced and to play catch up to Marvel.

Now all of a sudden they're dumping all of these characters into one movie? When Marvel took time to develop this universe? DC had all the time in the world. It's rushed and even thought it may work out, given their track record for making dumb decisions to follow up a good one, chances are, their big movie Superman/Batman will be crap too.

Of course it'll do numbers, but where will it leave the story? And Affleck has signed on for multiple movies. So if this one is crap it's just gonna take them farther off track. Because they'll have to wait until this run is over to address the issues and... reboot.

I guess I'm just disappointed in DC. This is coming from a man that wanted to be Batman as a kid after seeing the movie. I was even working on drawings of how to make my grappling hook gun. laugh.gif
WTB AF1'S SZ 14
Reply
WTB AF1'S SZ 14
Reply
post #76 of 37368
Thread Starter 
Nah you can't say it's a reboot, it's just like Incredible Hulk where it ignores the first one. Returns is the same thing, it ignore III and IV because Singer wanted to follow only Donners work, it's still not the reboot and that is why they casted someone like ROuth who is a spitting image of Reeves.

And those other Batman films, they are just like the James Bond franchise and what they plan to do with Iron Man moving forward, it won't be a reboot but they'll keep making them. But that Bruce Wayne/Batman is pretty much the same in all those films, it just got cheesier and cheesier. You can't let how bad the film was cloud your judgement and say it's a reboot because it was just that bad and different.




And again, dumping all these characters? All we know is that Batman and Superman and a small role for WW. What is this "dumping all these characters" come from? Just based on rumors? At least wait til it's been casted and actually shot before using that as an excuse.

Again they simply could not continue from the world Burton made for the simple reason that they never intended to. Same way Marvel didn't plan to make any Avengers films back then or that Fox has no plans to expand on XMen films but now is planning expanding to XForce and maybe combining it's world with Fantastic Four. Same with Sony, back then they never planned to expand their world to Sinister Six and a solo Venom film but Marvel opened the door and showed how successful it is so now everyone is doing it.

DC has planned a JLA film for a while now actually, it just didn't pan out (and really glad it didn't with how GL and Returns turned out) but remember when Common was already GL back in 2007 or 2008? According to him, it was the writers strike that did it and when the executives decided to pull the plug on the project. Sometimes things just happen that way.
post #77 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

DC didn't f' up, they just wasn't thinking about extending their universe. I mean we all know Nolansverse can't have supernatural or magical being in it, it was more "realistic".


Now they keep rebooting their films when Batman was just rebooted in Begins and no other time? They aren't even rebooting Batman in the Superman vs Batman film, Batman just exist already. You aren't going to see another origins story.


Seriously, people just want to crap on DC as much as possible. roll.gif

How are they not rebooting Batman? The characters will be played by a completely different cast, its set in a different universe, and besides Goyer, the production will be handled by a completely different crew (Nolan/Syncopy are not involved anymore asfaik). So it basically has all the elements of a reboot, but since it doesnt include an origin story it isnt? wtf?
post #78 of 37368
Marvel didn't start off as a movieverse either, but it was brilliant idea that worked out.
post #79 of 37368
^ Nobody thinks that SR is a reboot because Singer said from the jump that he would be continuing the story from Donners universe. Also, the director of Incredible Hulk himself has called the film a reboot btw
post #80 of 37368
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DangerousG View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

DC didn't f' up, they just wasn't thinking about extending their universe. I mean we all know Nolansverse can't have supernatural or magical being in it, it was more "realistic".


Now they keep rebooting their films when Batman was just rebooted in Begins and no other time? They aren't even rebooting Batman in the Superman vs Batman film, Batman just exist already. You aren't going to see another origins story.


Seriously, people just want to crap on DC as much as possible. roll.gif

How are they not rebooting Batman? The characters will be played by a completely different cast, its set in a different universe, and besides Goyer, the production will be handled by a completely different crew (Nolan/Syncopy are not involved anymore asfaik). So it basically has all the elements of a reboot, but since it doesnt include an origin story it isnt? wtf?

First, different cast, crew or take on the character doesn't mean reboot, again James Bond reference again. No one is saying those are reboots and Marvel is again going to take that route once RDJ is gone and Feige clearly said that won't be a reboot.

Second, this isn't a Batman film, it is just Batman in a Superman film. Sure it could be a completely different Batman we've seen but that doesn't make it a reboot.
post #81 of 37368
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DangerousG View Post

^ Nobody thinks that SR is a reboot because Singer said from the jump that he would be continuing the story from Donners universe


Ummm, Brolic just said it.

Quote:
Superman Returns might as well have been a reboot.


And speaking of Hulk, isn't Rufallo playing Nortons role in that one? Everything is new in the Avengers (cast, crew, director, etc...) but I don't think people consider Ruffalos Hulk a reboot, is it? (serious question as I really do not know in this one).



And yes, I do think this is just somewhat talking crap about DC just to talk crap. I mean this is the Avengers thread and yet DC is brought up when it has already been beaten to death in the Superman/Batman thread. Actually DC is brought up in all Marvel threads just so people could crap on them. laugh.gif
post #82 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

First, different cast, crew or take on the character doesn't mean reboot, again James Bond reference again. No one is saying those are reboots and Marvel is again going to take that route once RDJ is gone and Feige clearly said that won't be a reboot.

Second, this isn't a Batman film, it is just Batman in a Superman film. Sure it could be a completely different Batman we've seen but that doesn't make it a reboot.

Alright imma take one more stab at it cause I dont think this conversation is really worth going on about. laugh.gif
Quote:
And speaking of Hulk, isn't Rufallo playing Nortons role in that one? Everything is new in the Avengers (cast, crew, director, etc...) but I don't think people consider Ruffalos Hulk a reboot, is it? (serious question as I really do not know in this one).

No, its not considered a reboot even though everything is new because Marvel has already set the rules with their cinematic universe and we know Ruffalo is continuing on Nortons character. Its the same deal for RDJ and kind o/ not really for James Bond (some people consider Casino Royal to be a reboot, some dont).

This is obviously not the same situation for the new Batman, which is completely removed from the past incarnation and is what i consider to be a reboot. I'm not really sure what you want to say with your second point. Yeah, its not a Batman film but obviously we all know that MoS2 is the jumping point and this will be the character, whether or not Affleck continues with the role, that they will use in JLA and future Batman films.
post #83 of 37368
What I think some of yall should know as far as WB and DC is the various heads of WB had very different ideas and attitudes towards their comic book publishing division. DC was on the brink at one point (90s in 2000s). WB was just gonna license out the characters to other comic publishers and dismantle DC. The pres at the time was convinced otherwise. The movies made the real money so in their minds the comics didn't matter. That's why all the Batman and Superman films largely exist in their own universe. All DC is a bunch cobbled together superhero properties and even then they were all still in separate universes. DC got in on the shared universe after Marvel made it popular and profitable.

To me that's the root reason there is no plan for a DC cinematic universe. All WB is mostly fine with doing are Batman and Superman movies and if they didn't drop the ball with Superman Returns they'd probably just stick to that. Especially after the failure of GL. Plus you gotta keep in mind that once again Marvel showed them how to do it (MCU) and given how much money they made with it WB couldn't help but give it a serious try. We're talking billions of dollars here.





So hold up, the Batman movies were only rebooted once? Adam West's, Val Kilmer's, Michael Keaton's, and George Clooney's Batman movies are all in the same continuity? Were each not a reboot to a complete different Batman?

It's different with James Bond cuz he doesn't have a rogues gallery he keeps facing and there's two takes on 007 anyway; either James Bond is a code name a worthy agent takes and their have been multiple agents from Connery to Craig or this is the same James Bond, **** what he looks like. That's closer to Cheadle/Howard and Norton/Ruffalo than every guy that's played Batman.

Every time there was a new Batman movie with a different actor playing him I took that as a reboot.
post #84 of 37368
Adam West is by himself, but the Burton/Schumacher films are connected.
post #85 of 37368
Quote:
Originally Posted by DangerousG View Post

Adam West is by himself. But the Burton/Schumacher films are connected
Damn if those movies were good enough I'd go back and watch them to be sure and see the clear connection.

I mean Marlon Wayans is still getting paid for not being the first black Robin in that one Batman movie. I just don't see how it all connects to Bat nipples and the rest.
post #86 of 37368
Each film is stand alone so there isn't really a connection besides the fact that some of the cast members and the general aesthetic of the movies are the same laugh.gif But yeah they're just considered to be taking part in the same universe so I wouldnt call them reboots.
post #87 of 37368
@Brolic Scholar

Also remember DC had a chance to flesh out their universe with tv shows and they screwed that up too. Smallville was great and a success and they ain't capitalize off ish.

Aquaman show? Nope. Blue Beetle show? Nope. So can we get a Batman show? Nope.

But what we can give you is 5 trillion animated movies that nobody besides true fans is going to care about (love all of those btw). DC made big mistakes and now they're paying for it.
post #88 of 37368
Thread Starter 
In comparison to James Bond, Burton and Schumacker Bats never faced the same villains either. All villains were only in their respective films.

Technically its the same James Bond, i think even when they were making two Bond films at the same time by different companies it was still the same Bond. It was a bit more evident when Feige described the future IM films where they just recast Stark and take the "Bond" route.
post #89 of 37368
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeminiStar View Post

@Brolic Scholar

Also remember DC had a chance to flesh out their universe with tv shows and they screwed that up too. Smallville was great and a success and they ain't capitalize off ish.

Aquaman show? Nope. Blue Beetle show? Nope. So can we get a Batman show? Nope.

But what we can give you is 5 trillion animated movies that nobody besides true fans is going to care about (love all of those btw). DC made big mistakes and now they're paying for it.

Man you guys act like it is so easy to get a show going like that. laugh.gif


Smallville became stale after 5 seasons, it got viewers but the quality would have suffered because budget would just take its toll and outside of truly big fans, not many of the public would care. Hell Aquaman is DCs biggest joke and everyone makes fun of him and you think his own show would be a success? laugh.gif
post #90 of 37368
I see those different Batman movies as reboots each time they changed actors. The only connection they share is the title character being Batman. What else makes them exist in the same universe? The characters don't even act the same from one movie to the next. In Batman and Batman Returns the stories are connected. They even talk about Vicki Vale in Returns and why she isn't there. What connections exist in the following movies?
WTB AF1'S SZ 14
Reply
WTB AF1'S SZ 14
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General
NikeTalk › NikeTalk Forums › The Lounge › General › MARVEL C U Thread - GOTG2 05/05 - THOR:Ragnarok Teaser Trailer Out