You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 03, 2016, 05:53:08 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen  (Read 4289 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ShadowSlider

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #100 on: August 29, 2014, 05:12:12 PM »
You mean from the trailers way before the actual movie came out, when we first saw him? How the hell were we supposed to know that far ahead that he was just a figurehead? He's still even on the posters and DVD cover. The fact that they faked us out just to play about the weakest joke and put a completely inferior villain in his place was, in essence, the slight. Them asking for a 'second chance' to cover up this embarrassing mistake they ought to have known better to make in the first place is just asking too much. I know I'm beating a dead horse by now, so...yeah.

So that doesn't make you even more eager to see them do it right? I mean, I totally get where you're coming from. Venom was, is, and likely always will be my favorite Spider-Man villain and he got screwed over big time in Spider-Man 3, but as pissed off as his treatment in that film made me, it also made me want to see the "real" Venom that much more.

Offline Slywyn

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #101 on: August 29, 2014, 06:11:14 PM »
You mean from the trailers way before the actual movie came out, when we first saw him? How the hell were we supposed to know that far ahead that he was just a figurehead? He's still even on the posters and DVD cover. The fact that they faked us out just to play about the weakest joke and put a completely inferior villain in his place was, in essence, the slight. Them asking for a 'second chance' to cover up this embarrassing mistake they ought to have known better to make in the first place is just asking too much. I know I'm beating a dead horse by now, so...yeah.

Isn't that kind of the point though? Build him up as a villain only to reveal he's just a figurehead at the hands of someone else? I don't see how that's a slight, or even a mistake. That's pretty brilliant advertising. Now they can bring in the actual Mandarin, I don't see how you should be anything other than, you know, excited.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #102 on: August 29, 2014, 06:18:26 PM »
So that doesn't make you even more eager to see them do it right? I mean, I totally get where you're coming from. Venom was, is, and likely always will be my favorite Spider-Man villain and he got screwed over big time in Spider-Man 3, but as pissed off as his treatment in that film made me, it also made me want to see the "real" Venom that much more.

Ah, Venom ... I really think he'll take two movies to do right, one to play out the black suit against another villain and build up Eddie properly, and one with Venom as the main focus. As much as they packed into Amazing Spiderman 2, I have my doubts that it'll happen this time around either.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #103 on: August 29, 2014, 06:20:09 PM »
Isn't that kind of the point though? Build him up as a villain only to reveal he's just a figurehead at the hands of someone else? I don't see how that's a slight, or even a mistake. That's pretty brilliant advertising. Now they can bring in the actual Mandarin, I don't see how you should be anything other than, you know, excited.


Mathim dislikes movies that don't spoil the plot twist in the trailers, evidently.

Offline ShadowSlider

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #104 on: August 29, 2014, 09:18:37 PM »
Ah, Venom ... I really think he'll take two movies to do right, one to play out the black suit against another villain and build up Eddie properly, and one with Venom as the main focus. As much as they packed into Amazing Spiderman 2, I have my doubts that it'll happen this time around either.

I dunno, that kinda seems like the route they've taken with the Green Goblin. ASM 2 seemed to be mostly an origin story for him so that he can spend the entirety of his next movie as just the Green Goblin. Still, I have my doubts as well, considering the plan this time is apparently to introduce Venom in a solo movie first, and then do who-knows-what with him later. I don't know WTF they're thinking with this setup, and that's honestly what worries me. But, who knows, they could very well surprise me. All I really care about is that they make him the true badass that he really is. He should be presented as the ultimate physical threat to Spider-Man, and so long as they do that (and don't fuck up his look), I'll be happy.

Well, that and not having him play buddy-villain with anyone else. Him teaming up with Sandman was so stupid. Venom is more than capable of defeating Spider-Man on his own.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #105 on: August 29, 2014, 09:57:41 PM »
I haven't seen Amazing Spiderman 2 yet so I can't really judge it, but even the first one seemed a bit rushed and incomplete to me. I'm hoping it improves but I'm highly skeptical for now.

Well, that and not having him play buddy-villain with anyone else. Him teaming up with Sandman was so stupid. Venom is more than capable of defeating Spider-Man on his own.

Yeah I'm pretty sure the Sandman was only there because they also tried to cram in the full plot with Harry. They could have gotten 3 movies out of everything they tried to cram into one and had a much better product. Something along the lines of Symbiote-Peter vs Goblin-Harry, then a straight up Venom movie, and a Sinister Six or at least Norman's return for the team up with Harry somewhere down the line. But instead we got the half-assed mess that was Spiderman 3.

Offline MathimTopic starter

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #106 on: August 30, 2014, 12:11:28 PM »


Mathim dislikes movies that don't spoil the plot twist in the trailers, evidently.

Don't make assumptions about me or I'll make some about you and you REALLY won't like 'em. Let's keep our slanderous comments to the celebs and filmmakers, shall we?

The Mandarin is Iron Man's greatest nemesis and has the chutzpah and power to back up that reputation. If they wanted to wait to utilize the Mandarin, that would have been fine, I'd have waited while Tony got some more practice in on some less-worthy opponent if I was prepared for it. Or hell, don't even give me a clue as to who the damn villain is (like the very first Iron Man 2 trailer where it wasn't clear about Whiplash, all we really saw was him getting chased down by the drones). I don't like them teasing his ultimate foe and then pulling the South Park style gag where they did a Terrance and Philip episode instead of showing the conclusion of finding out who Eric Cartman's father was. As it has been said before-All Hail the King was that ass-kissing response to the negative feedback to their treatment of the Mandarin character. The only reason they'd ever bring in the 'real' Mandarin is because they totally screwed up the delivery the first time.

I mean, they're making enough capital that they can afford to make mistakes and still not lose out, but that's no reason to snub the fans like that. I don't want to just like these films, I want to RESPECT them as well. And respect has to be mutual. They seriously damaged that relationship with their decision to let Shane Black do what he wanted.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #107 on: August 30, 2014, 12:21:17 PM »
I'm more or less with Mathim on Iron Man 3 - I do like a lot of what they did with it, but slapping the Mandarin's name on it was an unnecessary cheap stunt and made it hard to enjoy the movie on it's own terms.

Offline MathimTopic starter

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #108 on: August 30, 2014, 12:41:59 PM »
Shane Black even defends his decision on it; he's not sorry at all or regretful about it. That's kind of the worst insult.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #109 on: August 30, 2014, 01:11:06 PM »
It didn't even really make sense in universe - there really wasn't much if any name recognition to capitalize on, and if there was a real Mandarin with a scary reputation, who'd also kept his activities that quiet, what kind of idiot would really risk pissing the guy off on such a personal level just for the sake of a distraction? It really just made Killian seem that much less credible as an intelligent villain.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #110 on: August 31, 2014, 01:36:39 AM »
It didn't even really make sense in universe - there really wasn't much if any name recognition to capitalize on, and if there was a real Mandarin with a scary reputation, who'd also kept his activities that quiet, what kind of idiot would really risk pissing the guy off on such a personal level just for the sake of a distraction? It really just made Killian seem that much less credible as an intelligent villain.
Kinda like Hammer, eh?

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #111 on: August 31, 2014, 06:28:58 AM »
Kinda, except we were never supposed to take Hammer seriously.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #112 on: August 31, 2014, 05:32:15 PM »
Kinda, except we were never supposed to take Hammer seriously.
And he's supposed to be Stark Industries main rival (according to the movie, at any rate)?  He was never a threat, he was a joke.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #113 on: August 31, 2014, 05:45:16 PM »
And he's supposed to be Stark Industries main rival (according to the movie, at any rate)?  He was never a threat, he was a joke.

Well, he thought he was Stark's main rival anyway, I don't think anyone else seriously believed that. I'm not familiar with him from the comics, but from the movie I got the impression he inherited the company from someone more competent and lucked out on Tony getting out of the weapons business before he ran it into the ground. Either way he was never the main villain, he was a plot device to give the main villain more resources and access to the War Machine armor. He really just isn't that big a deal in the movie or the comics, so any mishandling of his character there might have been was far less damaging than with the Mandarin.

Offline consortium11

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #114 on: August 31, 2014, 06:31:25 PM »
Well, he thought he was Stark's main rival anyway, I don't think anyone else seriously believed that. I'm not familiar with him from the comics, but from the movie I got the impression he inherited the company from someone more competent and lucked out on Tony getting out of the weapons business before he ran it into the ground. Either way he was never the main villain, he was a plot device to give the main villain more resources and access to the War Machine armor. He really just isn't that big a deal in the movie or the comics, so any mishandling of his character there might have been was far less damaging than with the Mandarin.

Justin Hammer was a pretty integral part of two of the most influential and iconic Iron Man storylines (some may well suggest the most influential and iconic); I don't think his importance in the Iron Man rogues gallery can be brushed away quite so easily.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #115 on: August 31, 2014, 07:09:49 PM »
Justin Hammer was a pretty integral part of two of the most influential and iconic Iron Man storylines (some may well suggest the most influential and iconic); I don't think his importance in the Iron Man rogues gallery can be brushed away quite so easily.

Fair enough, he has zero name recognition to me so any impact he might have had in the comics I wouldn't know about. So I probably am dismissing him a bit too lightly. Compared to the Mandarin though? No one else is both that much of a threat, and has that much history with Iron Man, and wasting that just to make their fake terrorist seem more dangerous to the audience (and just the audience, not in universe) is lazy writing on a whole new level. Even if they do try to salvage it later saying there's a real Mandarin still out there.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #116 on: September 02, 2014, 05:06:58 AM »
I honestly had no idea that Justin Hammer was actually important to the IM comic, I haven't read on in decades.  The issue I have is that for a company that was supposed to be a threat to Stark Enterprises, nothing that we were shown hinted at it.  We were expected to assume that we'd know that Hammer was somehow good enough.  Instead it was nothing but a gag reel.

Online Vorian

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #117 on: September 02, 2014, 12:33:27 PM »
I don't think we were supposed to believe Hammer was a serious rival to Stark, it was pretty obvious from the start that he was far behind Stark and trying to be bigger than he was. He's just the next best thing with Stark out of the weapon business.

Either way I don't think any failings with Hammer really undermine Vanko's credibility as a villain, but to me slapping the Mandarin's name on that farce in Iron Man 3 undermined Killian's. Iron Man 3 really needed a strong villain, not an idiot with a petty grudge and a big ego. The more I think about it, the more I think a real Mandarin movie would have been perfect for Tony's development at that time, and the AIM crap could have been left to Agents of SHIELD to develop over the first half of the season. That would have given them a stronger plot anyway.

Offline Kwiehtyp3

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #118 on: September 02, 2014, 04:19:52 PM »
Just a small correction that somebody may have already mention. The two highest grossing films of all time are Avatar and Titanic, both with over 2 billion dollars. If you Include home video sales, each made over 3 billion dollars. Titanic made another 55m for television broadcasting rights.

Offline MathimTopic starter

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #119 on: September 02, 2014, 04:23:41 PM »
Even if Hammer was supposed to be a credible villain, he'd just be a clone of Obadiah Stane. Seriously, he'd pay someone else to engineer a suit of armor FOR him, to get Tony out of the way so they could be the king of the hill. At least Vanko had the talent to make his own and customize it to use his signature whips (would have loved to see him try it with a four-armed suit) and had a vendetta against Tony so strong he was willing to make a suicide attack out of it. He didn't care about money or anything, and while that's a great motivation for a villain, being utterly hell-bent on the obliteration of his hated enemy, they didn't go deeply enough into it. If they'd given more time to developing Vanko as a character and villain, that would have made Iron Man 2 a whole lot better. That, and he ought to have had an actual suit built for the battle at Monaco. Seriously, him not having any armor on at all was just kinda...pathetic. Don't tell me that whip let him have the strength to manhandle Suitcase Armor Man, that was so lame.

Not only is the Mandarin a credible villain with much more far-reaching goals and abilities, but he's not an American businessman or someone with a petty grudge; the perfect new archetype villain that could have started off Phase 2. And they blowed it.

Offline ShadowSlider

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #120 on: September 02, 2014, 04:54:57 PM »
Even if Hammer was supposed to be a credible villain, he'd just be a clone of Obadiah Stane. Seriously, he'd pay someone else to engineer a suit of armor FOR him, to get Tony out of the way so they could be the king of the hill. At least Vanko had the talent to make his own and customize it to use his signature whips (would have loved to see him try it with a four-armed suit) and had a vendetta against Tony so strong he was willing to make a suicide attack out of it. He didn't care about money or anything, and while that's a great motivation for a villain, being utterly hell-bent on the obliteration of his hated enemy, they didn't go deeply enough into it. If they'd given more time to developing Vanko as a character and villain, that would have made Iron Man 2 a whole lot better. That, and he ought to have had an actual suit built for the battle at Monaco. Seriously, him not having any armor on at all was just kinda...pathetic. Don't tell me that whip let him have the strength to manhandle Suitcase Armor Man, that was so lame.

Not only is the Mandarin a credible villain with much more far-reaching goals and abilities, but he's not an American businessman or someone with a petty grudge; the perfect new archetype villain that could have started off Phase 2. And they blowed it.

Yeah, I actually went back and watched Iron Man 3 again last night, and it made me realize two things. One, I'm REALLY glad Marvel made it so this Mandarin was the fake one, because I thought this was a stupidly sudden introduction for him. And two, they really shouldn't have tried to do Extremis and Mandarin in the same movie. I actually really, really like the Extremis parts of the story, and Killian's plot to "own the war on terror" actually makes a lot of sense given the more business-oriented aspect of the previous two Iron Man films. But shoe-horning in the Mandarin like that? Ulgh, no.

I think they should've either cut the Mandarin out entirely and focused all that extra time to better develop the "We create our own demons" and "Does the suit make the man, or does the man make the suit" themes, or just make a straight up Mandarin movie and have Extremis be a sub-plot that allows Tony to finally get the upper-hand on his enemy after being completely manhandled in their first fight.

I think the only real upside to the Mandarin being used in Iron Man 3 is that when they inevitably make a movie with the Real Mandarin (and let's face it, after All Hail the King, it is inevitable), he won't just be some random terrorist that we've never heard about before (within the context of the films).

Offline MathimTopic starter

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #121 on: September 02, 2014, 05:16:34 PM »
I actually wrote a script that would have neatly tied both the Mandarin and Extremis in the same movie without over-cluttering it (I also wrote a similar one for Spider-Man 2 where it had both the Lizard and Doc Ock). You just have to care enough. ;D  I can't help but also mention one last gripe about IM3 that no one else has brought up yet: Characters like Ellen Brandt who have connections to other comic characters and stories, was way out of place the movie and was essentially a wasted fodder character. Same thing with Chen Lu, who is supposed to be supervillain Radioactive Man, also being shoved into the background and not given his proper due. What a waste of potential. I wish they'd stop name-dropping these people (the Mandarin fake-out was bad enough, after all) who are totally being misused and/or have no business being in these movies this soon anyway. It's like the opposite of them failing to utilize characters such as Zeke Stane and others, as if they don't have enough imagination to do proper conversions from print to screen.

Don't look now, but wikipedia's most recent update on the plot description for Age of Ultron gives away WAY more details than I thought it would, so beware before going to look into it if you're not ready to hear about more details about Ultron's origin. The only thing we can say for sure without it being too spoilerific is that it won't be the same as in the comics since he was originally the creation of Ant-Man, and that guy's not even being introduced into the MCU until after Avengers 2.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2014, 05:20:17 PM by Mathim »

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #122 on: September 02, 2014, 05:31:55 PM »
It's like the opposite of them failing to utilize characters such as Zeke Stane and others, as if they don't have enough imagination to do proper conversions from print to screen.


To try and bring this thread vaguely back on-topic...at least this complain is a 'comics movie thing' rather than a 'Marvel thing'. Zsasz got like a 15-second cameo in Batman Begins.

Offline ShadowSlider

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #123 on: September 02, 2014, 08:20:08 PM »
To try and bring this thread vaguely back on-topic...at least this complain is a 'comics movie thing' rather than a 'Marvel thing'. Zsasz got like a 15-second cameo in Batman Begins.

Eh, I hear you, but given the intentionally more real-world approach Nolan took with his films, I don't think Zsasz as people knew him would have had much of a place in the story. He's just a little too over-the-top and isn't on the same level as Bane, Ra's al Ghul, Joker, Scarecrow, or Catwoman.

What did irritate me was the bullshit drug-dealer cop-out he used with Scarecrow in The Dark Knight. That was a truckload of crap and one of only two real complaints I had with The Dark Knight.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen
« Reply #124 on: September 02, 2014, 08:28:46 PM »
I don't even remember Scarecrow being in TDK - had to go look it up on Wikipedia when you mentioned it. Maybe it was worse than it seems on description (I remember fake Batmen with machine guns, and big angry dogs, that's it), but it seems like a logical callback/cameo to BB to have Scarecrow - main-focus big bad of the first movie - reduced to peddling his toxic creations on the black market for petty cash.