Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I don't know. Marvel embraces the "fun" a bit too much for my taste sometimes. Examples would be the whole Mandarin thing in IM3 and don't get me started on the end credit scene of GOTG.But on the whole the Fun Action movie works for them. But I think DC have to do what works for them, which I think is Dark and Gritty. That's what worked with Batman, Watchmen and Man of Steel. They tried the Fun approach with Green Lantern and previously with Batman & Robin , but they just can't pull it off.
IM3 pissed me off to no ends. There was too much nonsense that it got so silly. Thor 2 as well. It was annoying that they went overboard and in turn felt as forced humor. Thank goodness Captain 2 brought a good balance. GOTG humor was just fun and how the oddity of the group is any ways. Hopefully, Marvel puts out more movies with a good balance of humor like Cap 2 and not what they gave us in Thor 2 and IM3. As for Howard the Duck, I didn't mind his appearance, but I was hoping for a serious reveal that would expand into other storylines. A reveal of Nova, Mentor/Eros, the Skrulls, Annihilus, the Space Knights, or Blaastar would've been sweeeeeet!
Batman - Need to be Dark and Gritty
Superman - needs action pack, Fun, inspiring, - this is why Man of Steel failed. The leveled city and snapping of Zod's neck. Reeves Superman would never have done this. Even Nolan's Batman didn't kill the Joker. Snyder went for shock and traumatic scene but he forfeited Superman's character.
Green Lantern - fun, action packed, well thought out, and more human. Seriously, nobody cared for Hal in that first movie. He was just boring and Hammond was a stalking perve. Hard to relate to a villain like that.
DC needs to change it up and stay more true to the characters. T
Originally posted by dynamix
Does anybody else notices the similarity between GotG and Star War? lol.SL = Han Solo
Groot = Chewbacca
Ronan = Darth Vader (even sounds like him lol)
Thanos = Emperor
Yes, that's what Gunn was going for. There's a lot of similarities and they use it to their advantage.
SL = Han Solo/Luke Skywalker (lost Prince of Spartoi)
Originally posted by Inhuman
im not spinning and i didnt make that pic.lel@ a "a bunch of mediocre solo films". nice opinion or do you think you speak for everyone now?
.
Your fvcking fanboy image had the rankings for each solo film. Outside of Iron Man they had scores in the 60s and 70s out of 100. Most countries deem that as below average to average.
Or do you not know how people use numbers
Originally posted by Based
Your fvcking fanboy image had the rankings for each solo film. Outside of Iron Man they had scores in the 60s and 70s out of 100. Most countries deem that as below average to average.Or do you not know how people use numbers
what countries are this retarded? You are the one that is having trouble understanding simple rating system. Seems you need help so Ill break it down for you.
(as far as RT ratings go)
in RT 50's is below average. (no marvel cinematic universe films have scored this low yet)
2 marvel films have scores in the 60's (60's is average)
4 films in the 70's (above average)
1 film in the 80's (rating of good) (89 almost 90)
3 films in the 90's (film rating of great)
you see that award in anything 70% and over? that says "certified fresh"
do you also see non of the films have any "rotten" icons ?( green squashed tomato icon. like one the cover of the MOS steel movie)
so tell me again how most marvel films are below average?
(according to RT but scores are similar in other reputable sites as well)