Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

[chrisman0606]

2 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

It's my least favorite Snyder movie. The story is too familiar. There's a lot of animated movies that recycle the same script That's why I rarely like animated movies (And also my problem with the MCU).

Well DCEU has problems, and MCU has some problems but it has good reviews except Iron Fist, while DCEU is darn rotten.

[YM!]

3 minutes ago, chrisman0606 said:

Well DCEU has problems, and MCU has some problems but it has good reviews except Iron Fist, while DCEU is darn rotten.

However although I may be mixed on the DCEU so far, reviews don't mean everything for some. Example, despite it's flaws, Legend of The Guardians would probably make my top 50 list in my best animated films and it was rotten.

[Eevin]

Compromise:
MCU recycles the same good script over and over until it becomes dull and pointless

DCEU comes up with new, different scripts that redefine what it means to be lazy

 

Everyone happy?

[MCKillswitch123]

I have not seen either DOTD or the owls movie, but Watchmen blows away 300 and Snyder's DC movies imo. Well, the Director's Cut does. The theatrical version is a little bit more uneven, but still enjoyable. Sure, I totally could do without blue dicks and all, and the movie's pacing is questionable, but I think it still did a decent job of exploring the comic's philosophical themes (hell, "Who watches the watchmen" is a question that we continuously ask ourselves even today). And the opening scene w/The Comedian's demise is still the best thing Snyder's ever done.

[Napoleon]

2 hours ago, YourMother said:

One could say the same with DCEU and superhero movies in general. However I don't think Snyder is a bad director he just needs good writers imo. At the same time, I respect your opinion.

I don't think any of the DCEU movies so far were generic, but I agree on the superhero movie genre in general. At least Fox is also doing some things differently, like they did with Logan and Deadpool. Even though I didn't like Deadpool that much, I have a lot of respect for what they did.

[ZattMurdock]

Peter Sciretta from Slash Film said if he had to bet $100 dollars today, he'd bet against Ben Affleck sticking around for The Batman's standalone film. 

[YM!]

11 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

I don't think any of the DCEU movies so far were generic, but I agree on the superhero movie genre in general. At least Fox is also doing some things differently, like they did with Logan and Deadpool. Even though I didn't like Deadpool that much, I have a lot of respect for what they did.

To be honest the DCEU like how the MCU first started has been a mixed bag for me, you have a good film (IM1/SS), a bad film but with some redeeming traits (TIH/BVS), and one I have really mixed emotions about (IM2/MoS). However a lot of studios nowadays are more keen to do superhero movies and/or establish cinematic universe. I, like the majority (myself included) love the MCU, I can understand criticism towards it, but in a way, if it wasn't for them we may have had a longer wait for Justice League. Who knew Avengers was going to do $1.5B and Guardians wasn't going to flop? Who knew a Lego Batman Movie could be a moderate success? Who knew Logan and Deadpool would succeed? And who'd think even a bad Batman and Superman movie would do over $850M? Personally hoping Black Panther, Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel breakout.

[RandomCat]

3 hours ago, rukaio101 said:

I think the key words you're missing here is 'this was a unique story that was never told before for superhero comics'. Yeah, I'm certain many of the themes and ideas in Watchmen had been explored before in Sci-Fi fiction, but Sci-Fi fiction has had a long history of exploring complex philosophical ideas. Superhero comics hadn't (in large part thanks to the whole Comics Code kerfuffle leading to comics being made 'kid friendly' for a number of years). Watchmen was one of the first mainstream comic book hits to really bring those sorts of ideas and successfully transfer them to the superhero genre. And that opened the gates for a lot more other darker and more philosophical takes on the genre.

 

Also, it's hard to claim that Watchmen's success was only a result of those themes lifted from sci-fi literary fiction, because that misses one of the most important aspects of a comic book. The art. Watchmen would not be the same story it was without Dave Gibbons' art. There's a lot of hidden meaning and subtle techniques and visual storytelling in there which is often overlooked. Literary fiction does not have that same visual element. And even if it did, there's still a lot of difference in thematic meaning that will automatically come from transferring ideas across different genres. Take, for example, Dr Manhattan. The idea of Ubermensch or perfect human has been explored plenty of times across Sci-Fi. However, when you put it into the context of superheroes, there's instantly a different meaning. Because when you think of an all-powerful Ubermensch who helps people, your mind automatically goes to a certain boyscout in blue tights, correct? Thus Dr Manhattan acts as both an exploration of the Ubermensch and a commentary on the character of Superman, a being so ridiculously above humanity, and how he affects the world. As a result, the theme has added depth and meaning that is only really applicable to the superhero genre. Similarly, Rorschach (who I think you (like many others) are completely misinterpreting in story, by assuming his worldview was being portrayed as 'correct') is a reflection of the darker sides of street vigilantes like Batman, being effectively a violent, anti-social hobo in a mask who's clearly mentally ill. 

 

Now, not to say that Watchmen is necessarily a perfect story. Like you, I wasn't all that fond of the pirate stuff and there are definitely flaws to be found. And it's fine to dislike it for those flaws. And ss for wider effects on the industry, I will agree that lot of dark and edgy crap came out due to a) a massive misunderstanding of Watchmen's themes and b ) an attempt to replicate its critical success. And that was bad. But I do think a lot of good came out of it as well. It made comics more likely to be taken seriously as an art form. It opened the doors for riskier and more out-there takes on the superhero genre. Many classics of the genre probably in some way owe thanks to that story. Yeah, it inspired a lot of shit, but you can't just ignore the good it inspired too. 

 

 

 

 

(Also, the film was alright-ish. It was slavishly loyalty to the source material, which acted as both its biggest strength (due to the quality inherent in said source material) and biggest weakness (because what works for a comic does not always work for a film). Would've preferred to see Terry Gilliam's take, to be honest.)

 

Long list of stuff. First the easy bit. The Art. I don't have ano eye for art so any argument will fall on deaf ears. (Or blind eyes.)

 

I did clarify that it is know it is new for comics, but a lot of fans I've seen treated it as if it was new, full stop. 

 

I also disagree that Watchmen dididn't anything for the ideas of deeper storey telling that wasn't already occurring in comics at the time, and that I didnt music read Rorschach and his world view, I never said his world view was the right one. (In fact, I did say the opposite.)

 

As well the message of the book is one that is the very antithesis of my personal beliefs. 

 

 

[Arlborn]

Huh, even though 2016 was the year of the mouse there are actually "only" 7 Disney movies in the top 20 profitable movies of 2016 and the first Disney movie only appears as third, how interesting.

 

What I see from this list is the confirmation that Universal and WB indeed also had a pretty good year:

 

Rank | Movie | (Studio) | Net Profit

1. The Secret Life Of Pets (Uni) – $374.65M
2. Deadpool (Fox) – $322.24M
3. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (Dis) – $319.60M
4. Finding Dory (Dis) – $296.60M
5. Zootopia (Dis) – $294.90M
6. The Jungle Book (Dis) – $258.15M
7. Sing (Uni) – $194.25M
8. Captain America: Civil War (Dis) – $193.40M
9. Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them (WB) – $164.70M
10. Suicide Squad (WB) – $158.45M
11. Doctor Strange (Dis) – $122.65M
12. Moana (Dis) – $121.30M
13. Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice (WB) – $105.70M
14. The Conjuring 2 (WB) – $98.30M
15. Hidden Figures (Fox) – $95.55M
16. Kung Fu Panda 3 (Fox) – $76.65M
17. The Angry Birds Movie (Sony) – $72.00M
18. La La Land (Lionsgate) – $68.25M
19. Don’t Breathe (Sony) – $59.10M
20. Central Intelligence (WB) – $52.00M

HONORABLE MENTION: Bad Moms (STX) – $50.80M; Sausage Party (Sony) – $47.05M; The Purge: Election Year (Uni) – $44.60M

 

http://deadline.com/2017/04/most-profitable-movies-2016-secret-life-of-pets-deadpool-disney-1202060846/

 

 

 

[RandomCat]

4 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

Huh, even though 2016 was the year of the mouse there are actually "only" 7 Disney movies in the top 20 profitable movies of 2016 and the first Disney movie only appears as third, how interesting.

 

What I see from this list is the confirmation that Universal and WB indeed also had a pretty good year:

 

Rank | Movie | (Studio) | Net Profit

1. The Secret Life Of Pets (Uni) – $374.65M
2. Deadpool (Fox) – $322.24M
3. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (Dis) – $319.60M
4. Finding Dory (Dis) – $296.60M
5. Zootopia (Dis) – $294.90M
6. The Jungle Book (Dis) – $258.15M
7. Sing (Uni) – $194.25M
8. Captain America: Civil War (Dis) – $193.40M
9. Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them (WB) – $164.70M
10. Suicide Squad (WB) – $158.45M
11. Doctor Strange (Dis) – $122.65M
12. Moana (Dis) – $121.30M
13. Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice (WB) – $105.70M
14. The Conjuring 2 (WB) – $98.30M
15. Hidden Figures (Fox) – $95.55M
16. Kung Fu Panda 3 (Fox) – $76.65M
17. The Angry Birds Movie (Sony) – $72.00M
18. La La Land (Lionsgate) – $68.25M
19. Don’t Breathe (Sony) – $59.10M
20. Central Intelligence (WB) – $52.00M

HONORABLE MENTION: Bad Moms (STX) – $50.80M; Sausage Party (Sony) – $47.05M; The Purge: Election Year (Uni) – $44.60M

 

http://deadline.com/2017/04/most-profitable-movies-2016-secret-life-of-pets-deadpool-disney-1202060846/

 

 

 

 

7 out of 13 is pretty good batting average.

 

But bravo to Deadpool, just raking in the cash.

[MrGlass2]

2 hours ago, RandomJC said:

 

But bravo to Deadpool, just raking in the cash.

 

Deadpool made more profits than Civil War and Doctor Strange combined!

[RandomCat]

4 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

Deadpool made more profits than Civil War and Doctor Strange combined!

 

K. And?

[YM!]

21 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

Deadpool made more profits than Civil War and Doctor Strange combined!

Deadpool also made more profits than Suicide Squad and Batman V Superman combined.

[ChipDerby]

lol you marvel fools. He was just pointing out how fucking impressive Deadpool was.

 

holy hell.

[chrisman0606]

Just now, ChipMunky said:

lol you marvel fools. He was just pointing out how fucking impressive Deadpool was.

 

holy hell.

By your Logic DC fools.

[ChipDerby]

lolok

[chrisman0606]

Beside doing better than Marvel also DC Deadpool did better. I feel sorry X-Men Apocalypse is the least profitable.

[MrGlass2]

1 hour ago, RandomJC said:

 

K. And?

 

It was a Marvel v Marvel war, and Deadpool is the winner!

 

Even more impressive, who-would-have-believed-that: Deadpool made more profits than Civil War and Batman v Superman combined!

[RandomCat]

1 minute ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

It was a Marvel v Marvel war, and Deadpool is the winner!

 

Even more impressive, who-would-have-believed-that: Deadpool made more profits than Civil War and Batman v Superman combined!

 

K. And?

[chrisman0606]

7 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

It was a Marvel v Marvel war, and Deadpool is the winner!

 

Even more impressive, who-would-have-believed-that: Deadpool made more profits than Civil War and Batman v Superman combined!

Look Deadpool made more profit than DS and CW and vice versa with BVS and SS.