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

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, iJackSparrow said:

And yet, they had to give up on 007.

 

? Who got it, didn't even heard that a deal was done on 007, it was not that really profitable franchise for Sony anyway, 13-15m a year or so.

[ZattMurdock]

2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

? Who got it, didn't even heard that a deal was done on 007, it was not that really profitable franchise for Sony anyway, 13-15m a year or so.

http://observer.com/2017/05/james-bond-rumors-sony-movie/

[Kvikk Lunsj]

6 minutes ago, iJackSparrow said:

Nah. I've been in this game for a while to understand who is powerful and who is a producer trying to keep his job. Kinberg is the latter. 

They did not give the ti Bond. The rights expired and anyone can bid on it.  

[aabattery]

2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

? Who got it, didn't even heard that a deal was done on 007, it was not that really profitable franchise for Sony anyway, 13-15m a year or so.

 

Nothing set in stone yet. There's a thread on it on the Bond subforum and I think the latest is that Annapurna feels confident about getting it. Wouldn't be surprised if Sony lost it but like you said, it's hardly a golden goose for Sony.

[chrisman0606]

Well the difference with James Bond and Spider-Man, is that Sony had the distribution rights for James Bond, while they have the film production rights for Spider-Man.

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, iJackSparrow said:

http://observer.com/2017/05/james-bond-rumors-sony-movie/

 there are five studios in the running to pair with MGM and EoN Productions. The contestants are: Sony, Warner Bros., Universal, 20^th Century Fox and Megan Ellison’s Annapurna Pictures, which is a newcomer to the distribution battlefield.

 

? I don't think they gave up on Bonds, would not surprise me if a Rothman have little interest in all that trouble for a terrible ROI type of deal like the previous deal thought.

[robertman2]

8 hours ago, aabattery said:

 

Not only do you disrespect ?, but you disrespect Trevor as well.

 

@Sam @MrPink @Robertman2 & Knuckles, what are we gonna do about this?

Death ?

8 hours ago, MrPink said:

 

We make a club about Lego Ninjago making less than Lego Batman OW

Less than Norm of the North

Edited May 10, 2017 by Robertman2 & Knuckles

[The Futurist]

You re getting 1 memorable villain every two year, if you re lucky, and somehow, everybody s pseudo  hot take is this :

 

" But Marvel has No Good villains !!!"

 

It  s like if you're no Vader or The Joker, you re lame, bro !

 

And Kurt Russell has something to say to you this year, Bitches !!!

 

 

 

[YM!]

8 hours ago, MrPink said:

 

We make a club about Lego Ninjago making less than Lego Batman OW

Now that'd give me an early heart attack.

[AJG]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/deadpool-animated-comedy-series-donald-glover-marvel-set-at-fxx-1002091

 

'Deadpool' Animated Comedy Series From Donald Glover, Marvel Set at FXX

So a Deadpool Cartoon made by Marvel and ABC and coming to FX...

 

Those F4 rights surely have to be back at Marvel. They're even letting Fox use their Brand name for the new Gifted show.

[ZattMurdock]

35 minutes ago, AJG said:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/deadpool-animated-comedy-series-donald-glover-marvel-set-at-fxx-1002091

 

'Deadpool' Animated Comedy Series From Donald Glover, Marvel Set at FXX

So a Deadpool Cartoon made by Marvel and ABC and coming to FX...

 

Those F4 rights surely have to be back at Marvel. They're even letting Fox use their Brand name for the new Gifted show.

 

This is amazing. Genuinely more excited for this than Deadpool 2, that I'm kinda scared with Tim Miller walking away. 

[Harpospoke]

17 hours ago, The Futurist said:

Why cool & hip people like to prentend that having a somewhat weak villain is ONLY Marvel thing ?

 

The villains in Indiana Jones were so fantastic, something named something doing something something : memorable !  

 

 

That whole "lame villains" thing is a new invention to look for something to complain about with Marvel I think.  Interesting how it's never directed at DC with their forgettable villains.   You're right...Indiana Jones is #2 on the AFI heroes list and no one can name his villain.  It's never been important to a heroic movie.

 

Who was the villain in Casablanca?   Some Nazi guy whose name I can't remember and Casablanca is my favorite movie.   Yet Rick is considered one of the greatest heroes of all time.  (#4 on AFI list)   The "faceless Nazi" is a pretty common villain.   At least Capt America had a Nazi with a name.   And I didn't even like that movie that much but it had nothing to do with the villain.

 

James Bond is #3 on their list and I can't name any of his villains if they aren't in the title.  (Golden eye?)

 

The #5 hero is Will Kane from High Noon and he only had 3 faceless villains.

 

The Man with No Name is one of the greatest heroes of all time too and I can't think of the names of any of his villains.   And Eastwood's other hero is Dirty Harry and I have no idea who his villains were.

 

Seems like the villain is often just a faceless entity like in Schindler's List, Grapes of Wrath, To Kill a Mockingbird, Gandhi, 12 Angry Men, or Norma Rae.

 

A great villain doesn't seem to matter much at all.

 

14 hours ago, iJackSparrow said:

Yet ANOTHER sign that Fox has reached some kind of deal over Fantastic Four (besides some spoilers in GotG Vol. 2) saw the light of the day today:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I_htkGJAZ4

 

Do you guys remember when Marvel used "gifted" to identify Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in Age of Ultron?

 

Marvel is producing this with Fox. Marvel holds the rights for X-Men characters. Or at least held. I have a very strong feeling that the Fantastic Four are coming for Phase 4. Would the X-Men be that far behind? 

 

Deadpool killed Xmen coming back.  I'm halfway expecting Fox to screw up the DP sequel though now that they are actually paying attention to DP.   But the DP success probably pushed a deal a decade or more into the future.   Fox never had that kind of success with any of their Xmovies so they've got to be seeing dollar signs.

 

But FF should definitely go back to Marvel.   Why would Fox or any other studio have any interest in a franchise that started out mediocre and dropped down to spectacular failure?   No other franchise would get 3 tries...much less 4 or more.   Gotta be a grudge or ego in there somewhere because there is no logical reason for Fox to make another FF movie.

 

It's interesting that Fox and others got those rights in the first place because Marvel was in serious financial distress.   Now Sony was the one with big money trouble and it led to Marvel getting part of those rights back.   What goes around comes around.

Edited May 10, 2017 by Harpospoke

[Barnack]

The remember the name exercise is not a particularly good one, it has a lot more to do with how memorable the name is than the character quality, every one that saw Death Race remember Machine Gun Joe, because it was Stallone and an awesome name, nothing to do with the character being a particularly good one.

 

All example using real life scenario like Casablanca are a bit of a special case, history created the treat for you, better in many way than any fictional villain could ever do. What matter is the goal you root for and the challenge the hero face, if the movie do not rely on a great villain for those because a general situation is the challenge like Casablanca or acclaimed science-fiction film acclaimed science-fiction film Gravity it will work without one. If the challenge/conflict is caused by a villain, now the movie can rely on that villain to be good for the movie to be good.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Barnack

[The Futurist]

It s not about the name at all, it s about remembering something about the villain, anything, a design, a look, a line, the acting, something he does I don't know ... something specific that made it memorable and stand out.

 

Somehow the Marvel movies now get that de-facto lame criticism and it s so unfair it boggles the mind, it happens to 95% of movies-blockbusters.

 

 

Fantastic-Memorable villains has always been the very rare exception, not the rule.

 

Deal.

With.

It.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Harpospoke]

59 minutes ago, Barnack said:

All example using real life scenario like Casablanca are a bit of a special case, history created the treat for you, better in many way than any fictional villain could ever do. What matter is the goal you root for and the challenge the hero face, if the movie do not rely on a great villain for those because a general situation is the challenge like Casablanca or acclaimed science-fiction film acclaimed science-fiction film acclaimed science-fiction film Gravity it will work without one. If the challenge/conflict is caused by a villain, now the movie can rely on that villain to be good for the movie to be good.

 

Capt America 1 had the same thing Casablanca had.   History created it for them.   But I didn't like Cap 1 at all.   It had a "great villain" if Casablanca had one on that definition.   So I don't see any correlation with the perceived quality of the villain and how good the movie is.   Doesn't seem to matter at all.   It's not like I hated BvS because Lex was weak.  (I hated it because they made Superman into a brooding idiot)

[chrisman0606]

Although a Fox Team-Up with Marvel Studios is impossible now like Feige said, @iJackSparrow mentioned that Marvel and Fox are on better terms like cooperating on movies, tv shows, trading characters, and thanks from both side, I have a feeling that if they continue to be on friendly terms that a team-up can become possible. I would like Wolverine and Captain America to team-up like I do Spidey and Deadpool.

[The Futurist]

 

 

Edited May 11, 2017 by The Futurist

[YM!]

http://batman-news.com/2017/05/11/diane-lane-justice-league-the-avengers/

 

Diane Lane thinks JL won't be better than The Avengers. I wonder if she means is in critical reception or quality. Thinking the former more than the latter:

Edited May 11, 2017 by YourMother

[RandomCat]

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 2:34 PM, Harpospoke said:

 

That whole "lame villains" thing is a new invention to look for something to complain about with Marvel I think.  Interesting how it's never directed at DC with their forgettable villains.   You're right...Indiana Jones is #2 on the AFI heroes list and no one can name his villain.  It's never been important to a heroic movie.

 

 

TOHT!

[Arlborn]

23 hours ago, chrisman0606 said:

Although a Fox Team-Up with Marvel Studios is impossible now like Feige said, @iJackSparrow mentioned that Marvel and Fox are on better terms like cooperating on movies, tv shows, trading characters, and thanks from both side, I have a feeling that if they continue to be on friendly terms that a team-up can become possible. I would like Wolverine and Captain America to team-up like I do Spidey and Deadpool.

 

I wouldn't mind that as long as it's a one time and done type of deal. Joining the universes would be a big NO for me.