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

[dudalb]

33 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

The fact that Marvel Studios started being somewhat inclusive after it started being cool and profitable for companies doesn't erase what they have done in the past. Of course, their "change of heart" has to be celebrated and encouraged, no matter the financial motives behind it. But let's not pretend their first 10 years haven't been questionable in that regard.

Well, we were overdue for a "MArvel is evil" tirade from the Emperor Of France......

[dudalb]

15 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

Can’t a lot of their lack of inclusiveness in the past be blamed on Ike Perlmutter?

You are aware that the poster in question is the #1 MCU hater and the #1 Zack Snyder fan on this site. And the two are connected.

 

[Walt Disney]

2 hours ago, Barnack said:

Yet they are both filled into Avengers 3:

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10068015

 

So the movie Part 1-2 filmed in one big chunk is officially announced in 2014, before Age of Ultron is released and before writers/director are hired, there was an older plan that than for which that was not the case that fair enough, but why it would have more "value" than the more updated plan ?

They always planned to film them back to back. They were just originally intended to be separate movies, which is what they turned out to be. However, there was a time when they thought they were going to label them as part and part 2 because that was the trendy thing to do.

Edited September 4, 2019 by Walt Disney

[Seto Kaiba]

 

On the other side...
Funny how Warner can make an movie about asians and refuse to pay an asian woman the same as a white man.

[JB33]

3 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

 

On the other side...
Funny how Warner can make an movie about asians and refuse to pay an asian woman the same as a white man.

If this is for real, then WOW! Shame on WB. Good on Lim for standing by her worth and exiting the project.

[Legion Again]

Wonder what Disney is giving her for Raya 

[Alexdube]

11 hours ago, Walt Disney said:

IW is as much of a part 1 as Empire Strikes Back was a part 1. Not really a part 1. It just ends with the antagonist winning.

 

I think some people misconstrue IW as a part 1 because at one time it was going to be re-labeled as a part 1 because of other films like Harry Potter going that route. However, the failure of Mockingjay being split into 2 ended that plan. The ironic part is that before the part 1 & 2 fad, IW and Endgame were envisioned as 2 separate movies. Most people didn’t know the orignal plans, so they mistakenly think it was always meant to be a part 1, and was changed because of Mockingjay. But the reality is it was changed back to its original plans of not being a part 1.

 

 

All of this is semantics. What does it matter if they call it part 1 & 2 or not? The point is the story was never meant to end with IW. Endgame simply doesn't make sense without IW and Endgame basically undoes everything that happened in IW. These movies are very much inseparable

 

The only thing is they have their own movie title, but you might as well have called them Avengers: Infinity War Part I and Avengers: Infinity War Part II. The problem is that it's a dead giveaway that what you're about to see in part 1 isn't definitive, so giving them their own movie titles makes sense. But it's essentially the same long movie

Edited September 5, 2019 by Alexdube

[justvision]

11 hours ago, HeadShot said:

It's true. I mean the movie literally has a 5 year time jump LOL. For sure not a part one. 

Time lapse is a poor argument. Many movies have 3 to 10 year time jump intra-movie.

 

There are valid arguments on both sides for and against this part 1 part 2 thing, almost comparably compelling IMO.

 

And there is probably part 10 of this debate I have seen. I am sure to see part 23 if I stay in this forum till next Avengers film.

Edited September 5, 2019 by justvision

[Krissykins]

16 hours ago, Thanos Legion said:

It wasn’t. People have been quiet on that front since it’s a stupid argument and the movie already came out.

Oh it definitely was. Endgame would make very little sense without seeing Infinity War. It’s a direct follow up. The first part ended on a cliffhanger. (No one thought for a second any of those characters would remain “dead”). 

15 hours ago, Walt Disney said:

IW is as much of a part 1 as Empire Strikes Back was a part 1. Not really a part 1. It just ends with the antagonist winning.

It’s a to-be-continued in part 2 basically. No one bought that being an “ending”.  

[LaughingEvans]

14 hours ago, Napoleon said:

The fact that Marvel Studios started being somewhat inclusive after it started being cool and profitable for companies doesn't erase what they have done in the past. Of course, their "change of heart" has to be celebrated and encouraged, no matter the financial motives behind it. But let's not pretend their first 10 years haven't been questionable in that regard.

 

Can I ask you an honest question? Do you believe the shit that you write or are you just trolling?

[Walt Disney]

5 hours ago, Alexdube said:

All of this is semantics. What does it matter if they call it part 1 & 2 or not? The point is the story was never meant to end with IW. Endgame simply doesn't make sense without IW and Endgame basically undoes everything that happened in IW. These movies are very much inseparable

 

The only thing is they have their own movie title, but you might as well have called them Avengers: Infinity War Part I and Avengers: Infinity War Part II. The problem is that it's a dead giveaway that what you're about to see in part 1 isn't definitive, so giving them their own movie titles makes sense. But it's essentially the same long movie

Endgame doesn’t make sense without IW in the same way that Princess Diaries 2 doesn’t make sense without The Princess Diaries. Most sequels build on the original movie. Rocky 2 would make no sense if you didn’t see Rocky.

 

IW is a film that tells the story of Thanos getting the necessary elements to assemble the Infinity Gauntlet. Once he assembles the Gauntlet and snaps his fingers, the plot is complete. It ends with the antagonist victorious. Endgame is about the after effects of what happened in IW. It is another installment in the franchise, but it isn’t one long movie broken into 2 parts. 

[MrGlass2]

Where did people get this idea that AEG was a Part 2??

 

[JimiQ]

20 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

Where did people get this idea that AEG was a Part 2??

 

Yeah, but both were released in april, so explain that ( /s )

[Kjtc]

The Part I / Part II thing is discussed in a Collider retrospective this week:

 

 

Quote

 

In April 2015, as filming was about to get underway on Captain America: Civil War, Marvel signed directors Joe and Anthony Russo to take the helm of Infinity War 1 and 2. That they were hired before even making Civil Warspeaks to the strength of not only their work on Captain America: The Winter Soldier, but also their working relationship with Marvel Studios throughout the development of that film and Civil War. Clearly the Russos and Marvel saw eye to eye on how to make these kinds of movies. The next month, the Russo Brothers’ Marvel screenwriters and MCU veterans Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely were tasked with writing the two-part epic.

However, at this time Marvel realized that Infinity War would no longer be a “Part 1” and “Part 2” scenario, despite their previous announcement. Feige explained that shortly after revealing the release dates and titles in October 2014, Marvel realized they wanted to make two distinct movies, not two half-movies:

“We announced [in 2014] Infinity War Part 1 and Part 2. Very soon after that, as we started talking about it, we realized that’s not really what we were doing, and that’s not really what we wanted to do. We didn’t wanna do half a movie and then half a movie. We wanted to do two distinct movies, and we can talk about is it a cliffhanger or not at the end of Infinity War—and it’s semantics perhaps—but we always looked at it as not a cliffhanger. Thanos won and the movie is over. And now that you’ve seen Endgame it’s a tonally very different movie than Infinity War and stylistically very different than Infinity War, which again was always the intention, so very soon after calling them Part 1 and Part 2, we said, ‘Oh we’re not gonna do that.’”

 

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Kjtc
Error

[Legion Again]

This is one of the stupidest debates in site history. Hopefully I have the good sense never to comment on it again. The only thing the Part 1/Part 2’ers demonstrate is that they don’t understand what makes something a Part 1+Part2.

[WittyUsername]

In the case of all the other “Part 1/Part 2” films of the past decade, they were based on a single book that got split into two separate movies. IW/EG represented a different situation from that. Sure, both films took inspiration from the Infinity Gauntlet storyline in the comics, but they weren’t exactly straightforward adaptations of it, especially not EG. 

[HeadShot]

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/warner-bros-developing-harry-potter-film-featuring-original-cast/

 

yikes. plz no

[WittyUsername]

27 minutes ago, HeadShot said:

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/warner-bros-developing-harry-potter-film-featuring-original-cast/

 

yikes. plz no

Can we please stop giving that website so much exposure?

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, WittyUsername said:

In the case of all the other “Part 1/Part 2” films of the past decade, they were based on a single book that got split into two separate movies.

If we allow to go to all the 2000s, Kill Bill Vol 1-2 was an original, Lord of the rings part 1-2-3 are not that old, Attack on the Titan part 1-2 was not on a single book, Hobbit part 1- 2-3 got split into 3 from one book I think ?

Edited September 5, 2019 by Barnack

[Alexdube]

1 hour ago, Thanos Legion said:

This is one of the stupidest debates in site history. Hopefully I have the good sense never to comment on it again. The only thing the Part 1/Part 2’ers demonstrate is that they don’t understand what makes something a Part 1+Part2.

Here's the reality: there is no authority or definition on what makes a "part 1 and a part 2" movie. It doesn't mean anything and both answers are valid. Are they 2 different movies? Yes technically they are. Are they part of the same larger story? Yes they are. It's just an editorial decision to give them different titles.

 

I think this "debate" isn't the real debate, it's simply a symptom of other questions about those movies. Do they stand on their own? Does Endgame diminishes the stakes of what happens in IW? etc.

 

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Alexdube