rukaio101 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I mean come on Marvel! Iron man 3 was Strike one, this is Strike two.. Thor better be a hit or else.. Says the guy with Man of Steel as his avatar. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Says the guy with Man of Steel as his avatar. so? I'm a huge superman fan, and Man of Steel had it's issues, but it was still 10x better then Iron man 3, and I like both DC and Marvel, but I think DC is heading in a better Darker more serious direction and I fear that Pretty soon Marvel is just going to be for kids... Edited October 1, 2013 by Kalo21 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted October 1, 2013 Community Manager Share Posted October 1, 2013 Apparently there's a post-credits scene in tonight's episode...I'm against the idea of doing that in television, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Apparently there's a post-credits scene in tonight's episode... That's kind of a silly thing to do for TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rukaio101 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 so? I'm a huge superman fan, and Man of Steel had it's issues, but it was still 10x better then Iron man 3, and I like both DC and Marvel, but I think DC is heading in a better Darker more serious direction and I fear that Pretty soon Marvel is just going to be for kids... Darker and more serious doesn't necessarily mean better. Especially when the moviemakers obviously don't understand how to use darkness to improve quality (like the people behind MoS). Honestly, I'd even struggle to call MoS a 'dark' movie. The darkest thing about it was the lighting. Occasionally throwing around pseudo-philosophical cr*p which falls apart under any close inspection isn't dark. Neither is levelling a city and promptly forgetting about it. Hell, the original Superman had darker moments than MoS. Lois Lane's death, for example (even if it was undone incredibly stupid). Anyway, I consider Iron Man 3 to be at least 100x better than MoS. Then again, I consider Herpes to be about 4/5x better than MoS, so that's not much of an achievement. I'd also point out that IM3 and Agents of SHIELD are much higher rated by critics than MoS. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 so? I'm a huge superman fan, and Man of Steel had it's issues, but it was still 10x better then Iron man 3, and I like both DC and Marvel, but I think DC is heading in a better Darker more serious direction and I fear that Pretty soon Marvel is just going to be for kids... :rofl: :rofl:It's like they don't even try anymore. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Apparently there's a post-credits scene in tonight's episode...Is it the tease that hinted at Fury's cameo? I read that somewhere. Making it a post-credit scene is just silly. Should just be future episodes' previews or something of the likes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Darker and more serious doesn't necessarily mean better. Especially when the moviemakers obviously don't understand how to use darkness to improve quality (like the people behind MoS). Honestly, I'd even struggle to call MoS a 'dark' movie. The darkest thing about it was the lighting. Occasionally throwing around pseudo-philosophical cr*p which falls apart under any close inspection isn't dark. Neither is levelling a city and promptly forgetting about it. Hell, the original Superman had darker moments than MoS. Lois Lane's death, for example (even if it was undone incredibly stupid). Anyway, I consider Iron Man 3 to be at least 100x better than MoS. Then again, I consider Herpes to be about 4/5x better than MoS, so that's not much of an achievement. I'd also point out that IM3 and Agents of SHIELD are much higher rated by critics than MoS. Well your obviously bias, against Man of Steel. and sure a film doesn't have to be dark to be good, but in order to be lasting and enduring it has to have depth and a story you care about, something Iron Man 3 failed to do for me. I personally think the story was kind of a mess, and I only saw it once, and I didn't HATE it. but it was a major let down for me. and as For Agents of S.H.I.E.D. a lot of people aren't diggin it look on IMDB, and just because Critics like something is better, Am I suppose to turn off my brain and follow blindly what they say? a good critic would want you to make your own opinion, and we are all our own critics and I'm not going to like or dislike something just because someone tells me to. and how could you compare a movie with a disease? Man of Steel is a movie and I do think it had some script issues and a couple other things wrong with it, I loved it overall, lots of people did. and thought it was a big step in the right direction, and trying to make someone feel to stupid just because they like or dislike it is just immature. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rukaio101 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Well your obviously bias, against Man of Steel. Is that what they call disliking a film nowadays? and sure a film doesn't have to be dark to be good, but in order to be lasting and enduring it has to have depth and a story you care about, Both of which Man of Steel lack. Unless you mean depths of stupidity. a lot of people aren't diggin it look on IMDB, The pilot of Agents of SHIELD currently has 7.6 on IMDB. Do you and I have different definitions of the words 'aren't digging it'? and just because Critics like something is better, Am I suppose to turn off my brain and follow blindly what they say? a good critic would want you to make your own opinion, and we are all our own critics and I'm not going to like or dislike something just because someone tells me to. You're welcome to have your own opinion, but when you go on a public forum and claim that 'Marvel is on strike 2' with a glaring MoS avatar, you'd damn well better be prepared to be called out on it. You can't just claim 'it's my opinion' without any argument backing it up and expect everyone to just go along with it. Man of Steel is a movie and I do think it had some script issues and a couple other things wrong with it,. I think it had much more than 'a couple of things' wrong with it and thought it was a big step in the right direction, Hah. No it wasn't. If anything, it was a step completely in the wrong way and proof that WB have absolutely no idea what made TDK/Marvel so popular. The reason Marvel's movies work so well is because they get people who know the character and have a working vision for the movie and let them just get on with it, only interfering when necessary. Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy worked the same way. He had a vision for the character and just got on with it. However, Man of Steel isn't like that. Man of Steel was just WB trying to force a Nolan-style Batman movie with Superman, which just doesn't work because Batman and Superman are very different characters. And it felt forced as a result and turned out like a cheap Batman copy without any of the stuff that made Batman entertaining in the first place. And this isn't the first time WB have tried this. Green Lantern was an attempt to force GL into the 'Marvel formula' to try and simulate Marvel's success. From the sounds of things, WB are trying to build their DCCU by forcing characters into Nolan-style 'gritty' movies, which just won't work for many of them, instead of giving them to people who know what they're doing and have interesting, working ideas for the characters. Hence, they're going in the wrong direction. and trying to make someone feel to stupid just because they like or dislike it is just immature. Again, you're the one who came on here claiming Iron Man 3 and Agents of SHIELD were 'strike outs', so don't suddenly try backing out when someone calls you on something you like. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Is that what they call disliking a film nowadays? Both of which Man of Steel lack. Unless you mean depths of stupidity. The pilot of Agents of SHIELD currently has 7.6 on IMDB. Do you and I have different definitions of the words 'aren't digging it'? You're welcome to have your own opinion, but when you go on a public forum and claim that 'Marvel is on strike 2' with a glaring MoS avatar, you'd damn well better be prepared to be called out on it. You can't just claim 'it's my opinion' without any argument backing it up and expect everyone to just go along with it. I think it had much more than 'a couple of things' wrong with it Hah. No it wasn't. If anything, it was a step completely in the wrong way and proof that WB have absolutely no idea what made TDK/Marvel so popular. The reason Marvel's movies work so well is because they get people who know the character and have a working vision for the movie and let them just get on with it, only interfering when necessary. Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy worked the same way. He had a vision for the character and just got on with it. However, Man of Steel isn't like that. Man of Steel was just WB trying to force a Nolan-style Batman movie with Superman, which just doesn't work because Batman and Superman are very different characters. And it felt forced as a result and turned out like a cheap Batman copy without any of the stuff that made Batman entertaining in the first place. And this isn't the first time WB have tried this. Green Lantern was an attempt to force GL into the 'Marvel formula' to try and simulate Marvel's success. From the sounds of things, WB are trying to build their DCCU by forcing characters into Nolan-style 'gritty' movies, which just won't work for many of them, instead of giving them to people who know what they're doing and have interesting, working ideas for the characters. Hence, they're going in the wrong direction. Again, you're the one who came on here claiming Iron Man 3 and Agents of SHIELD were 'strike outs', so don't suddenly try backing out when someone calls you on something you like. I see your point, however your opinion of Man of Steel is still subjective, if you want to see statistics Man of Steel has 0.2 points higher then Iron Man 3. with 7.6 and 7.4 respectively, and over 200 thousand ratings and have both been out for months, while Agents of SHIELD just premiered last week and has a little over a thousand ratings. and i do agree to an extent that WB tried a little to hard to push MoS to DK tones, and is something they hopefully will work on in the future, and in fact up until Iron Man 3 came out, I was Marvel's biggest fan. I LOVED The Avengers when it came out, and thought their formula for the series was genius. but it's starting to feel from the last couple things marvel has to offer, to me and quite a few other people, that they are starting to feel artificial and generic. and they need to get more creative if they want to keep up their brand. Edited October 1, 2013 by Kalo21 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incarnadine Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Ah, the age old battle of DC vs. Marvel is rearing up again. There's only 1 way to settle things... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamKendall Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) DC vs. Marvel back and forth arguing ... That's how I feel ... I think both are ... or at least CAN be awesome. Edited October 1, 2013 by Adam 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesypoofs Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 When do you guys think we will find out what really happened with Coulson between TA an AoS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesypoofs Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Nick Fury Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
druv10 Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) Solid episode and loved the Fury cameo. Edited October 2, 2013 by druv10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamKendall Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 I didn't really like that episode very much ... at least the cameo at the end was worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Decent episode, dat Samjack made it amazing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 The plot of the episode was kind of dull but the cast chemistry is improving which is promising for future eps. And the cameo at the end... lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 When do you guys think we will find out what really happened with Coulson between TA an AoS? End of the season probably Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
druv10 Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 The plot of the episode was kind of dull but the cast chemistry is improving which is promising for future eps. And the cameo at the end... lol Yeah, Skye wasn't as annoying as pilot and chemistry was definitely better between the cast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
