Comics and Movies

[Roadtrip635]

There is a misconception about ego. The majority of human beings have an inner Tarantino or a Scorsese or a Scott within them. It is demonstrated in the myriad of things we do, just in forms of different passions that may not have anything to do with directing movies, lol.

The minority of us have egos on steroids. It is a lifelong personality trait. I may be perceived as picking on Cameron just for his "passionate dislike" of movies I enjoy but he has been this way for decades.

There was an excellent 2009 article on Cameron from The New Yorker by Dana Goodyear called "Man of Extremes." I googled it and it is still available. It is a subscription site, so I will not be posting the link but first time readers can get free access to it on their initial visit.

The article provides some insightful examples of Cameron's personality. Perhaps some would still envision a guy having a typical big ego but it is actually much more than that. Not trying to change anyone's mind. Just stating what is.

"Passionate dislike" sounds kinda strong for someone that was supposed to film a SpiderMan movie and refers to it as "the greatest movie I never made,". I for one, would like to have seen that movie. Maybe you are just picking on him?

While plans for a "Spider-Man" movie eventually landed with "Evil Dead" trilogy filmmaker Sam Raimi at Sony Pictures, Cameron still laments the opportunity he missed, decades ago. In his new book, "Tech Noir: The Art of James Cameron," the filmmaker calls his unrealized version of the famed Marvel superhero "the greatest movie I never made,"

Read More: https://www.looper.com/678968/james...is-failed-spider-man-movie/?utm_campaign=clip

 

[Roadtrip635]

All that's left of humanity is on a speeding train that never stops...on a frozen Earth? What the...?

I never watched the series, but the movie was good. Chris Evans was good as the lead, but yeah the premise seemed odd at first, but kinda works watching the movie...lol

 

[DallasEast]

"Passionate dislike" sounds kinda strong for someone that was supposed to film a SpiderMan movie and refers to it as "the greatest movie I never made,". I for one, would like to have seen that movie. Maybe you are just picking on him?

While plans for a "Spider-Man" movie eventually landed with "Evil Dead" trilogy filmmaker Sam Raimi at Sony Pictures, Cameron still laments the opportunity he missed, decades ago. In his new book, "Tech Noir: The Art of James Cameron," the filmmaker calls his unrealized version of the famed Marvel superhero "the greatest movie I never made,"

Read More: https://www.looper.com/678968/james...is-failed-spider-man-movie/?utm_campaign=clip

Already know that story.

You do understand Cameron is essentially (and publicly) implying his directorship of a superhero movie, in this case Spider-Man, would have been much better than any such type film made before or in the future? Granted, I totally believe Cameron could back up his words. You will get zero argument from me that he could. As I have said before, I love his movies (no comment about Titanic though ).

However, these types of public commentary are not "big ego" based. They are narcissistic.

I will put it in another way. There are plenty of directors, top of the industry directors, with big egos. And I have zero proof to backup my next statement. I seriously doubt anyone could research and find "many" examples of big ego directors gushing about movies they could have made, in the same particular film genre they negatively compare their own movies against.

For example, Scorsese has been highly critical of superhero movies. Called them amusement theme parks. That's criticism by itself, good or bad. On the other hand, I doubt there are many quotes of him saying, "I could have taken <fill in a superhero name> movie and made it Oscar worthy. I think about not doing one all the time."

 

[Roadtrip635]

Already know that story.

You do understand Cameron is essentially (and publicly) implying his directorship of a superhero movie, in this case Spider-Man, would have been much better than any such type film made before or in the future? Granted, I totally believe Cameron could back up his words. You will get zero argument from me that he could. As I have said before, I love his movies (no comment about Titanic though ).

However, these types of public commentary are not "big ego" based. They are narcissistic.

I will put it in another way. There are plenty of directors, top of the industry directors, with big egos. And I have zero proof to backup my next statement. I seriously doubt anyone could research and find "many" examples of big ego directors gushing about movies they could have made, in the same particular film genre they negatively compare their own movies against.

For example, Scorsese has been highly critical of superhero movies. Called them amusement theme parks. That's criticism by itself, good or bad. On the other hand, I doubt there are many quotes of him saying, "I could have taken <fill in a superhero name> movie and made it Oscar worthy. I think about not doing one all the time."

Seems like an awful lot of "implying" going on there....lol. It certainly could have been the best ever.... at least up to that point, what were there 3 or 4 by the early/mid 90's. I am with you on Titanic.
I didn't really take away that he was implying that it would be the greatest supe movie ever, but seemed like he was genuinely excited by the project. He was just sharing what his version would have been like, more real world vs comic book world, wanting to explore the character and tell a compelling story. I don't know if the Scorsese example really works there, since hasn't shown interest and never signed up to actually make a superhero movie. I will say if Scorsese ever decides to make a Punisher movie, my first response will be......

I'm not saying Cameron doesn't have a big ego, he certainly does, but it also seems that some people can be hypersensitive (read comic book nerds ) to anything they may perceive as criticism.

 

[DallasEast]

Seems like an awful lot of "implying" going on there....lol. It certainly could have been the best ever.... at least up to that point, what were there 3 or 4 by the early/mid 90's. I am with you on Titanic.
I didn't really take away that he was implying that it would be the greatest supe movie ever, but seemed like he was genuinely excited by the project. He was just sharing what his version would have been like, more real world vs comic book world, wanting to explore the character and tell a compelling story. I don't know if the Scorsese example really works there, since hasn't shown interest and never signed up to actually make a superhero movie. I will say if Scorsese ever decides to make a Punisher movie, my first response will be......

I'm not saying Cameron doesn't have a big ego, he certainly does, but it also seems that some people can be hypersensitive (read comic book nerds ) to anything they may perceive as criticism.

I did not say "greatest supe movie ever". I said "much better". And no one should say projects do not excite him. The article I mentioned earlier clearly backs that up. Heck, everyone working around him gets excited too. Some to the point of probably wanting to choke him lol.

Again, as far as ego examples are concerned, I would say Scorsese has a big ego. Psychologically, Cameron's ego is far larger than big. Just my opinion.

 

[Roadtrip635]

I did not say "greatest supe movie ever". I said "much better". And no one should say projects do not excite him. The article I mentioned earlier clearly backs that up. Heck, everyone working around him gets excited too. Some to the point of probably wanting to choke him lol.

Again, as far as ego examples are concerned, I would say Scorsese has a big ego. Psychologically, Cameron's ego is far larger than big. Just my opinion.

Yes you did say "much better", but the quote was

would have been much better than any such type film made before or in the future?

Just asking for a friend (please don't ban me ) but if something was much better than something before it or in the future, wouldn't that make it the best or greatest ever?

 

[Runwildboys]

Yes you did say "much better", but the quote was

Just asking for a friend (please don't ban me ) but if something was much better than something before it or in the future, wouldn't that make it the best or greatest ever?

 

[nobody]

Superman vs Thor: Which superhero would win in a fight?
By Jakob Barnes | The Digital Fix
July 12, 2022



Who would win in a fight between Superman and Thor? These two comic book characters are quite literally gods, and two of the most iconic faces from the DCEU and MCU respectively. You may have often found yourself wondering who is more powerful though, so it’s time to settle that debate once and for all.

Superman is from the planet Krypton, which was destroyed when he was just a baby. The final act of his father, Jor-El, was to send young Kal-El to Earth in an escape pod. When the little alien lands on our planet, he is adopted by Martha and Jonathan Kent, but it soon becomes apparent that Clark, as they name him, has superhuman abilities thanks to Earth’s low gravity and the power of our sun.

Thor, on the other hand, is the god of thunder and the first in line for the throne of Asgard, a race of Viking-like warriors from space. In the MCU timeline, Thor comes to Earth to retrieve his nefarious brother Loki, and ends up putting his magic hammer Mjölnir to good use when he joins the Avengers. But, is he strong enough to defeat the Man of Steel?

Read more

Even on Earth, Thor would give Superman a run for his money simply because Thor's abilities in the comic are counted as magic. It's why Shazam comes out on top sometimes against Superman without kryptonite. Generally on Earth or within Earth's orbit of the sun, Supes takes the win though. If it is elsewhere the article is right, Thor's chances go way up. If it's comic and not cinematic Thor after his father's death thus giving Thor the Odinforce on top of his own powers, Supes probably doesn't stand a chance much of the time. If it's under the light of a red star, Supes loses every time. If it's right by a yellow sun (within the orbit of Mercury) or in one, Thor probably doesn't stand a chance even with the Odinforce. The theoretical battle depends on the circumstances like they said, but generally Supes is stronger all things considered.

 

[DallasEast]

Yes you did say "much better", but the quote was

Just asking for a friend (please don't ban me ) but if something was much better than something before it or in the future, wouldn't that make it the best or greatest ever?

That would depend on the final product. I would be the last person to bet against Cameron's capability. Regardless, my main point is still about how his personality trait drives his vocal opinions of the MCU.

Just waiting on the release of Avatar: The Way of Water sequel later this year. I am hoping for it to be an even better success than the original movie for two reasons. Selfishly, I was blown away by the first film and want that feeling repeated again. Secondly, I will be awaiting his comments of the movie's box office because I am certain he will compare his work with the MCU again. And no, it is not necessary for him to make comparisons even if the media questions him. That is his choice.

 

[Runwildboys]

Even on Earth, Thor would give Superman a run for his money simply because Thor's abilities in the comic are counted as magic. It's why Shazam comes out on top sometimes against Superman without kryptonite. Generally on Earth or within Earth's orbit of the sun, Supes takes the win though. If it is elsewhere the article is right, Thor's chances go way up. If it's comic and not cinematic Thor after his father's death thus giving Thor the Odinforce on top of his own powers, Supes probably doesn't stand a chance much of the time. If it's under the light of a red star, Supes loses every time. If it's right by a yellow sun (within the orbit of Mercury) or in one, Thor probably doesn't stand a chance even with the Odinforce. The theoretical battle depends on the circumstances like they said, but generally Supes is stronger all things considered.

It's always bothered me when I've seen Superman fly out of our solar system.

Also, I was watching Superman and Lois , and

Spoiler

his powers were completely drained, so his brother flew him to the Sun and threw him in. How did he not freeze or suffocate on the way there? Oh, and they had a conversation, just outside the corona.

I'm a huge fan of Supes, and I really like the show, but they need to put more thought into it, or at least give some type of explanation, no matter how implausible.

 

[DallasEast]

It's always bothered me when I've seen Superman fly out of our solar system.

Also, I was watching Superman and Lois , and

Spoiler

his powers were completely drained, so his brother flew him to the Sun and threw him in. How did he not freeze or suffocate on the way there? Oh, and they had a conversation, just outside the corona.

I'm a huge fan of Supes, and I really like the show, but they need to put more thought into it, or at least give some type of explanation, no matter how implausible.

Spoiler

Crap! I should start watching this show! Are you telling me the Last Son of Krypton has a brother in this series??? Good gravy!

 

[quickccc]

Even on Earth, Thor would give Superman a run for his money simply because Thor's abilities in the comic are counted as magic. It's why Shazam comes out on top sometimes against Superman without kryptonite. Generally on Earth or within Earth's orbit of the sun, Supes takes the win though. If it is elsewhere the article is right, Thor's chances go way up. If it's comic and not cinematic Thor after his father's death thus giving Thor the Odinforce on top of his own powers, Supes probably doesn't stand a chance much of the time. If it's under the light of a red star, Supes loses every time. If it's right by a yellow sun (within the orbit of Mercury) or in one, Thor probably doesn't stand a chance even with the Odinforce. The theoretical battle depends on the circumstances like they said, but generally Supes is stronger all things considered.

Good point. Supposedly there's two elements that Superman is most vulnerable to .. Kryptonite and Magic.

Normally the Man of Steel is not affected by lightning bolts and storms, but if since Mjolnir hammer possesses mystical properties
and there's even the mystical energies within Thor's body himself, there could be a different effect from lighting, winds and storms on
Superman than the average.

Only if magic is applied could Thor defeat Superman, imo.
Otherwise if it was brute vs brute ..Superman would best Thor, much like the Hulk singlehandedly has walloped Thor to near death ( ala Hulk vs.... animation)

 

[quickccc]

https://screenrant.com/tag/kraven/

Kraven the Hunter: Release date, cast and latest news (January, 2023 last rumored)

The iconic villain is finally getting his own movie.

How do you feel about Kraven Hunter having his own full scale live action movie ?

What makes him different and better than other Spidey enemies, such as Dr. Octopus, Green Goblin, Scorpion, Vermin, Electro, Mysterio, Hobglobin,
and others that he has to have his own live action movie ?

 

[Stash]

https://screenrant.com/tag/kraven/

Kraven the Hunter: Release date, cast and latest news (January, 2023 last rumored)

The iconic villain is finally getting his own movie.

How do you feel about Kraven Hunter having his own full scale live action movie ?

What makes him different and better than other Spidey enemies, such as Dr. Octopus, Green Goblin, Scorpion, Vermin, Electro, Mysterio, Hobglobin,
and others that he has to have his own live action movie ?

I think this is another disaster-in-the-making for Sony, just like Morbius. They’re trying to capitalize on as much of the Spider-Man intellectual property as they can, but these characters aren’t interesting enough to stand on their own without Spidey.

 

[DallasEast]

https://screenrant.com/tag/kraven/

Kraven the Hunter: Release date, cast and latest news (January, 2023 last rumored)

The iconic villain is finally getting his own movie.

How do you feel about Kraven Hunter having his own full scale live action movie ?

What makes him different and better than other Spidey enemies, such as Dr. Octopus, Green Goblin, Scorpion, Vermin, Electro, Mysterio, Hobglobin,
and others that he has to have his own live action movie ?

In my opinion, he is more clever than anyone on that list with the exception of Green Goblin. His agility is top notch. While he had some bouts of insanity, he is nowhere as nuts as everyone else on that list.

 

[Runwildboys]

Spoiler

Crap! I should start watching this show! Are you telling me the Last Son of Krypton has a brother in this series??? Good gravy!

And two sons.

 

[quickccc]

I think this is another disaster-in-the-making for Sony, just like Morbius. They’re trying to capitalize on as much of the Spider-Man intellectual property as they can, but these characters aren’t interesting enough to stand on their own without Spidey.

Pre-Sony, I could’ve easily seen Morbius' solo movie having success without Spiderman- because of the vampire- mania intrigue, origin of his pseudo-vampiric nature, and hematology scientific background, superhuman physical traits and abilities that surround and support his flight abilities.

- By as any movie, character or story, it depends upon the studio and the director. Thus with wrong direction on every account, Morbius was doomed to fail.
What could have easily tied into a spinoff to the Midnight Sons, ..Man Thing, ..Werewolf by Night,.. Santana, a much better re-boot Ghost Rider, and even
Red Hulk and Doc Sampson, seem to all been flushed down now with that wreck of a bomb by Sony's Morbius.

- With Kraven, as you said, it seems like they really just trying to sell off the name of Spiderman to which Marvel comic followers will know Kraven, but not the general audience.

- Just like Moon Knight, I could’ve seen Kraven being in a Disney series of his own, but not his own live action film .at the big screen.

 

[quickccc]

I think this is another disaster-in-the-making for Sony, just like Morbius. They’re trying to capitalize on as much of the Spider-Man intellectual property as they can, but these characters aren’t interesting enough to stand on their own without Spidey.

And i need to look this Comic thread again or google research into why Disney has not yet bought over the Marvel rights from Sony, as they have with
Fox Century Studios.

 

[Stash]

And i need to look this Comic thread again or google research into why Disney has not yet bought over the Marvel rights from Sony, as they have with
Fox Century Studios.

Because Sony isn’t interested in giving up their cash cow.

 

[DallasEast]

And two sons.

That I knew. It's just the birds and the bees.

Spoiler

What surprised me was a story that included survivors of Krypton more than Kal-El and Kara Zor-El. I learn something new every day.