Comics and Movies

[DallasEast]

I have no problem at all with the first three Xmen films (original Xmen, ...United.. and First Class) as well Days of Future Past

Need your opinion. Which of the following do you feel was the better end-product of the actual story?

• Singer's film? or
• Chris Claremont and John Byrne's two-part story?

For what it's worth, I agree 100% about X-Men: First Class, directed by Matthew Vaughn--not (thankfully) Bryan Singer.

 

[quickccc]

Need your opinion. Which of the following do you feel was the better end-product of the actual story?

• Singer's film? or
• Chris Claremont and John Byrne's two-part story?

For what it's worth, I agree 100% about X-Men: First Class, directed by Matthew Vaughn--not (thankfully) Bryan Singer.

Great question, ...

More likely Claremont- Byrne Future past - especially including Rachel summers, etc.

but when it comes to films, there is a shorter limit and span that has to be implemented, vs
what one can do, in the books.

Speaking of Days of Future Past, i did like the 90's animation version that had Bishop as the mutant hunter , instead of Rachel Summers in the comics.

 

[DallasEast]

Great question, ...

More likely Claremont- Byrne Future past - especially including Rachel summers, etc.

but when it comes to films, there is a shorter limit and span that has to be implemented, vs
what one can do, in the books.

Speaking of Days of Future Past, i did like the 90's animation version that had Bishop as the mutant hunter , instead of Rachel Summers in the comics.

The cartoon series took too many liberties with the original story just like Singer. I take the show over the movie. At least the two-part episode was primarily neutered for a Saturday morning kids audience. What was Singer's excuse? That is a rhetorical question of course.

 

[quickccc]

Need your opinion. Which of the following do you feel was the better end-product of the actual story?

• Singer's film? or
• Chris Claremont and John Byrne's two-part story?

For what it's worth, I agree 100% about X-Men: First Class, directed by Matthew Vaughn--not (thankfully) Bryan Singer.

I actually thought between Vaugh’s First Class… vs Bryan Singer’s Xmen United,.. it was very razor-thin, instead of head and shoulders.in comparisons.

- I barely give the nod to First Class, despite the very last scene from First Class ,with Magneto and that awkward, new and dorky, USFL looking helmet he was wearing when he broke Emma the White Queen out of her jail cell for the very final scene.

But with First Class,I can’t describe how much oh so loved the Magneto “ serenity “ scenes with Xavier in magnetically lifting a huge radar satellite ..and of course magnetically
pulling an enormous submarine from the ocean waters, the music score with it
… those were easily the two biggest wow scenes in any Xmen movies.

Not because of just the wow action sequences and special effects, but they were very inspiring, emotional moving moments ..
And then add Xavier permanently paralysis to the mix along with first appearance of a younger Xavier and Magento, Hell fire club and Mystiques/Xavier friendship.

- Singer’s Xmen United, I thought it had a great blend of plot write, emotional heart-felt, acting and direction, and the fact that a prominent, very popular Xmen member
was lost. The build up to the self-sacrifice of Jean Grey, and the way she decided to end her life in an effort to save her fellow mates and beloved Cyclops, ...the facial emotions
from Scott, Logan and Professor X.

Even the emotional mood and stage was still there when the Xmen confronted the President when explaining the losses and dire need to act against an agenda movement.
The final epilogue send off given by Xavier to complete the film.

Plus Xmen United first introduced Nightcrawler and Colossus, and first displayed Wolverine berserk claws vs human beings.

 

[quickccc]

The cartoon series took too many liberties with the original story just like Singer. I take the show over the movie. At least the two-part episode was primarily neutered for a Saturday morning kids audience. What was Singer's excuse? That is a rhetorical question of course.

Film budget costs and limited span could be a big excuse. Just like novels vs films, you can place a lot more details and script in a book or animation series than
a film, ..unless you wanna make that length film like the Watchman (2 hours and 43 minutes !! )

My biggest problem with Bryan Singer is i felt he placed way too much time and investment in focusing on Magneto that led into Apocalyse, when it was already covered in
First Class and Days of Future Past,.. geeez here goes more of the Magneto origin ,and it becomes a burnt out .." ok we've been there- done that."

Can you not go to an origin another prominent figure in the Xmen ?...... Jean Grey, Xavier or Storm ?

 

[DallasEast]

I actually thought between Vaugh’s First Class… vs Bryan Singer’s Xmen United,.. it was very razor-thin, instead of head and shoulders.in comparisons.

- I barely give the nod to First Class, despite the very last scene from First Class ,with Magneto and that awkward, new and dorky, USFL looking helmet he was wearing when he broke Emma the White Queen out of her jail cell for the very final scene.

But with First Class,I can’t describe how much oh so loved the Magneto “ serenity “ scenes with Xavier in magnetically lifting a huge radar satellite ..and of course magnetically
pulling an enormous submarine from the ocean waters, the music score with it
… those were easily the two biggest wow scenes in any Xmen movies.

Not because of just the wow action sequences and special effects, but they were very inspiring, emotional moving moments ..
And then add Xavier permanently paralysis to the mix along with first appearance of a younger Xavier and Magento, Hell fire club and Mystiques/Xavier friendship.

- Singer’s Xmen United, I thought it had a great blend of plot write, emotional heart-felt, acting and direction, and the fact that a prominent, very popular Xmen member
was lost. The build up to the self-sacrifice of Jean Grey, and the way she decided to end her life in an effort to save her fellow mates and beloved Cyclops, ...the facial emotions
from Scott, Logan and Professor X.

Even the emotional mood and stage was still there when the Xmen confronted the President when explaining the losses and dire need to act against an agenda movement.
The final epilogue send off given by Xavier to complete the film.

Plus Xmen United first introduced Nightcrawler and Colossus, and first displayed Wolverine berserk claws vs human beings.

Our opinions are on opposite sides of the same coin concerning those two films.

 

[quickccc]

Our opinions are on opposite sides of the same coin concerning those two films.

But you'd give the nod to Matthew Vaugh's First Class over Stinger's United ? .. or is it vice versa ?

 

[DallasEast]

Film budget costs and limited span could be a big excuse. Just like novels vs films, you can place a lot more details and script in a book or animation series than
a film, ..unless you wanna make that length film like the Watchman (2 hours and 43 minutes !! )

Singer is receiving excuses I do not believe he deserves. He was a co-writer for X-Men, X-Men: United, X-Men: First Class and X-Men Apocalypse. However, he did not have a strong influence or say so over one of the screenplays in particular since he did not direct *drumroll* X:FS.

Directors have the ultimate say on how screenplays translate to screen. It would not surprise me if Matthew Vaughan interpretation of X-FS screenplay was notably different from Singer's. And thankfully so.

My biggest problem with Bryan Singer is i felt he placed way too much time and investment in focusing on Magneto that led into Apocalyse, when it was already covered in
First Class and Days of Future Past,.. geeez here goes more of the Magneto origin ,and it becomes a burnt out .." ok we've been there- done that."

Can you not go to an origin another prominent figure in the Xmen ?...... Jean Grey, Xavier or Storm ?

um.

Tell me you are not shocked.

Didn't that overuse seem familiar?

He did the exact same thing with Hugh Jackman! In every mutant film he directed before X:A. In my opinion, the entire audience should be grateful he did not have Michael Fassbender AND Jackman for X-Men: Apocalypse. After all, everyone got a taste of that very same preferred crutch in X: DOFP.

Singer.

 

[DallasEast]

But you'd give the nod to Matthew Vaugh's First Class over Stinger's United ? .. or is it vice versa ?

Answer: X-Men: First Class. And it's not close.

Awhile back, I created an animated gif sarcastically illustrating my opinions of all the mutant movies starting with X-Men and ended before the release of The New Mutants. It is easy to follow. The higher the Batmobile travels, the higher my opinion of a film. The lower the Batmobile travels, the lower my opinion of that particular movie. I have re-posted it below

As anyone can see, the Batmobile drives up a good size hill for X2 but climbs the second highest incline to reach X: FC along the road.

You would be right if the Batmobile appears to drive off a cliff for X-Men: The Last Stand.

 

[Stash]

Disney+'s X-Men '97 Series Reveals New Leader And Nostalgic Characters For Marvel's First Big Return To Mutants



https://www.cinemablend.com/superhe...cters-for-marvels-first-big-return-to-mutants

 

[Roadtrip635]

The 10 Worst Trends In The MCU, Ranked
With several superhero movies and TV shows, the MCU has developed a formula for success, but this means Marvel has some predictable trends as well.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe has managed to maintain its incredible prominence through nearly fifteen years of sprawling continuity, staying true to its formula while taking whatever opportunities it can to push its own boundaries. It's an undeniably impressive feat, though one that may run into trouble.
The current Phase Four, which includes films like Thor: Love and Thunder and The Eternals and TV shows like Hawkeye and Ms. Marvel, has been the worst critically reviewed phase in the MCU's lifespan. While this could be attributed to franchise fatigue, it's more likely that audiences are resistant to certain new and ongoing trends in the universe.
https://www.cbr.com/worst-trends-in-the-mcu/

 

[VaqueroTD]

The 10 Worst Trends In The MCU, Ranked
With several superhero movies and TV shows, the MCU has developed a formula for success, but this means Marvel has some predictable trends as well.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe has managed to maintain its incredible prominence through nearly fifteen years of sprawling continuity, staying true to its formula while taking whatever opportunities it can to push its own boundaries. It's an undeniably impressive feat, though one that may run into trouble.
The current Phase Four, which includes films like Thor: Love and Thunder and The Eternals and TV shows like Hawkeye and Ms. Marvel, has been the worst critically reviewed phase in the MCU's lifespan. While this could be attributed to franchise fatigue, it's more likely that audiences are resistant to certain new and ongoing trends in the universe.
https://www.cbr.com/worst-trends-in-the-mcu/

Agree with some of them. I haven't seen Thor 4 yet and sounds like a lot of these comments are coming from recent experiences watching Eternals, Dr Strange 2 and Thor 4.

Couple of comments...

#10 Everything needs to be funny. It's not just MCU. Even the DC classic Superman and Batman franchises went this direction. Remember Superman III with Richard Pryor? LOL Or Batman and Robin? Or Spiderman III with the big dance number in a jazz club with Tobey Maguire? Something about studios can't resist getting campier in sequels.

#7 MCU has to kill every villain. Agree that they don't bring back enough of their classic villains and also want to say this is where DC really screwed up. They were trying to build their own Avengers, i.e. Justice League, so fast they lost sight of something that sets them apart from Marvel. They have the best, most famous villains. I guess they were trying to do something like that with the end credit scene in Superman vs Batman where Deathstroke meets Lex Luthor about the Legion of Doom. What kid didn't grow up in the 70's and 80's and not love the League of Super Heroes vs Legion of Doom cartoons? And Batman is full of great stories where his villains team up and so far they have yet to bring more than 2 together? I think I read they were going to bring back Heath Ledger's Joker in the third Nolan Batman film if he hadn't died, but Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, etc... Batman is loaded with villains. Marvel STILL beat them to the punch with the last Spider-Man movie and that Sinister Six from all the films. Spider-Man is probably as close as Marvel gets to having a Batman villain line-up like DC. DC just stinks at making these films.

 

[DallasEast]

Disney+'s X-Men '97 Series Reveals New Leader And Nostalgic Characters For Marvel's First Big Return To Mutants



https://www.cinemablend.com/superhe...cters-for-marvels-first-big-return-to-mutants

@Roadtrip635 , this tidbit may be of interest:

On the villains front, Mister Sinister is serving as X-Men ’97’s main antagonist, with head writer Beau DeMayo saying that the character is “back in a big way.”

It could be a huge stretch on my part but bringing back Sinister as the new Big Bad may have implications for live action movies and shows in the future--for example, a particular Hayley Atwell (voice) initial appearance in What If...? and subsequent appearance in Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.

Disney/Marvel have strongly demonstrated they attempt to tie as many storyline elements together as possible. In my opinion, Sinister getting a much larger platform allows the character to act upon his malevolent scientific schemes. And any Marvel mutant fan knows the end-product of Sinister's #1 all-time evil scheme:

Could translate into a movie down the road. Like Captain Murtaugh said, "Real thin." I know but I'm rolling with it.

 

[DallasEast]

The 10 Worst Trends In The MCU, Ranked
With several superhero movies and TV shows, the MCU has developed a formula for success, but this means Marvel has some predictable trends as well.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe has managed to maintain its incredible prominence through nearly fifteen years of sprawling continuity, staying true to its formula while taking whatever opportunities it can to push its own boundaries. It's an undeniably impressive feat, though one that may run into trouble.
The current Phase Four, which includes films like Thor: Love and Thunder and The Eternals and TV shows like Hawkeye and Ms. Marvel, has been the worst critically reviewed phase in the MCU's lifespan. While this could be attributed to franchise fatigue, it's more likely that audiences are resistant to certain new and ongoing trends in the universe.
https://www.cbr.com/worst-trends-in-the-mcu/

~slowly exhales~ Okay.

10. Everything Needs To Be Funny - Agree but do not agree with the implication that it is a problem for many of the MCU films. For me, it was a problem with both Taika Waititi movies. However, the majority of the films have a good mix of humor and drama. And the few that have been intentionally humorous like the Guardians and Spider-Man movies have been done either well or extremely well. Moon Knight is the only television series that has tried too hard and stumbled with misused humor.

9. Every Movie Needs To Be A 3-Hour Epic - Pure exaggeration that is likely due to personal attention spans. 29 MCU films so far. Eternals clocks in between 2 1/2 and 3 hours. 20 movies are between 2 and 2 1/2 hours long. Seven movies are under 2 hours.

Only Avengers: Endgame runs over three hours. By a minute. Yes. It is long but does it need to be three hours? In hindsight, I would say no. In fact, I would have preferred it be fleshed out more. For example, more detail could have been assigned to:

• Captain Marvel's space rescue. Space is infinitely vast. Exactly how did Danvers locate Stark & Crew and return them to Earth?
• Soul Stone importance. The Hawkeye/Black Widow fight seemed too brief (wonder if their fight in The Avengers was longer).
• Captain America's returning of the Infinity Stones. Just one sequence of him returning A stone to its proper place in the timeline would have been sufficient AND would not have disturbed the Steve/Peggy reunion at the end.

8. The Multiverse Of Cameos - Disagree. The Illuminati cameos reinforced the multiverse plot, not weaken it. It is regrettable that some of the audience does not know the characters represented by cameos but that is not the films' problem UNLESS the characters are not explained (no matter how briefly) to the audience.

7. MCU Films Always Kill The Villain - Mostly disagree. Phases 1 through 3 were about Thanos. Loved Ultron but there was no need for the character afterwards. Pick a movie from that stretch. Are there any deceased villains anyone wanted to see again? Also, Loki was a villain. He survived for more appearances. Speaking of cameos, Ronan the Accuser got *****slapped in Guardians Vol I. He showed up again in Captain Marvel. There are holes in the always kill the villain exaggeration.

6. Keep The Heroes Alive At All Costs - Should I agree or disagree? I want comic book movie adaptations. I have read thousands of comics. Heroes deaths and rebirths are the norm for most comics. The Walking Dead is based on a comic. "Heroes" die in it and do not come back unless zombiefied. I don't know what to think. ERROR! ERROR! DOES NOT COMPUTE! ERROR!!!

Frak it. I agree but the writer is stupid (kinda kidding).

5. Everyone Gets A Disney Plus Series - First, that is another exaggeration. Second, not every comic book character is lead solo movie material BUT an arguably large portion of all characters are worthy of a television series. How each series is presented determines whether it was a good choice to give a character a tv show. Third, I think this a premature assumption by the writer. There have not been THAT many Disney+ MCU series to date.

4. The Six Episode Season - Completely agree. Disney's penny pinching is one of my major issues with the streaming service concerning ALL their hubs.

3. Just Shoot It In The Volume - Agree. However, I think any technical issues like shadows in filming quality is a mainly a director problem to clean up.

2. Big CGI Villains - Moving on. Do not want to get myself banned.

1. The Characters Take Detours Instead Of Journeys -

The rest of Phase Four's characters are essentially the people they were at the start of the film, give or take a few aesthetic changes. Fans can forgive other MCU trends a little easier, but this formula is the hardest for audiences to accept.

Just who the <expletive> do you want them to be at the end of a movie or series? Peter Pan?

I'm done.

 

[Roadtrip635]

@Roadtrip635 , this tidbit may be of interest:


It could be a huge stretch on my part but bringing back Sinister as the new Big Bad may have implications for live action movies and shows in the future--for example, a particular Hayley Atwell (voice) initial appearance in What If...? and subsequent appearance in Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.

Disney/Marvel have strongly demonstrated they attempt to tie as many storyline elements together as possible. In my opinion, Sinister getting a much larger platform allows the character to act upon his malevolent scientific schemes. And any Marvel mutant fan knows the end-product of Sinister's #1 all-time evil scheme:

Could translate into a movie down the road. Like Captain Murtaugh said, "Real thin." I know but I'm rolling with it.

I'll take it!

 

[Roadtrip635]

~slowly exhales~ Okay.

10. Everything Needs To Be Funny - Agree but do not agree with the implication that it is a problem for many of the MCU films. For me, it was a problem with both Taika Waititi movies. However, the majority of the films have a good mix of humor and drama. And the few that have been intentionally humorous like the Guardians and Spider-Man movies have been done either well or extremely well. Moon Knight is the only television series that has tried too hard and stumbled with misused humor.

9. Every Movie Needs To Be A 3-Hour Epic - Pure exaggeration that is likely due to personal attention spans. 29 MCU films so far. Eternals clocks in between 2 1/2 and 3 hours. 20 movies are between 2 and 2 1/2 hours long. Seven movies are under 2 hours.

Only Avengers: Endgame runs over three hours. By a minute. Yes. It is long but does it need to be three hours? In hindsight, I would say no. In fact, I would have preferred it be fleshed out more. For example, more detail could have been assigned to:

• Captain Marvel's space rescue. Space is infinitely vast. Exactly how did Danvers locate Stark & Crew and return them to Earth?
• Soul Stone importance. The Hawkeye/Black Widow fight seemed too brief (wonder if their fight in The Avengers was longer).
• Captain America's returning of the Infinity Stones. Just one sequence of him returning A stone to its proper place in the timeline would have been sufficient AND would not have disturbed the Steve/Peggy reunion at the end.

8. The Multiverse Of Cameos - Disagree. The Illuminati cameos enforced the multiverse plot, not weaken it. It is regrettable that some of the audience does not know the characters represented by cameos but that is not the films' problem UNLESS the characters are not explained (no matter how briefly) to the audience.

7. MCU Films Always Kill The Villain - Mostly disagree. Phases 1 through 3 were about Thanos. Loved Ultron but there was no need for the character afterwards. Pick a movie from that stretch. Are there any deceased villains anyone wanted to see again? Also, Loki was a villain. He survived for more appearances. Speaking of cameos, Ronan the Accuser got *****slapped in Guardians Vol I. He showed up again in Captain Marvel. There are holes in the always kill the villain exaggeration.

6. Keep The Heroes Alive At All Costs - Should I agree or disagree? I want comic book movie adaptations. I have read thousands of comics. Heroes deaths and rebirths are the norm for most comics. The Walking Dead is based on a comic. "Heroes" die in it and do not come back unless zombiefied. I don't know what to think. ERROR! ERROR! DOES NOT COMPUTE! ERROR!!!

Frak it. I agree but the writer is stupid (kinda kidding).

5. Everyone Gets A Disney Plus Series - First, that is another exaggeration. Second, not every comic book character is lead solo movie material BUT an arguably large portion of all characters are worthy of a television series. How each series is presented determines whether it was a good choice to give a character a tv show. Third, I think this a premature assumption by the writer. There have not been THAT many Disney+ MCU series to date.

4. The Six Episode Season - Completely agree. Disney's penny pinching is one of my major issues with the streaming service concerning ALL their hubs.

3. Just Shoot It In The Volume - Agree. However, I think any technical issues like shadows in filming quality is a mainly a director problem to clean up.

2. Big CGI Villains - Moving on. Do not want to get myself banned.

1. The Characters Take Detours Instead Of Journeys -


Just who the <expletive> do you want them to be at the end of a movie or series? Peter Pan?

I'm done.

I agree with some of it.

The humor, sometimes it works, but when it doesn't it's brutal. I don't want the God of Thunder sounding like a failed stand-up comic at open mic night. I like having some humor, but it needs to feel more organic and not feel manufactured, like the script said "Insert joke here". Not every superhero needs to have a sense of humor and some subtle humor is OK.

As far as the "3 hour epic", for me it's not about time, it's about the story. I don't need to have a movie that's intertwined with several other projects or have to figure out how it fits in with everything else, it's OK to have a stand-alone story or adventure.

As far as killing off villians and supes. I think Loki's been killed off like 3 times....lol. We should at least feel like a hero can be killed off. I think that's the double edge sword of a multiverse concept, it expands the stories you can explore and tell, but not as concerned with someone getting killed off, there's always another version in a different timeline or there's a way to change the outcome.

The D+ series, I'm not crazy about the 6 episode formula either. I am glad that Agatha got her own series, I thought she was the most interesting character in WandaVision. I'm not thrilled about the long turnaround to make it happen, though.

I think the author is off the mark a bit about the Hero Journey. It may feel like detours through a single movie, but many of the characters do go through the hero journey throughout the course of several movies. Tony Stark is no longer the same person in Endgame that we saw in that first Ironman movie. Most movies have that hero journey within one movie, but that's a perk of the MCU, that journey can extend over a longer stretch of time.

I think my biggest pet peeve about the MCU is how long it takes to get a movie or series done. There's basically one guy in charge of a huge universe of characters and has to figure out how they all fit together. The Agatha character got a huge positive response, but it will have been 2+ years to get a 6 episode series. It will be 6 years from when Disney acquired the X-Men before we will see a movie. It's great to have a plan and an agenda, but sometimes you have to alter that.

 

[DallasEast]

As far as the "3 hour epic", for me it's not about time, it's about the story. I don't need to have a movie that's intertwined with several other projects or have to figure out how it fits in with everything else, it's OK to have a stand-alone story or adventure.

I can wrap my mind around your opinion much better than the author's.

I think my biggest pet peeve about the MCU is how long it takes to get a movie or series done. There's basically one guy in charge of a huge universe of characters and has to figure out how they all fit together. The Agatha character got a huge positive response, but it will have been 2+ years to get a 6 episode series. It will be 6 years from when Disney acquired the X-Men before we will see a movie. It's great to have a plan and an agenda, but sometimes you have to alter that.

No one can claim I am the patient type. Lag time between productions feel as if it eats at my soul.

However, there is a danger to doing things "too quickly." The MCU is receiving its fair share of criticism per each film or series release. I am certain the studios would defend themselves by saying the time devoted to each production delivers the best product to market. Now consider the criticism they would attract my ramping up the assembly line.

Plus, there are practical matters to think of also. Studios want maximum return on films while understanding competing films will eat at their profits. The last thing they would want is two or more of their films, that are similar in nature, joining the competitive frenzy.

TV shows are about attracting and retaining subscribers. Streamers like Netflix gathers anything they can get their hands on and throws it at the market in glubs. On the other hand, Disney is proactively matching and marketing specific products according to highly defined hubs. Pixar. Star Wars. National Geographic. Marvel. And inflating its own library with newer serial content.

I agree stuff is slowly made available for everyone and it frustrates me too. It is their marketing plan though and they have not made it secret either. Knowing and accepting it takes the edge off my frustrations.

 

[Runwildboys]

~slowly exhales~ Okay.

10. Everything Needs To Be Funny - Agree but do not agree with the implication that it is a problem for many of the MCU films. For me, it was a problem with both Taika Waititi movies. However, the majority of the films have a good mix of humor and drama. And the few that have been intentionally humorous like the Guardians and Spider-Man movies have been done either well or extremely well. Moon Knight is the only television series that has tried too hard and stumbled with misused humor.

9. Every Movie Needs To Be A 3-Hour Epic - Pure exaggeration that is likely due to personal attention spans. 29 MCU films so far. Eternals clocks in between 2 1/2 and 3 hours. 20 movies are between 2 and 2 1/2 hours long. Seven movies are under 2 hours.

Only Avengers: Endgame runs over three hours. By a minute. Yes. It is long but does it need to be three hours? In hindsight, I would say no. In fact, I would have preferred it be fleshed out more. For example, more detail could have been assigned to:

• Captain Marvel's space rescue. Space is infinitely vast. Exactly how did Danvers locate Stark & Crew and return them to Earth?
• Soul Stone importance. The Hawkeye/Black Widow fight seemed too brief (wonder if their fight in The Avengers was longer).
• Captain America's returning of the Infinity Stones. Just one sequence of him returning A stone to its proper place in the timeline would have been sufficient AND would not have disturbed the Steve/Peggy reunion at the end.

8. The Multiverse Of Cameos - Disagree. The Illuminati cameos reinforced the multiverse plot, not weaken it. It is regrettable that some of the audience does not know the characters represented by cameos but that is not the films' problem UNLESS the characters are not explained (no matter how briefly) to the audience.

7. MCU Films Always Kill The Villain - Mostly disagree. Phases 1 through 3 were about Thanos. Loved Ultron but there was no need for the character afterwards. Pick a movie from that stretch. Are there any deceased villains anyone wanted to see again? Also, Loki was a villain. He survived for more appearances. Speaking of cameos, Ronan the Accuser got *****slapped in Guardians Vol I. He showed up again in Captain Marvel. There are holes in the always kill the villain exaggeration.

6. Keep The Heroes Alive At All Costs - Should I agree or disagree? I want comic book movie adaptations. I have read thousands of comics. Heroes deaths and rebirths are the norm for most comics. The Walking Dead is based on a comic. "Heroes" die in it and do not come back unless zombiefied. I don't know what to think. ERROR! ERROR! DOES NOT COMPUTE! ERROR!!!

Frak it. I agree but the writer is stupid (kinda kidding).

5. Everyone Gets A Disney Plus Series - First, that is another exaggeration. Second, not every comic book character is lead solo movie material BUT an arguably large portion of all characters are worthy of a television series. How each series is presented determines whether it was a good choice to give a character a tv show. Third, I think this a premature assumption by the writer. There have not been THAT many Disney+ MCU series to date.

4. The Six Episode Season - Completely agree. Disney's penny pinching is one of my major issues with the streaming service concerning ALL their hubs.

3. Just Shoot It In The Volume - Agree. However, I think any technical issues like shadows in filming quality is a mainly a director problem to clean up.

2. Big CGI Villains - Moving on. Do not want to get myself banned.

1. The Characters Take Detours Instead Of Journeys -


Just who the <expletive> do you want them to be at the end of a movie or series? Peter Pan?

I'm done.

Isn't it you who told me Captain Marvel has some type of "universal telepathy", with which she can "see" things anywhere in the universe? I assumed that was how she found Tony floating out in space.

 

[DallasEast]

Isn't it you who told me Captain Marvel has some type of "universal telepathy", with which she can "see" things anywhere in the universe? I assumed that was how she found Tony floating out in space.

"Cosmic awareness." It is the ability to perceive something existing or an event happening somewhere in the universe.

Endgame did not establish whether Danvers has the ability. Neither did her own movie. In Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, Wong brought in Dr. Banner and her to consult on the "beacon" emanating from Shang-Chi's rings. Captain Marvel had no clue where the beacon was headed or what might be there. Not a feeling. Nothing.

We can assume her cosmic awareness found Stark. We could assume the ship he and Nebula were on was sending out a secret S.O.S. We can assume many things that the movie should have simply told the audience instead and prevent nerds like me from guessing years after the fact.

 

[Runwildboys]

"Cosmic awareness." It is the ability to perceive something existing or an event happening somewhere in the universe.

Endgame did not establish whether Danvers has the ability. Neither did her own movie. In Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, Wong brought in Dr. Banner and her to consult on the "beacon" emanating from Shang-Chi's rings. Captain Marvel had no clue where the beacon was headed or what might be there. Not a feeling. Nothing.

We can assume her cosmic awareness found Stark. We could assume the ship he and Nebula were on was sending out a secret S.O.S. We can assume many things that the movie should have simply told the audience instead and prevent nerds like me from guessing years after the fact.

IDK, I guess when a movie requires one to suspend disbelief to such a degree that the MCU movies do, I don't really worry so much about things like knowing exactly how she found them. I figure they'll explain it somewhere down the road, if enough people want an explanation.