Avengers: Endgame SPOILERS 1 1

[theCapraAegagrus]

7 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Having corners is a state of mind...

It's geometry.

[sagekilz]

On an absolute B character side note, and I'm unsure if it's been stated earlier, but the tease of Pepper in the Rescue suite was a bright-spot for me.  However seeing an unrecognizable character, swoop in lightning fast, for what seemed like 10 seconds was disappointing; the team-up of Iron man and Rescue looked fantastic but it was literally over if you blinked.  Aside from everything else, the Rescue character was also a dissapointment.

[davidpg]

Saw it for the second time on Sunday, taking my son this time.  We both loved it, and I liked it better the second time.  The points that bothered me the first time still stuck though.

I was certain that Loki somehow tricked Thanos and the rest that he was actually killed to be able to be hidden behind he scenes and work his magic. That means that Loki really was pretty much unceremoniously killed off. I know Loki taking the Tesseract means he's still alive in a new timeline...still lame.  I must also say that everyone and their Grandmothers picking up and handling the Infinity Stones, not to mention the whole Gauntlet, was quite annoying.

Still enjoyed the heck out of it!

[Batman]

4 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

It wasn't so much effort, trust me. If I really put more effort into it I might have added more supporting statements and made grammar edits.

4 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Okay, fine. "Shazam! was far more entertaining than Endgame" for you and other folks with an implicit bias for all things DC. I mean, your avatar is Batman...

Another assumption but I am a DC guy, yes

[Batman]

4 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

I am a perpetual DC Comics supporter both on paper and on the screen. That does not blind one from having a legitimate opinion about one or the other, or competing brands, etc.

I suspect that Batman couldn't care less about Endgame being a Marvel Studios production. Obviously, he spent the money to see the movie. He has the right to his opinion. I suspect that I will disagree with it after I see Shazam.

I'll look forward to that discussion

[@therealsilvermane]

Just to beat a dying horse, here's an interview from 2007 before the release of Iron Man to the world, where Robert Downey Jr and the interviewer both refer to Iron Man as a B-list character ready to jump to A-list with this movie.

[TupennyConan]

Two reasons he had to die: 

1. Way too expensive

2. Way too old [compare his 2007 face to his 2019 face]  

[TupennyConan]

When we grow too old and too expensive, we must die. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

Just now, TupennyConan said:

When we grow too old and too expensive, we must die. 

[comix4fun]

4 minutes ago, TupennyConan said:

When we grow too old and too expensive, we must die. 

 

“No structure, even an artificial one, enjoys the process of entropy. It is the ultimate fate of everything, and everything resists it.” 

[@therealsilvermane]

Another blast from the past. The 2007 Iron Man Comic Con Panel while IM was still in production. Incredible how far Marvel Studios and RDJ have come in 10 years. Here, they talk about Robert Downey Jr being given a chance to play the role and Kevin Feige refers to Iron Man as a lesser known character (Avi Arad agrees Iron Man has always been a Marvel top tier character). Amazing.

[sagekilz]

40 minutes ago, TwoPiece said:

[Bosco685]

56 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Just to beat a dying horse, here's an interview from 2007 before the release of Iron Man to the world, where Robert Downey Jr and the interviewer both refer to Iron Man as a B-list character ready to jump to A-list with this movie.

And the criteria RDJ used for calling this A-List character a B-List character? Other than he said it.

[@therealsilvermane]

48 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

And the criteria RDJ used for calling this A-List character a B-List character? Other than he said it.

The perception of the time by both the star and the media of Iron Man. Marvel Studios and RDJ saw themselves as making an independent movie with a lesser known comic character, and in some ways they were. But I'm actually more interested now in just looking back and seeing how far we've come with comic book moviemaking since this movie. Spider-Man, X-Men, and The Dark Knight were great, but it was Iron Man that truly opened up  translating comic books into cinema. 

[Bosco685]

24 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

The perception of the time by both the star and the media of Iron Man. Marvel Studios and RDJ saw themselves as making an independent movie with a lesser known comic character, and in some ways they were. But I'm actually more interested now in just looking back and seeing how far we've come with comic book moviemaking since this movie. Spider-Man, X-Men, and The Dark Knight were great, but it was Iron Man that truly opened up  translating comic books into cinema. 

It's a thought, But prior to the massive success of Iron Man (2008), the foundation was laid with the general audience via Blade (1997), X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002).

[@therealsilvermane]

3 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

It's a thought, But prior to the massive success of Iron Man (2008), the foundation was laid with the general audience via Blade (1997), X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002).

I think 1989 Batman laid that foundation down. At least Tim Burton showed everyone how you do it, that is, make a super-hero comic book movie post-Christopher Reeve Superman that isn't equal parts cheesy.

Edited May 15, 2019 by @therealsilvermane

[Bosco685]

15 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I think 1989 Batman laid that foundation down. At least Tim Burton showed everyone how you do it, that is, make a super-hero comic book movie post-Christopher Reeve Superman that isn't equal parts cheesy.

Look at you, coming around to reality.

I didn't want to shock you with a non-Marvel influence. Feige says it's Superman(1978).

 

[Prince Namor]

I just always saw Batman and Spider-man (and maybe Superman or Wolverine) as A-list characters and their movies, comics and merchandise would always sell the most. 

Anybody after that was either B, C or D-list.

That was just my perception.

[@therealsilvermane]

1 hour ago, Bosco685 said:

Feige says it's Superman(1978).

That's interesting. Maybe that's a big reason for Feige's success (among many other things).

As I see it, Sam Raimi, Bryan Singer, and Christopher Nolan's successful hero flicks followed Tim Burton's method. Raimi's Spider-Man especially was very similar to Burton's Batman. Like Batman, Spiderman lived in a quirky almost-horror movie world created by the filmmaker. Raimi even borrowed Danny Elfman for the music. Like Batman, the SInger's X-Men were dressed in black leather soldier-esque garb instead of "yellow spandex," and most of the movie's scenes took place at night. But maybe more important, Christopher Nolan and Bryan Singer cared less for their comic book characters than they did for their movie hero's metaphor. Basically, their heroes served the movie, rather than the movie serving the hero. Tim Burton himself said he was less concerned with Batman and more with the duality metaphor of Batman and Joker. For Bryan Singer, the X-Men followed Stan Lee's Civil Rights model as his heroes were a metaphor for gay rights. For Christopher Nolan, Batman was a metaphor for fear in Begins, and then a metaphor for the hated hero in Dark Knight.

Kevin Feige seemed to say "Screw all that dark serious film-auteur metaphor stuff! I just want to make a movie about Iron Man from the comics!" Go back to 1978 Superman, and that's what Richard Donner did. He just made a movie about Superman. Not a metaphor. Feige followed this model. As opposed to Burton and Nolan whose Batman served the film's metaphor, Feige's first Marvel Studios movie was in complete service to Tony Stark and Iron Man. The character came first.

Food for my thoughts.

[Prince Namor]

I think there's more to it than that, but yeah that makes sense. I always thought these movies were a nod to Stan Lee in that it took the story seriously, while at the same time winking at the audience ("It's all fun! We're playing superheroes!").

I remember Stan somewhere (back in the day) saying about those original Superman movies, that it was the kind of movie that Marvel should be making because that's how the Marvel Comics were, NOT how DC comics were - and that Marvel's movies at the time (the live action Spider-man and Captain America) were too stuffy and serious, like DC Comics.