MovieChat Forums > DarthRoger > Replies
DarthRoger's Replies
Oh and Grace Randolph in her online review stated "this is kind of 'Captain Feminism' the movie." Just finished watching her give her points.
I agree and have still been trying to wrap my mind around how Kevin Fiege came to this decision, to put an immensely unpopular comics character in the MCU. Haven't they restarted Captain Marvel's comic line 5 times due to poor sales? Doesn't that mean anything? If you're a smart business person, it means you don't keep putting a product out that people don't want and won't buy. SJW nonsense has wrecked comic books and it looks like they are going to wreck the beloved movies too. I'm not seeing Captain Marvel and likely never will, not even via Red Box or online. I vote with my dollars and Captain Nasty (I don't care what 40 something white dudes think) doesn't care about my dollars anyway. Good luck Marvel!
I believe it's been hinted at in interviews with Kevin Fiege where he stated "Captain Marvel can beat Thanos." That statement could be taken to mean that she's the one to defeat him and a lot of online posters and fans have assumed that's what he meant.
Of course, no being in existence is more powerful than the being who can wield all infinity stones, so unless she defeats him when he's not wearing the gauntlet, I don't see how she defeats him. It's not possible when he's controlling all the stones.
You tell yourself what you need in order to support the narrative you believe.
Fact: Marvel Studios was not using "black nationalism" as a promotional gimmick for Black Panther. Nor was anyone associated with the Black Panther movie telling people who weren't black, that the movie wasn't for them. It was a solid MCU movie with a good story.
Fact: The female director of Captain Marvel has stated that the movie is an "activism" movie. Brie Larson herself has said she's using her role as a form of "activism."
Those facts are the salient ones in this discussion.
Wow, you're really reaching now. So your assertion is that some ignorant, stupid people posted on the Black Panther board back in 2018 and that this somehow equates with what Brie Larson is saying publicly, as the star and face of Captain Marvel?!?
That's not even the same thing that either I or the original poster (kuku) are talking about. We are talking about the MCU via Brie Larson and the directors of Captain Marvel openly saying it's a feminist movie AND that it doesn't matter if white guys like it or not. Those are direct comments from the people who are starring in and directing the freaking movie! How is that the same as some moron posting pointless statements on the Black Panther board? They aren't even the same issue.
Get a better argument!
Umm... there was nothing in any of the Black Panther trailers or marketing about black power, racism or an anti-white message that anyone was up in arms about. There was 0 movie controversy with Black Panther.
You seriously just made that shit up!
Chadwick Boseman was not out there on press junkets saying incendiary things like Brie Larson is and NOBODY was accusing Black Panther of being a movie with an ethnocentric bent.
Marvel did not push an agenda with Black Panther, whereas the directors and main star of Captain Marvel have clearly stated their movie is a form of "activism."
To try and go back in time and create a scenario for Black Panther that didn't happen, in order to cover for Captain Marvel, is lame.
A YES on both points. Hollywood seems bound and determined to shove this gruel down moviegoers mouths. Well I won't show up to eat their serving of SJW nonsense. After Avengers: Endgame, I'm likely done with the MCU if Larson stays in it. Black Panther should have been the next leader of the Avengers or maybe Bucky/Winter Soldier, not "I'm-the-best-most-powerful-show-the-boys-how-its-done" braggard and flake like Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel.
I'd just like for those who think Captain Marvel is representative of a strong woman, to explain how man-hating makes you strong? You don't see that from Black Widow, Maria Hill, Scarlet Witch, Okoye, Gamora or Nebula. They are all great characters and their gender doesn't make them great characters, who they ARE makes them great characters. They are tough, badass fighters, team players and PERSONABLE people. Those are traits of a strong character, be they male OR female. I'd sit through a Black Widow trilogy happily and I sure wish they had given her and Hawkeye at least one stand-alone movie between Avengers: Age of Ultron and Avengers: Infinity War. Missed opportunity there!
Yeah, I agree. What I meant by the phrase "serious comic book movies" was that we had studios and directors getting "serious" about making comic book movies, whereas before they had treated such projects as being just for kids, failing to realize that's not the majority of the market for these movies.
I just did not arrange that sentence very well.
I agree with you about 2000's X-Men changing the genre and creating movies with solid stories and real stakes. They got away from the Joel Schumacher days - THANK GOD - and started giving fans what we'd always wanted, serious comic book movies. I believe that first X-Men movie though has to share the stage with Rami's Spider-man of 2002. Those two movies began and completed the transition to real comic book feel on the big screen.
Well I loved Thor: Ragnarock as it was the best of the Thor trilogy and grossed 850 million. I also loved Aquaman and it continues to do well, having grossed over 1 billion and change. If you look close, you can see ideas gleaned from the last Thor movie at play in Aquaman. Both studios - WB/DC and Disney/Marvel - borrow ideas from each other and expand on them. Of course, I'm a comic book fan with a foot in both Marvel and DC, so I want them both to be successful.
I finally saw it and man, what a blast!
This is the way Warner Bros should have been doing DC movies this entire time.
It had a solid story, pulled from the comics. It was colorful, not gray-blue shadowy like previous DC entries. It had good casting, decent acting, great action sequences and it didn't forget to be FUN! In short, it was everything a comic book movie is supposed to be and that's why it's grossed over 1 billion dollars. Way to go Warner Bros!
Oh and Black Manta was AWESOME to see on the big screen!
I've liked him in most every role he's taken. "Big Fish" was a gem of a movie that not many people have seen. Really enjoyed it and he will be missed!
Well maybe... LOL!
Apologies for the earlier comment. I got a bit defensive.
Well seeing how it was 1992 when the movie came out, not a lot of people were posting on the internet. But since you put so much effort into your reply and I don't wish you to feel cheated out of being a douchebag, I told people that Batman Returns was shit in 1992.
Chew on that Stoney.
I'm pretty sure it was meaningless to being with.
Incel...
???
Yeah, I don't know what that means either.
In other news, an early screening of Captain Marvel has one commentator saying the cat in the movie is great. At least there is that much to be stoked about.
My own feeling is you cast the best actor. If that actor happens to be black, then who cares? At the end of the day, I want to see a well acted and good movie. The focus should be on who'd be the best Batman.
Now on the flipside, I don't see why WB would do that as the environment right now smacks of identity politics (whether one believes it or not) and large groups of the viewing public [sometimes I count myself in these groups, sometimes I don't, depending on the circumstances] are rightly tired of it. Just look at the recent shift by Disney-Marvel with the "special look" trailer for Captain Marvel that was released, following two official trailers that they themselves admitted weren't generating the kind of 'buzz' they wanted. If you compare the new trailer to the previous two, you'll notice there's not an emphasis on the hero being female, as there was in the first two trailers. None of the word HER morphing into HERO silliness (and it was silly) on the screen and more emphasis on the fun parts, for which MCU movies are best known.
So at the end of all this, my take is:
1. Cast the best actor (male) to play Batman. White or black.
2. Movie studios keep away from real-life social/political statements and just make good movies
And let's not forget the two janitors - retard and redneck - mopping up the floors around the vampires IN A SECRET LAB!!!
Who the hell runs a top secret, government funded lab with real vampires and has the inbred and idgett brothers cleaning up right next to their cells?!?
And what the hell happened to the shatterproof Plexiglas that was keeping the vampires contained? How is it that there are suddenly metal bars in front of the vampire cells instead of glass, where they can easily grab ahold of someone through the bars?!?!?
She's flighty and insecure. That's what struck me about MJ from the Rami movies. She wants her dreams all right now but when she doesn't get them, she becomes petulant and indecisive. The character as she portrayed MJ, reminds me a lot of Sookie Stackhouse as played by Anna Paquin. She's a bit of a brat who only sees things as she sees them. "You weren't here for me!", she shouts at Bill in Season 1 of True Blood, when poor Bill was meeting the head vampire to explain why he killed another vampire to save Sookie. What a brat! Same with MJ. Wants what she wants, no matter!
I still love it. When RAIDERS came out in the 80's, it was the coolest movie most of us had ever seen. It got a whole generation of high school aged kids actually interested in antiquity and archaeology. I only wish they had not made any sequels. The sequels made Doctor Jones look more like an intellectual buffoon who got lucky in near-death experiences, rather than a smart guy and fighter. Both TEMPLE OF DOOM and LAST CRUSADE weren't the best movies. I don't even acknowledge that most recent movie as it was a catastrophe and further eroded Indy's mystique.