• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

CBM: X-Men '97; Deadpool and Wolverine trailer

WakeForestRanger said:
You also don't want to start each movie or episode with a list of excuses why certain characters are indisposed. That would get old quickly.
Click to expand...

True, that's why they should pare down the plot and scope of each film to fit the starring character, so the question of "why isn't the hulk/Thor/Ironman here to destroy this ship/blow up this dam/pick up this school bus" never comes up.
 
What would Iron Man, Thor, or Hulk be doing right now? This is spy vs. spy stuff. Stark could help with the tech. Thor maybe could guard the Fridge. Hulk? Probably more trouble than he's worth.

One more thing about Ward. An article I posted last week on his switch basically quoted the part of tonight's episode where he talks about how he earned their trust.

Edit: MDMH, I think that's what they've done, far better than I would have expected. It goes back to the conversation about genres we had a few days ago. None of the solo films have been outside of the character's element. I'm sure the solo Netflix series will do the same. Nobody is going to ask why Thor can't come in and help Luke Cage beat up some low level street thugs.
 
Last edited:
Days of Future Past trailers. They look good.



 
myDeaconmyhand said:
The existence of super heroes and powers in the Marvel universe doesn't excuse the glaring plot holes. If you create a character in the movie universe that can so easily save the earth from destruction, you have to give a reason why they aren't saving the world all the time. That's why raising the "epic destruction/drama" bar for every Marvel film will potentially become a detriment. I bet Ant-Man won't be trying to prevent Hydra from using the moon as a dodgeball of mass destruction.
Click to expand...

Why would you have to give a reason? The comics don't have Spider Man getting beat up by Green Goblin and crying about how he wished that Iron Man would show up or that he wishes that he'd kept the Iron Spider suit, so why should the movies? Ant-Man is going to be a heist movie so I highly doubt that Hydra will even be mentioned. It won't be in GOG either. Looking for plot holes like that are asinine in these types of movies.
 
but you're looking at it as a comic fan. it just seems weird that the movies partition the Superheroes. i know we can't have everyone showing up in every movie and i think CA2's plot was limited just enough to keep it plausible that Stark/Thor were not involved, but it is a huge stretch most of the time.
 
ThinkingWithMyDeac said:
To the point earlier about ending a movie on a non happy ending. I wonder how long they will draw out SHIELD getting there ass kicked on the show. People don't like negative things especially in their entertainment as it is a source to get away from their own shit. With a movie you can leave it and be done with it after the single viewing. With the TV show you would be exposed to negativity over and over again week after week, with somewhat poor ratings for what it is already they can't afford to lose fringe viewership.
Click to expand...

People love conflict. The bigger, the better.
 
The Stig said:
Why would you have to give a reason? The comics don't have Spider Man getting beat up by Green Goblin and crying about how he wished that Iron Man would show up or that he wishes that he'd kept the Iron Spider suit, so why should the movies? Ant-Man is going to be a heist movie so I highly doubt that Hydra will even be mentioned. It won't be in GOG either. Looking for plot holes like that are asinine in these types of movies.
Click to expand...

I disagree that it's asinine, the context of the Avengers is that they are gathered by Nick Fury/Shield to save the world. That's the bar they set, Avengers = Save the World. I didn't wonder where the X-Men were during the Wolverine movie, and I didn't wonder where the Avengers were during Iron Man 3. I've read a lot of the Winter Soldier reviews and the 3rd act climax is generally considered the weak point of the film. At no point does anyone ever believe that those ships are going to start shooting millions of innocent people.
 
I don't know why they felt they had to one up the complete decimation of SHIELD with the helicarrier stuff unless it was to have a "happy ending."
 
My problem is that they deliberately made mention of Stark and Banner as targets for the Helicarriers. That means they were around. If Fury knew how serious the threat was to the point where he could fake his death and escape to an underground bunker/hospital, he definitely could have gotten Stark on the phone.

Forget Hulk, but Stark and his suit robots could have likely disarmed the carriers without crashing them and more easily dispached Hydra. They even mentioned that the improvements on the carriers were Stark tech. Which means he probably could have just shut them down via some backdoor he programmed in, bc thats what Stark does.

The carrier targeted him in Stark tower. You can bet if he was there, he knew he was being targeted by his own tech, and that would likley give him the motivation to put the suit on, you know, to avoid certain death.

You cant have it both ways, dont have the carriers aim guns at stark and banner and then think they are going to ignore it.
 
You're making a lot of assumptions, the biggest one being that Stark would have known.
 
The Helicarriers and who they're aiming at are just plot devices. It's not really the point. Ya know why Stark doesn't come to the rescue? Because this is a film about Rogers. It's like asking why Tim Duncan didn't come in to play center and save [Redacted]'s job.
 
Deadbolt said:
The Helicarriers and who they're aiming at are just plot devices. It's not really the point. Ya know why Stark doesn't come to the rescue? Because this is a film about Rogers. It's like asking why Tim Duncan didn't come in to play center and save [Redacted]'s job.
Click to expand...

no, the point we're discussing is a flaw in an otherwise impressively expanded/developed marvel universe. it just gets increasingly weird to have these stand alone movies where other major players are ignored (lol Thor's "laying low")
 
ImTheCaptain said:
no, the point we're discussing is a flaw in an otherwise impressively expanded/developed marvel universe. it just gets increasingly weird to have these stand alone movies where other major players are ignored (lol Thor's "laying low")
Click to expand...

Thor would be so mad, his slam piece Jane would definitely be on the target list.
 
That would be an awesome "post credits" to AOS to have Ward and Portman talking about how much fun it is to bang an Asgardian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top