Does anyone hate MCU films?

[Beaddle]

No, that has been a factor back in the Paramount days. Heck, Robert Downey, Jr. was ad libing comedy from the very beginning.

.

If paramount still had Iron Man, who knows what would have happened. maybe more mission impossible Iron Man films after the poor reception of Iron Man 2.

What do you mean by "Disney" story?

GOTG and Thor Ragnarok have too much humor like any Disney movie. The movies are beyond lighthearted , they fit more in the disney arena than the comics. The CGI is too much, the cinematography is constantly upsetting, the editing is bad. The soundtrack volume mixtape is distracting. The tone is so far off their comics. This is when I stop fully paying attention to RT. I already had my suspicions with Age of Ultron and Iron Man 3 that many critics would let MCU get away with anything but who denies that anymore? Endgame is a disney's take on a post apocalyptic time travel story. If you want a marvel story DOFP, Guardians Disassembled and Loki, Agent of Asgard are the marvel stories. One was lucky to get a film.

Probably because a good chunk of the general audience don't read comics and only know the characters from the movies. Besides, good craftsmanship tends to overcome this sort of thing.

No offense but this is the worst excuse I ever heard that a good general audience don't read comics. I am reminded again of the internal fan conflict that is happening in marvel.

Not the same; a lot of different genres and styles within the brand. .

No.

May not be as experimental as say, Rogue One or Last Jedi, but still

Last Jedi was experimental? It was experimental only in feminism and it did it wrong.

80-20 chance they will do X-Men like that. The post guy of this thread put it best, MCU sells factory processed movies that are the same.

Geez. remember when you said, nobody thinks X-Men was different or X-Men had little impact on serious comics movies. people keep bringing it up left and right that X-Men is serious. You will find more people who believe X-Men has more serious ''good'' movies than DC because its true. Looks as if you are finding it difficult again to change the general perception of a marvel series. Spiderman is not pixar, X-Men is actually the most serious comic IP that hit the mainstream. Its pretty much common opinions as it is based on a mostly evidential truth that comes from the comics and movies.

You forgot the Guardians of the Galaxy; all of them have their origins either explored or alluded to and they inform the characters in the present. Pretty good character work at that, too.

Can they explore more without the humor? Can they also scale back on the over generous CGI that usually too fake to be real? Can they do more with the story. I should be comparing GOTG to star trek.

[Frobisher]

Comic book GoTG is nothing like Star Trek, even under Dan Abnett.

[Amadeus Arkham]

Hate is a rather strong word but rarely do I find myself wanting to re-watch an MCU movie again in its entirely. I sample a few clips on YouTube to re-watch cool moments/scenes from the movies. Despite my overall ambivalence towards the MCU I like that they began as the underdog starting off with a fairly unknown character like Iron Man, and grew to become not only the biggest superhero franchise, ever but the biggest movie franchise ever on the planet. I would even argue Marvel is even bigger than Star Wars now. I don’t hate the MCU, I hate some of the annoying factions of the fandom that like to trash the perceived “lesser” franchises like the DCEU and even the now defunct Fox X-Men series because they aren’t as successful and there aren’t as consistently well-liked as the MCU films. That brand allegiance can get really grating. That being said, even if I find the vast majority of the films mediocre to even plain bad they’re still superior to a lot of other recent blockbuster movies that I can’t even be bothered to recall the titles to. It’s a testament to the fact they definitely seem to know what they’re doing more so than any other movie studio even if the movies generally don’t speak to you.

People have said the MCU is like a big screen version of a television show and that may be true but to me it’s just the cinematic representation of the cohesive interconnected nature of superhero comics. Marvel more than even DC has always had a shared continuity since most of the Marvel characters from the onset were created to be apart of a wider universe of other characters. So I think the source material allows for a cinematic universe to be built from where other IP don’t really.

Last Jedi was experimental? It was experimental only in feminism and it did it wrong.

No offense dude, but I did laugh at this. Not going to bother to engage you in debate but now I kind of find it hard to take you seriously when it comes to this discussion after this post. You’re obviously entitled to your opinion and all, and I even sort of agree with some of your points but.....yeah no.

And I say this as someone who didn’t care all that much for the movie. Last Jedi was definitely very experimental with Star Wars. Now whether it’s ‘experimenting’ succeeded or failed is very much up to the individual subjective judgement of the viewer. For me, it only half succeeded and massively dropped the ball in other areas.

[Beaddle]

Hate is a rather strong word but rarely do I want to re-watch an MCU movie again in its entirely. I sample a few clips on YouTube to re-watch cool moments/scenes from the movies. Despite my overal ambivalence towards the MCU I like that they began as the underdog starting off with a fairly unknown character like Iron Man, and grew to become not only the biggest superhero franchise, but the biggest movie franchise ever on the planet. I would even argue Marvel is even bigger than Star Wars now. I don’t hate the MCU, I hate some of the annoying factions of the fandom that like to trash the perceived “lesser” franchises like the DCEU and even the now defunct Fox X-Men series because they aren’t as successful and there aren’t as consistently well-liked as the MCU films. That brand allegiance can get really grating. That being said, even if I find the vast majority of the films mediocre to even plain bad they’re still superior to a lot of other recent blockbuster movies that I can’t even be bothered to recall the titles to. It’s a testament to the fact they definitely know what they’re doing more than any other movie studio even if the movies generally don’t speak to you.

People have said the MCU is like a big screen verison of a television show and that may be true but to me it’s just the cinematic representation of the cohesive interconnected nature of superhero comics. Marvel more than even DC has always had a shared continuity since most of the Marvel characters from the onset were created to be apart of a wider universe of other characters. So I think the source material allows for a cinematic universe to built from where other IP don’t really.

No offense dude, but I did laugh at this. Not going to bother to engage you in debate but now I kind of find it hard to take you seriously when it comes to this discussion after this post. You’re obviously entitled to your opinion and all, and I even sort of agree with some of your points but.....yeah no.

And I say this as someone who didn’t care all that much about the movie. Last Jedi was definitely very experimental with Star Wars. Now whether it’s ‘experimenting’ succeeded or failed is very much up to the individual subjective judgement of the viewer. For me, it only half succeeded and massively dropped the ball in other areas.

Disney butchering everything that was great about star wars was hardly experimental. The river dividing star wars and the MCU has to do with how informed you are, or how informed is the series though I do know its more obvious with Spiderman than Star Wars since star wars is not part of the MCU.

[luprki]

Quality wise, Disney screwed up MCU, SW and SM. But Disney is smart, because they know quality doesn’t always sell, continuity and universe sells.

[80sbaby]

What other "universes" are selling well?

[trooper_thorn]

I don't really hate any of the Marvel movies so much as I hate what they represent as a whole.

The "Phases" where they know five years ahead of time which film they're going to be making along with their paint by numbers plots. The polished and shiny media, where all of the leaks and exposés have been pre-planned and approved by their PR departments before being fed to media outlets that they own/rent.

They're the cinematic equivalent of Applebees, where you know what you're getting and while it's not awful the best you can expect is mediocre.

Anyway, I'm lazy so I'll just let RLM sum up the MCU:

[luprki]

What other "universes" are selling well?

Star Wars, DCEU and FoX-Men all sell well.

[WebLurker]

If paramount still had Iron Man, who knows what would have happened. maybe more mission impossible Iron Man films after the poor reception of Iron Man 2.

Who knows? Point is, though, that the humor you deride as a Disney thing forced on the MCU was an "original sin" of the franchise.

GOTG and Thor Ragnarok have too much humor like any Disney movie. The movies are beyond lighthearted , they fit more in the disney arena than the comics. The CGI is too much, the cinematography is constantly upsetting, the editing is bad. The soundtrack volume mixtape is distracting.

Dunno, actually thought they were some of the better ones in terms of all that. Hey, I'm not pro critic or film student, though, so I'm just going off what I've learned on the subject in passing.

The tone is so far off their comics.

As Star Lord himself asked: "What's wrong with that?"

This is when I stop fully paying attention to RT. I already had my suspicions with Age of Ultron and Iron Man 3 that many critics would let MCU get away with anything but who denies that anymore?

Um, everyone? RT is just a review aggregate site; they only collect the data. If most pro critics like the movies, then that's all she wrote. (Thought: are the pro critics judging the movies in terms of how close they are to the source material or by how well made, entertaining, etc. they are as movies when viewed only in the context of themselves?)

Endgame is a disney's take on a post apocalyptic time travel story.

No, that's just what you wanted it to be. (And it was Marvel Studios who actual broke the story and put it all together. Shouldn't they be getting all the blame for what went wrong and all the kudos for what they did right?)

If you want a marvel story DOFP, Guardians Disassembled and Loki, Agent of Asgard are the marvel stories. One was lucky to get a film.

Yeah?

No offense but this is the worst excuse I ever heard that a good general audience don't read comics. I am reminded again of the internal fan conflict that is happening in marvel.

Comic readers are the minority. Most viewers just want a movie they can enjoy. If the film is quite different from the source material, all they're going to worry about is if they like it for what it is. I read comics and hardly any of them have been adapted into the MCU. Heck, in the case of the Guardians, that movie was my introduction, so that version is the only one I care about. Never read the comics, don't want to, and I'm okay with that. Let them both be the best versions of what they are, whether that be a funny space adventure with a pop soundtrack or a space opera comic that doesn't crack many jokes. (Besides, if the movie is well-made on its own terms, does it really matter if its different then the original? Lots of classics are like that.)

No.

If you're going to tell me that Doctor Strange and Spider-Man: Far From Home are the same kind of movie, I don't know what to say. Hate 'em or not, the MCU does not have a one-size-fits-all "formula."

Last Jedi was experimental?

All the way.

It was experimental only in feminism and it did it wrong.

You're going to have to explain that, since I have no clue what you're talking about.

As far as being experimental in general, I would direct you to how many tropes it inverted, the visuals, and the way it broke away from the previous ones.

Geez. remember when you said, nobody thinks X-Men was different or X-Men had little impact on serious comics movies.

I think that you got this comment from someone else. I don't remember typing that. However....

...people keep bringing it up left and right that X-Men is serious.

No one is denying that they're a more serious series. I agree. Thing is, I'm highly skeptical that it's legacy in that arena is as high profile as you believe.

You will find more people who believe X-Men has more serious ''good'' movies than DC because its true.

Preaching to the choir. Whatever missteps Fox did with the brand, they can be relieved that they did not make Batman v Superman.

Looks as if you are finding it difficult again to change the general perception of a marvel series.

Looks like you're not following much of what I'm saying.

Spiderman is not pixar...

Seriously, stop that. You never understood what I meant. You've ignored everything I've said to explain the point. I'm done with talking about the Pixar analogy. Let it go.

...X-Men is actually the most serious comic IP that hit the mainstream.

Yeah, but it's more then that. I should know; I've read some of that stuff.

Its pretty much common opinions as it is based on a mostly evidential truth that comes from the comics and movies.

Any sources?

Can they explore more without the humor?

No, that's the way this series rolls. Why do we have to be serious all the time?

Can they also scale back on the over generous CGI that usually too fake to be real?

That's part of the fun. Besides, some of the best characters are CGI.

Can they do more with the story. I should be comparing GOTG to star trek.

Guardians and Star Trek were always different things with different goals. As far as doing "more" with the story, there's an interesting assessment on one of them from someone who's pretty lukewarm on the series that I actually agree a lot with:



Double-checking the video, I have to say that I do feel reaffirmed that the Guardians movies, at least, have their own form of maturity. They may not discuss "relevant" themes like the X-Men movies did, but they really got some deep characters and explored that in a way that X-Men rarely did (and I'll take that any day). Honestly, I think the ending of that second one rivals Logan as a tear jerker in its own way. In any event, both movies are among my genre favorites and I'm pretty darn glad I can see both when the mood strikes me.

To sum up my position: I like both the Fox series and the MCU. Heck, I've been on record that I'm unhappy that the Fox series got canceled and am uncertain about a MCU reboot (there are possibilities that I would like explored when the time comes, but still, I'll be thinking a lot about the things we left behind). However, I think both series had different goals (serious movies vs. movies that run from more serious to less serious) and they should be judged by how they met those goals rather then whether they fit in a specific box (e.g. where they serious enough). Personally, I think the MCU did a lot better then Fox did in meeting their goal and deliver more consistently.

However, Days of Future Past and Logan are among my most favorite of superhero favorites, along side some select MCU stuff and a few other stuff from other series and studios and for good reason. They accomplished their goals very well. But those are not the only goals and rather then being shamed for not meeting a certain goal, I think they should be praised for succeeding that their own. Hence why I hold a western about a clawed mutant and a sci-fi comedy about living planets and talking trees and raccoons in equal esteem.

[motherofpearl1]

I thoroughly enjoyed the first two X Men films. After that, my interest waned especially when everything started revolving around Mystique. But I loved the first two.
And I also love The Last Jedi. It wasn't perfect, but it bravely tried to do something different with Star Wars, featured two outstanding performances from Mark Hamill and Adam Driver and so far is my favourite SW film.
One man's meat is another man's poison. But I wish people would stop some of the vile attacks on Rian Johnson. I can't stand Thor Ragnarok but I would never stoop to sending it's director death threats.

[Beaddle]

Who knows? Point is, though, that the humor you deride as a Disney thing forced on the MCU was an "original sin" of the franchise.

.

The humor is among the many self destructive things about Iron Man 3 not Iron Man 1

Dunno, actually thought they were some of the better ones in terms of all that. Hey, I'm not pro critic or film student, though, so I'm just going off what I've learned on the subject in passing.

Objectively speaking, they are some of the worst of the MCU. Any honest pro critic/film student is more likely to say so from a typical tick box film check.

As Star Lord himself asked: "What's wrong with that?"

Its not needed.

Um, everyone? RT is just a review aggregate site; they only collect the data. If most pro critics like the movies, then that's all she wrote. (Thought: are the pro critics judging the movies in terms of how close they are to the source material or by how well made, entertaining, etc. they are as movies when viewed only in the context of themselves?)

I have forgotten RT existed until now.

No, that's just what you wanted it to be. (And it was Marvel Studios who actual broke the story and put it all together. Shouldn't they be getting all the blame for what went wrong and all the kudos for what they did right?)

I wanted Endgame to be better than what Disney gave us as I know how much marvel comics has overdone time travel and post apocalyptic stories.

If you're going to tell me that Doctor Strange and Spider-Man: Far From Home are the same kind of movie, I don't know what to say. Hate 'em or not, the MCU does not have a one-size-fits-all "formula."

its the same structural kind of movie. The movies are shot the same way.

Comic readers are the minority. Most viewers just want a movie they can enjoy. If the film is quite different from the source material, all they're going to worry about is if they like it for what it is. I read comics and hardly any of them have been adapted into the MCU. Heck, in the case of the Guardians, that movie was my introduction, so that version is the only one I care about. Never read the comics, don't want to, and I'm okay with that. Let them both be the best versions of what they are, whether that be a funny space adventure with a pop soundtrack or a space opera comic that doesn't crack many jokes. (Besides, if the movie is well-made on its own terms, does it really matter if its different then the original? Lots of classics are like that.)

This is still wrong to me. Can anyone imagine if anyone said this about Game of Thrones? or they already did? Once D&D finished all the source material by season 6, the show's story began to fall apart because there was no source material to rely on as a back bone like season 1-6.

You're going to have to explain that, since I have no clue what you're talking about.

As far as being experimental in general, I would direct you to how many tropes it inverted, the visuals, and the way it broke away from the previous ones.

Last Jedi didn't portray women in the best light, it misunderstood feminism, There is nothing experiential about the movie, ransom moments, bad writing, disjointed action, character assassination is not experimental to me.

I think that you got this comment from someone else. I don't remember typing that. However....No one is denying that they're a more serious series. I agree. Thing is, I'm highly skeptical that it's legacy in that arena is as high profile as you believe.

Its as high profile, its higher than I thought. I did think because the MCU is so big now, most would just be okay with a Disney xmen makeover from the scratch, but I was wrong. Nobody want Disney to change the seriousness of X-Men, meaning they know what X-Men is from either the movies, comics , games , TV shows or animations.

Any sources?

Websearching, It should be easy to find more sources now since the latest xmen movie was a bomb. Don't also forget its been brought here.

Preaching to the choir. Whatever missteps Fox did with the brand, they can be relieved that they did not make Batman v Superman.

Dark Phoenix is worse than Batman v Superman. Snyder understands some good aspect about making movies, Kinberg doesn't understand anything. Dark Phoenix is also worse because this is the second time Kinberg got a phoenix movie wrong.

No, that's the way this series rolls. Why do we have to be serious all the time?

This movies should be a back bone of the comics not trapped by the comics.

Double-checking the video, I have to say that I do feel reaffirmed that the Guardians movies, at least, have their own form of maturity. They may not discuss "relevant" themes like the X-Men movies did, but they really got some deep characters and explored that in a way that X-Men rarely did (and I'll take that any day). Honestly, I think the ending of that second one rivals Logan as a tear jerker in its own way. In any event, both movies are among my genre favorites and I'm pretty darn glad I can see both when the mood strikes me.

GOTG is a movie you leave remembering all the fun and games, If GOTG had any deep character exploration, it would be the first thing we remember about the films, The first thing we remember is the humor. I don't see X-Men in any type of conversation with GOTG. it doesn't look as if they are in the same universe. GOTG has never felt like ''deep characters smart marvel'' like X-Men or Daredevil does.

To sum up my position: I like both the Fox series and the MCU. Heck, I've been on record that I'm unhappy that the Fox series got canceled and am uncertain about a MCU reboot (there are possibilities that I would like explored when the time comes, but still, I'll be thinking a lot about the things we left behind). However, I think both series had different goals (serious movies vs. movies that run from more serious to less serious) and they should be judged by how they met those goals rather then whether they fit in a specific box (e.g. where they serious enough). Personally,

Fox, MCU, DCU, I have said it many times, all have their bad apples. MCU bad apples are more difficult to uproot. As trooper_thorn said, The MCU problem is a whole. a whole tree to me not just some bad apples in a tree.

Why is Spiderverse a contender for the best Spiderman film? Easy answer- the movie (like spiderman 2) is not part of a structural processed factory formula like Homecoming and FFH.

[WebLurker]

The humor is among the many self destructive things about Iron Man 3 not Iron Man 1

Whatever you say, man.

Objectively speaking, they are some of the worst of the MCU. Any honest pro critic/film student is more likely to say so from a typical tick box film check.

Funny thing, the pro critics didn't.

Its not needed.

So it's just your personal opinion then? Okay, fair enough.

I have forgotten RT existed until now.

Yeah?

I wanted Endgame to be better than what Disney gave us as I know how much marvel comics has overdone time travel and post apocalyptic stories.

Maybe there are better time travel stories out there, but the movie was not a post apocalyptic story. You've got to get that out of your system. The movie is good or bad on how it executed it's premise, not on whether it was what you wanted the movie to be.

its the same structural kind of movie. The movies are shot the say way.

Except they're not. Heck, if anything, the MCU is a lot less "same-ey" then it was during Phase One.

This is still wrong to me. Can anyone imagine if anyone said this about Game of Thrones? or they already did? Once D&D finished all the source material by season 6, the show's story began to fall apart because there was no source material to rely on as a back bone like season 1-6.

Or maybe the show runners just made bad decisions on executing the outlines they had? (Besides, didn't Martin given them the outlines for the unpublished books, meaning that the last seasons probably would've been about the same had they had the actual books in hand?)

Last Jedi didn't portray women in the best light, it misunderstood feminism,

You lost me.

There is nothing experiential about the movie, ransom moments, bad writing, disjointed action, character assassination is not experimental to me.

I cannot agree with anything here at all, but I don't think there's going to be any point in refuting anything here.

Its as high profile, its higher than I thought. I did think because the MCU is so big now, most would just be okay with a Disney xmen makeover from the scratch, but I was wrong. Nobody want Disney to change the seriousness of X-Men, meaning they know what X-Men is from either the movies, comics , games , TV shows or animations.

Where do you get your information?

Websearching, It should be easy to find more sources now since the latest xmen movie was a bomb. Don't also forget its been brought here.

Funny, I was basing my observations on the web, too.

Dark Phoenix is worse than Batman v Superman. Snyder understands some good aspect about making movies, Kinberg doesn't understand anything. Dark Phoenix is also worse because this is the second time Kinberg got a phoenix movie wrong.

Absolutely not.

This movies should be a back bone of the comics not trapped by the comics.

Why?

GOTG is a movie you leave remembering all the fun and games, If GOTG had any deep character exploration, it would be the first thing we remember about the films, The first thing we remember is the humor. I don't see X-Men in any type of conversation with GOTG. it doesn't look as if they are in the same universe.

The characters are what stood out in the movie most. Think there's a reason for that. (Remember, everyone thought the movie wouldn't work, and it was a smash).

GOTG has never felt like ''deep characters smart marvel'' like X-Men or Daredevil does.

Can't speak for Daredevil, but the Fox movies were not much on strong characterization, at least across the board. Some characters get a lot, others are just there. Say what you will about Guardians, but they were able to avoid that trap and then some. I will put Nebula's redemption arc against Magneto's any day.

Fox, MCU, DCU, I have said it many times, all have their bad apples. MCU bad apples are more difficult to uproot. As trooper_thorn said, The MCU problem is a whole. a whole tree to me not just some bad apples in a tree.

In your opinion. Not really sure of half the stuff your basing your conclusions on.

Why is Spiderverse a contender for the best Spiderman film? Easy answer- the movie (like spiderman 2) is not part of a structural processed factory formula like Homecoming and FFH.

Easier answer; you have different tastes in regards to the MCU then others.

[Killerbee911]

Quality wise, Disney screwed up MCU, SW and SM. But Disney is smart, because they know quality doesn’t always sell, continuity and universe sells.

Stuff like this make my eyes bug out

Universal's: Dark Universe
Young Adult movies: I am Number 4,The Darkest Minds, Divergent, Mortal Instruments, Beautiful Creatures, Golden Compass, Ender's Game, Eragon, The Seeker the dark is Rising, The Host, The City of Ember
Movies like Transformers,Predator, Terminator, Aliens, Godzilla
* Yes some these have had moderate even big success

Hollywood has been throwing universes with continuity for years now. It should say something a bunch of stuff doesn't make past the first movie and even successful stuff like Transformers or Dceu mid stream have rethink what they are doing. If quality doesn't matter just universe why don't we have other long running successful series.It is fine not like something I don't like country music but just because country music is not my style doesn't means it is bad sometimes means it is not for you.

[XPac]

Star Wars, DCEU and FoX-Men all sell well.

Course, all of those are trending downward while marvel, 2 dozen movies in, is still trending upwards. So they know what they're doing.

[Beaddle]

Whatever you say, man.

Was there anything more painful than the fake ''Mandarin'' revelation in Iron Man 3 to Iron Man 1?

Funny thing, the pro critics didn't

These ''pro critics'' have let MCU get away with many things for so long, they no longer have any meaningful contribution. Critics are now even struggling to have a voice in the smaller indie films.

So it's just your personal opinion then? Okay, fair enough.

There are better ways to handle things than using unbearable humor everytime.

Yeah?

What is RT again? RT will be interesting to talk about again when they find themselves in another controversy and that is if anyone still cares about it.

Absolutely not.

Dark Phoenix has no saving grace. Batman v Superman had some. Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, director's experience, the cinematography and the CGI. I cannot think of anything good about dark phoenix.

I cannot agree with anything here at all, but I don't think there's going to be any point in refuting anything here.

The Last Jedi was not only bad star wars, it was a misunderstanding of the star wars mythos that is basically a pop culture ''religion'' now.

Where do you get your information?

Most news pages talking about comics. I just read one on Forbes. Its a Marvel knowledge thing too. I wonder why it is so resented in the MCU that X-Men films gets the most share of serious comic movies.

The characters are what stood out in the movie most. Think there's a reason for that. (Remember, everyone thought the movie wouldn't work, and it was a smash).

The characters in a humor paint by numbers plotted disney story is what stood out. Disney has been doing this for years. My understanding about GOTG even in the Marvel family is one of love-hate. I think people realize that it was a fun but brainless space movie and like it as such. They never wanted it to extend the way it has to other marvel movies. why else are people so divided about Thor 3? Why else was star lord the most hated character in infifnty war? Chris Pratt had to address the controversy. Most of all importance, people blame GOTG for the over done humor found presently in every MCU movie.

Can't speak for Daredevil, but the Fox movies were not much on strong characterization, at least across the board. Some characters get a lot, others are just there. Say what you will about Guardians, but they were able to avoid that trap and then some. I will put Nebula's redemption arc against Magneto's any day.

GOTG movies problems is they don't have maturity, realism , seriousness or core themes that drives the 60% of fox movies. GOTG is about having meaningless good fun time in cinema. X-Men, you are suppose to think and reflect every now and then. Fox just never let some characters retire. Magneto, Mystique Xavier, Wolverine.

Nebula's redemption over magneto would have some thoughts, If MCU would ever allowed Magneto to be portrayed as he is in the movies, which is from the comics. I don't know the ties between GOTG and X-Men. If MCU doesn't want to anger an entire fan base more than the spiderman base, MCU will keep GOTG far away from X-Men. As far away as DOFP was to GOTG, its not hard to see the movie that was made for the juvenile fun zone house and the movie made for the others, a mature audience, very much aware that comic stories are more than fun and jokes as GOTG makes things out to be.

Easier answer; you have different tastes in regards to the MCU then others.

My taste comes from what I know about Spiderman in the comics. That taste has more in it's flavors of the greatest spiderman film argument.

Why Spiderman FFH is a bad spiderman film.


Who doesn't have an opinion with enough time to make a video? I prefer unbiased opinions that is based more on the back bones of the comics concept and some objective filmmaking reasonable points.