Is the Marvel Age Of Movies Done?

[thwhtGuardian]

Interesting, What lack of understanding to movies did I miss when I have already explained countless times why some directors choose R including James Mangold Logan. That was all subject matter, in a genre of comic book films. This is not even me, this is Mangold who said so when he chose to make Logan R. So that does me he has a lack of understanding?

this really has no substance to what I said as it does not really answer anything I said either, So I will just make it simple. Every subject matter in humanity can and has made its way to a comic book story, Marvel included. this is why if I remember correctly there was even an MCU fan that once said, if any studio were to adapt Chris Claremont God Loves, Man Kills, it will be best to make it R because of the subject matter. So in reality we can even argue X-MEN 2 was unnecessarily contained to PG 13.

Here is the explanation of the story that carries substance to any stance why this will be an R film.



Lets also go further to subject matters and genre of of a marvel comic book tilted God Loves, Man Kills, If this scene is acted live on film, it will factually get R Rated.

Attachment 113631


Lastly remember about what I said, it was more about Scorsese comments about cinema academia that I can see where he is perfectly coming from, so what will now be implied is that Scorsese lacks an understanding of subject matters and genre, which from what I can see, he does not when you look at his filmography when he goes for R rated and when he stays PG 13 all in different genres he has done.

So there we have it, with my not understanding claims, although in reality I have given 3 strong objective examples of how subject matters works in any genre that will be good for R rating backed up by A Chris Claremont story, a 2003 comic film that feels watered down now and Scorsese filmography.

Please don't ever tell me I have a lack of understanding of movies subject maters and genre again.LOL

...you've literally given zero objective answers.

[Castle]

Lol yea Like if someone who makes 90% adult aimed MOB movies is a good barometer on how to make Comicbook movies. There is no need for an R rating rating for 98% of Comicbook properties. These and a films about the MOB have next to no overlap. Spielberg is a better example as he makes films with more variety. And he has a nice mix of R and PG/Pg13. The films that are R make sense too Saving Priavte Ryan and Schindlers list for example. Captain America wouldn't have been made better if soldiers heads were getting blown off when they were storming bases.

I will disagree with this, since you once made big deal to me about Nightcrawler self mutilating himself in X2 and that was not even an R film, not to mention it was made at a different time in the early 2000s, where the standard for comic book content was much higher, however to unnecessarily make a big deal about that scene that was still in a pg 13 film to try and mask me off of how MCU content can be very lacking once you directly compare it to other pg comic films, does not mask the issue, but it exposes the weakness of the issue.

As I said even till now, I still cannot find any good justification why Iron Man 3 first story was not good enough for the MCU, when the movie could still have remined pg 13. If a character talking about his own self mutilation can still be pg 13, surely someone with a drinking problem can also stay in a pg 13 range since that is a lighter subject matter.

Black Panther wouldn't have been better if they showed the women Nakia was protecting getting raped/Tortured /Or mutilated. It's just not the films being made. If Marvel makes a Punisher films about the horrors of war set in Vietnam or Iraq. Then yea the R rating would be a tool to add to that story. Not saying that can't do it without but it could be an aid.)

If I remember correctly Black Panther issue is that the some tried to make it a deep movie about tackling racism and prejudice but that was not what it was really about. Racism is barely even a theme in the film. However I would say, Black Panther would have been better as a film if it leaned more similar to Spike Lee's Blackkklansman. Which will likely end up on a split decision for R and PG that the director will have to decide on, because to get that deep on a subject matter like racism, you may have to show things like lynching , city unrest and people using the N word, these are all subject matters that can still be in a comic book genre.

[ed2962]

So was Ed Woods.

And Russ Meyer!

[ed2962]

This is because the marvel source material do open the doors to have having them, including DC.

What's funny is Marvel and DC do have characters that could lean towards being in a R-Rated movie, but instead of wanting a Santana movie or Werewolf by Night, some fans want R-Rated Hulk and X-men.

[ed2962]

But perhaps this Saturday morning kids show could have been better if were R-Rated? After all drug addiction is serious matter and this special didn't explicitly show people going through withdrawals or what it looks like to shoot up or the violence or crime often associated with the sub-culture. And where is cursing? Many teen-aged dope fiends use profanity. Surely the audience ( 6-10yr olds) would have found it much more impactful.

[Kirby101]

Wait, so now Scorsese can make good all ages movies like Hugo that don't have to be R. But Marvel is bad for making all ages movies from their all ages subject.
But also it's not that the MCU movies needed to be R, it's that Marvel chose the wrong books and movies to adopt and they needed to pick the stories that could be R if they wanted to prove they were "serious" film makers.
But the MCU is still bad because they aren't R rated, and, oh yes, more than one person was involved in making them.

Sheesh!

[Noodle]

Please don't ever tell me I have a lack of understanding of movies subject maters and genre again.LOL

And yet you say this:

If I remember correctly Black Panther issue is that the some tried to make it a deep movie about tackling racism and prejudice but that was not what it was really about. Racism is barely even a theme in the film.

So, yes. You have a lack of understanding of movie subject matters and genre.

[Castle]

What's funny is Marvel and DC do have characters that could lean towards being in a R-Rated movie, but instead of wanting a Santana movie or Werewolf by Night, some fans want R-Rated Hulk and X-men.

I cannot speak for Hulk as much as X-MEN, but X-MEN has factually earned the right for more r rated films because of

Deadpool
Deadpool 2
Logan

The X-Force (potential)
Multiple Man (Potential)

Those 2 films were what fox had in store before the disney buy out and they were confirmed to be r rated. Honestly I think Kevin Feige would have built better steam still trying to do this movies (x-force and multiple man) as a DC kind of Else world story, far away from the MCU, than the rumoured multiverse of some fox characters crossing over to the mcu, that is just done for hype and nostalgia with no challenging content.

As for Hulk, no doubt if Marvel has not been bought up by Disney and Edward Norton was still playing the character, I see him pushing that envelope considering his reputation for wanting to be very involved in the creative aspect of his movies. it may have given him a somewhat difficult reputation in the business but no doubt it has also defined him as one of the best actors of his generation that know how to deliver strong performances in his movie. I see Norton doing a great R rated Hulk film.

[Kirby101]

I also forgot that movies that are fun and funny and exciting and thrill packed with great characters and actors cannot be any good or "serious" because they are for all ages.

Or, those MCU movies would be fine if only they also made a Hulk movie were he showed his balls and cursed a lot.

[inisideguy]

I also forgot that movies that are fun and funny and exciting and thrill packed with great characters and actors cannot be any good or "serious" because they are for all ages.

Or, those MCU movies would be fine if only they also made a Hulk movie were he showed his balls and cursed a lot.

I can see the idea that there is a niche for more hardcore superhero stuff in media and we have all seen it. I can't for the life of me figure out why Castle needs or wants to see it in the context of the MCU. Personally I can watch Jessica Jones and appreciate what they are doing. But as for doing that long term in any franchise I think it would burn out. For me I can appreciate some of the Marvel Netflix stuff, and maybe there should be an outlet for that type of storytelling within the Marvel system? But I don't see it as being important within the MCU. I mean in some ways there is right? We saw the US agent basically decapitate a guy with his shield. So it is there. Its just not there all the time.

[Username taken]

What's funny is Marvel and DC do have characters that could lean towards being in a R-Rated movie, but instead of wanting a Santana movie or Werewolf by Night, some fans want R-Rated Hulk and X-men.

Exactly.

There are characters that operate within the sphere of what could termed as R-rated.

Let's see those ones get the R-rated treatment. All this talk of R-rated X-men, Hulk, Captain America is just meaningless.

If Marvel made an PG Punisher movie for example, then I'd fully understand the complaits.

[Kirby101]

Also, Disney has a family friendly brand. It would just be bad business and not worth the headache from the backlash if they were to make some of the Marvel shows as dark and violent as the Netflix shows. Why would they, WandaVision, FWS and Loki were good shows that were very well received. It's not like they have to look art the MCU and second guess themselves, the way WB had to with the Snyderverse's lackluster performance. What would be to point of R rated shows on Disney+. To prove they are serious film makers?

[Kirby101]

Exactly.

There are characters that operate within the sphere of what could termed as R-rated.

Let's see those ones get the R-rated treatment. All this talk of R-rated X-men, Hulk, Captain America is just missing the point in its entirety.

OR, it's just one more way to bash the MCU. Which really is the point.

[Username taken]

Also, Disney has a family friendly brand. It would just be bad business and not worth the headache from the backlash if they were to make some of the Marvel shows as dark and violent as the Netflix shows. Why would they, WandaVision, FWS and Loki were good shows that were very well received. It's not like they have to look art the MCU and second guess themselves, the way WB had to with the Snyderverse's lackluster performance. What would be to point of R rated shows on Disney+. To prove they are serious film makers?

Agreed.

Disney has always been a family brand and have always released more mature material outside of the core Disney banner.

It really isn't something very deep.

[inisideguy]

Here is something I was thinking about in this context. The Indiana Jones franchise. Now he is basically a pulp hero. His movies are PG, but are pretty graphic. Now would/ could Disney go that far in one of their superhero movies? Not that they were any deeper or whatever than a typical marvel film. But Spielberg did use some classic horror violence and gross stuff within them. And I think it worked within that framework and helped make the movies more memorable. I don't know just got me thinking a little.