No, this thread is about the head of Marvel's movie devision thinking the superhero genre isn't a thing. He also says "I believe that each of our films can be very different" which, yeah, sure, they could be very different, but that's clearly not a thing Marvel has been interested in doing yet. They've seemingly been trying their damnedest to keep everything similar, so it's pretty funny if Kevin Feigue actually thinks they're doing very different things.
EXACTLY. The Landis-Abnett run was FAR superior and Bendis did the...Bendis thing to it. Now GOTG has been reduced to a space comedy with half the cast of the book version and a cute Disneyfied cartoon to boot. I don't care what anyone says, Disney has all but destroyed Marvel Comics and as the films are now taking precedence as the source material, they all have this comedy/kid friendly "Gotta sell toys" tone post-Secret Wars. Avengers: Age of Ultron was just the same movie all over again, but Captain America: Winter Soldier needs to be the template of seriousness (not genre) for most Marvel films, if you ask me.
Feige, Snyder and Schpeilberg are all kidding themselves by attempting to divorce the comics mold. They are ALL comic book films based on comic book characters. The only differences are tone and technique in making them palatable.
Last edited by Godwell; 10-01-2015 at 07:52 PM.
Kid friendly superheroes? God forbid. You would think we were talking about characters made to appeal to children here.
How could Captain America: The Winter Soldier be the "template of seriousness" for the movies? That movie is just like other stuff, and it actually has less going on than Guardians of the Galaxy.
Is it just cool to hate Marvel cause they're big or something? Do people remember what comic book movies used to be like? Or when we thought getting to see The Avengers on screen was an impossibility? If Marvel movies are the bad ones then what's worth watching outside of Nolan's so gritty it gets stuck in your teeth films?
And I think this is where comic book movies can live on a lot longer than superhero movies. Just like movies based on novels can be many different things, so can comic book based movies. But if all movies based on books were Stephen King novels, they'd last just about as long as superhero movies can/will. Case in point, being a reader of comics for 20 years I had no idea A History of Violence was a comic book until I saw it in the credits. I think there is a valid critiques being made in these discussions about superhero movies. But not all comic book movies are superhero movies. Comic book movies have more range.
Let's not act like there aren't very real problems with most of Marvel's movies, (and I like more of what I've seen of them than not) or that some of them (like The Avengers) aren't terrible. Did getting to see The Avengers on the big screen ever feel like an impossibility? I would say pre-Iron Man, pre-2008, hell, pre-Ultimates really, it was more like no one cared if the Avengers were on the big screen. Before The Ultimates, Marvel's team of mightiest heroes may as well have been behind whatever Marvel was calling the fifth X-Men team at the time.
There are other movies, other action movies even. In fact, since 2008, the best action movies we've been getting aren't superhero movies.If Marvel movies are the bad ones then what's worth watching outside of Nolan's so gritty it gets stuck in your teeth films?