The Fantastic Four: First Steps

[Excraft]

12 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

It makes her look like a cliche and them look like idiots.

 

You do realize that Johnny is a man-child, right?  And Reed is an ass.  Makes perfect sense for her to be a mother type character.  That's fitting.  Strong female characters don't need to be the invincible know it all girls boss who kicks the ass of all comers. 

 

14 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Reed's motivations--do I really need to explain this one? I'm going to build a spaceship and explore the universe--with my girlfriend and her little brother. Cosmic rays? Oooops! Well, at least they got super powers instead of cancer. 

 

You do realize these are the same comic books where there are literal gods running around alongside people who were bitten by radioactive spiders or survived a full on nuclear blast and such, right?  It's a comic book.  It's not supposed to be realistic storytelling.

[battlewraith]

21 minutes ago, Excraft said:

Strong female characters don't need to be the invincible know it all girls boss who kicks the ass of all comers. 

 

Presumably there is a range of female character options available. So If I think Sue shouldn't be primarily a "mother type character"--it doesn't follow that she then has to be an invincible know it all whatever. Bizarre response.

 

Also, If Reed is an asshole and Johnny is a man-child to the extent that Sue has to mother them--that sounds like a shitshow. That's certainly not something I want to see and it's not how the trailer is coming across to me.

 

30 minutes ago, Excraft said:

You do realize these are the same comic books where there are literal gods running around alongside people who were bitten by radioactive spiders or survived a full on nuclear blast and such, right?  It's a comic book.  It's not supposed to be realistic storytelling.

 

No, it's a film that's coming out in 2025. The issue is not about what happened in the comics in the 60s. 

So while contemporary audiences will roll with some absurd plot points, the more reasonable things are the more likely the narrative is going to succeed with audiences.

"It's not supposed to be realistic storytelling" doesn't work if you've lost the viewer. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

There's nothing wrong with a strong mother figure. It's stupid when you're talking about a super powered team and somebody's defining characteristic is that they are the mom. To a group of adult men. It makes her look like a cliche and them look like idiots.

It may be a cliche, but that's because it's something that is often true.

 

Look, someone can be a "mother figure" without the adult men around her being children. The Matriarch is long standing archetype for a reason. In large families the actual mother, or grandmother, is often the Matriarch who, while not quite the leader, is a respected figure who guides people into certain directions, helps family members and gets them to cooperate.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Reed's motivations--do I really need to explain this one? I'm going to build a spaceship and explore the universe--with my girlfriend and her little brother. Cosmic rays? Oooops! Well, at least they got super powers instead of cancer.

You say this like it's supposed to be a valid critique. It's a comic book! It's not supposed to be Shakespeare, or a scientifically accurate historical text. It's a comic book written for kids and teenagers. If you change the story because it's not grown-up enough for you, or scientifically accurate enough for you, then it's no longer the same story and they're no longer The Fantastic Four.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Look at this still from Journey to the Center of the Earth that came out just a few years before FF:

Yeah, and? I don't see anything wrong with that picture. Why don't you tell me what's wrong with that picture.

[JKCarrier]

4 hours ago, Ghost said:

Heather (his wife) was the leader from issue #1.

Yes James created it, but he was not part of the story (except in flashbacks).  He was already dead by time the story started, which was a big part of the story and why she became the hero she became.

 

Sounds like you maybe haven't looked at those issues in a while. James was the leader until he died in Alpha Flight #12 (he was later retconned back to life, as is usually the case...).

[Ghost]

14 minutes ago, JKCarrier said:

Sounds like you maybe haven't looked at those issues in a while. James was the leader until he died in Alpha Flight #12 (he was later retconned back to life, as is usually the case...).

Ahhh, my old man memory has failed me again!!!

 

In that case, they damn sure better not have Heather leading the team when the movie finally gets made!

[battlewraith]

45 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Look, someone can be a "mother figure" without the adult men around her being children. The Matriarch is long standing archetype for a reason. In large families the actual mother, or grandmother, is often the Matriarch who, while not quite the leader, is a respected figure who guides people into certain directions, helps family members and gets them to cooperate.

 

And that would make sense if it were some kind of domestic drama where Sue is managing various relationships of an extended family. It's not. It's a team superhero movie where they are going to be facing down Galactus. It's her, her husband, her little brother and Ben Grimm. It would be really disappointing if they just relegated her to being a shallow mother figure character. Even the comics seemed to develop a tension about this when she transitioned from Invisible Girl to Invisible Woman, along with her brief stint as a supervillain. And that was back in the 80s. 

45 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

You say this like it's supposed to be a valid critique. It's a comic book! It's not supposed to be Shakespeare, or a scientifically accurate historical text. It's a comic book written for kids and teenagers. If you change the story because it's not grown-up enough for you, or scientifically accurate enough for you, then it's no longer the same story and they're no longer The Fantastic Four.

Comics evolve. Characters evolve. It doesn't need to faithful to the 1960s kid audience or risk not being "The Fantastic Four."

 

45 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Yeah, and? I don't see anything wrong with that picture. Why don't you tell me what's wrong with that picture.

 

There's nothing wrong with that picture. The point is that the idea was not particularly original. Most things in comics were existing elements reworked into other contexts.

Edited 22 hours ago by battlewraith

[Excraft]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Bizarre response.

 

Bullshit.  Let's see whose responses are "bizarre" here...

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

No, it's a film that's coming out in 2025. The issue is not about what happened in the comics in the 60s. 

 

Bizarre response.  It's a film based on a comic that started in the 1960's and has had a loyal following since then.  Look at the setting and set design in the trailer.  They're quite clearly going for something of a 1960's retro period piece.  The Fantastic Four has had a loyal following ever since their creation.  It's absolutely about what happened in the comics throughout their 60+ year history.  That's what the fan base is familiar with.  The last FF film changed the characters radically.  It failed.  Miserably. 

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

So while contemporary audiences will roll with some absurd plot points, the more reasonable things are the more likely the narrative is going to succeed with audiences.

 

Bizarre response.  Sue not being the "mother type" figure she's always been is "unreasonable" and "unbelievable" and "shallow", but characters being literal invincible gods, getting bitten by radioactive spiders and gaining super powers, surviving full on nuclear blasts and turning into unstoppable green rage monsters, having magical powers are all "reasonable" and "believable".  Bullshit.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

"It's not supposed to be realistic storytelling" doesn't work if you've lost the viewer. 

 

Bizarre response.  They've already "lost the viewers".  Changing the characters and the plots people are familiar with that drew them to the characters and have held their interest for decades is what the built in fan base is looking for, not "re-imaginings" for "modern audiences".  See the previous FF film.  How's changing characters people have adored for decades working out for Disney with their princess flicks?  Superhero films and films in general are unquestionably on the decline.  Box office receipts prove that.  "Modern audiences" aren't buying what they're selling.

 

46 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

It would be really disappointing if they just relegated her to being a shallow mother figure character.

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

And that would make sense if it were some kind of domestic drama where Sue is managing various relationships of an extended family.

 

Bizarre responses.  These show a severe lack of understanding on your part on what a mother type figure is.  Why is being a mother "shallow" and "disappointing"?  WTF do you think Sarah Connor is?  What was she doing in T2?  Anything and everything she possibly could to protect her fucking child.  That's a strong mother type character.  WTF was Ellen Ripley doing in Aliens protecting Newt?  That's a strong motherly instinct kicking in for a strong mother type figure.  Sue looking after her family and doing what she can to protect them isn't "shallow" or "weak" or "boring" or "disappointing".  Not in the least.

[Excraft]

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

Reed's motivations--do I really need to explain this one? I'm going to build a spaceship and explore the universe--with my girlfriend and her little brother.

 

Bizarre response.  Jeff Bezos launched William Shatner, Katy Perry and his girlfriend into space.  That's real life.  But some super intelligent guy bringing his girlfriend and her brother and his best friend into space isn't believable.

[Excraft]

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

 

 

Where's the guy on fire and the guy made of rocks?

[battlewraith]

3 hours ago, Excraft said:

 

Bullshit.  Let's see whose responses are "bizarre" here...

 

 

Bizarre response.  It's a film based on a comic that started in the 1960's and has had a loyal following since then.  Look at the setting and set design in the trailer.  They're quite clearly going for something of a 1960's retro period piece.  The Fantastic Four has had a loyal following ever since their creation.  It's absolutely about what happened in the comics throughout their 60+ year history.  That's what the fan base is familiar with.  The last FF film changed the characters radically.  It failed.  Miserably. 

 

 

Bizarre response.  Sue not being the "mother type" figure she's always been is "unreasonable" and "unbelievable" and "shallow", but characters being literal invincible gods, getting bitten by radioactive spiders and gaining super powers, surviving full on nuclear blasts and turning into unstoppable green rage monsters, having magical powers are all "reasonable" and "believable".  Bullshit.

 

 

Bizarre response.  They've already "lost the viewers".  Changing the characters and the plots people are familiar with that drew them to the characters and have held their interest for decades is what the built in fan base is looking for, not "re-imaginings" for "modern audiences".  See the previous FF film.  How's changing characters people have adored for decades working out for Disney with their princess flicks?  Superhero films and films in general are unquestionably on the decline.  Box office receipts prove that.  "Modern audiences" aren't buying what they're selling.

 

 

Bizarre responses.  These show a severe lack of understanding on your part on what a mother type figure is.  Why is being a mother "shallow" and "disappointing"?  WTF do you think Sarah Connor is?  What was she doing in T2?  Anything and everything she possibly could to protect her fucking child.  That's a strong mother type character.  WTF was Ellen Ripley doing in Aliens protecting Newt?  That's a strong motherly instinct kicking in for a strong mother type figure.  Sue looking after her family and doing what she can to protect them isn't "shallow" or "weak" or "boring" or "disappointing".  Not in the least.

 

Lol wow. Didn't know that an off the cuff use of bizarre would send you off the rails. 

 

Your generic litany about "modern audiences not buying what they're selling" is a joke. There are so many variables about why films in general are decline but you're never at a loss to point out that it's because rankled fans aren't getting what they want. And we're having this discussion again about a movie that hasn't come out yet, in regard to how this particular character could be portrayed. Possibly too independent and too in charge for your delicate sensibilities.

 

Neither Ellen Ripley nor Sarah Connor were mothers in their first films. Ripley in particular was an intelligent, resourceful crew member on a space vessel. The fact that you associate them with strong mother types is perhaps indicative of the problem--you can't seem to view them as anything else. Sue looking after her family and doing what she can to protect them doesn't require her to "mother" them. Any more than Reed trying to save the people of Earth requires him to father them. 

 

[battlewraith]

4 hours ago, Excraft said:

 

Bizarre response.  Jeff Bezos launched William Shatner, Katy Perry and his girlfriend into space.  That's real life.  But some super intelligent guy bringing his girlfriend and her brother and his best friend into space isn't believable.

 

Ok, so try actually putting some thought into this. If Bezos had actually designed the spaceship himself, at the beginning of space travel before NASA had done this. And, on it's maiden voyage brings his girlfriend, her brother, and his college friend into actual space in a faster than light rocket, not just something going into Earth orbit. Maybe you'd have a point.

And it's not about believability. It's about his perceived judgement in an era when people actually wear seatbelts.

[Excraft]

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

Your generic litany about "modern audiences not buying what they're selling" is a joke. There are so many variables about why films in general are decline but you're never at a loss to point out that it's because rankled fans aren't getting what they want.

 

Bizarre response.  If "modern audiences" were getting what they want from Hollywood and buying what movie studios are selling, then Hollywood and box office receipts wouldn't be in decline.

 

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

And we're having this discussion again about a movie that hasn't come out yet, in regard to how this particular character could be portrayed. Possibly too independent and too in charge for your delicate sensibilities.

 

Bizarre response.  No one other than you is suggesting that Sue Storm is June Cleaver sitting around the house baking cookies, making Reed dinner and doing the laundry.  That's not her character.  Neither is her character being the leader of the FF and the boss lady, which she is rumored to be in this film.  If that's the case, then that's diverging from the source material and the character that the built in fan base is familiar with.  This isn't rocket science to understand.

 

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

Neither Ellen Ripley nor Sarah Connor were mothers in their first films.

 

Bizarre response.  Yes, Ellen Ripley was a mother in the first film.  Watch Aliens again.  Nice attempt to deflect though.  No question Sarah Connor became a bad ass to protect her son. 

 

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

The fact that you associate them with strong mother types is perhaps indicative of the problem--you can't seem to view them as anything else.

 

Bizarre response.  That's complete bullshit.  I've no issue with strong female characters.  You seem to have a real disdain for anything feminine about the maternal instinct.  That just shows you're very shallow and narrow minded and can't grasp that female characters asserting their maternal instincts doesn't make them "weak", "shallow", "boring", a "shit show" or whatever other bullshit you want to call them.

[Excraft]

3 hours ago, battlewraith said:

Ok, so try actually putting some thought into this. If Bezos had actually designed the spaceship himself, at the beginning of space travel before NASA had done this. And, on it's maiden voyage brings his girlfriend, her brother, and his college friend into actual space in a faster than light rocket, not just something going into Earth orbit. Maybe you'd have a point.

And it's not about believability. It's about his perceived judgement in an era when people actually wear seatbelts.

 

Bizarre response.  Try putting some thought into this - in the real world, Jeff Bezos (billionaire) launched William Shatner (92 year old actor), Katy Perry (singer) and his own girlfriend into space.  Who gives a shit if he didn't design the rocket?  He still did it and that's real life.  You've got Elon Musk designing ships capable of sending real life people to Mars.  But a super genius doing it is somehow not believable.

[ZacKing]

20 hours ago, El D said:

Namor looking like Spock in a green speedo

 

This would have been infinitely better than the absolute sewage he turned out to be in Wakanda Forever.  Totally ruined the character in my opinion. 

[ZacKing]

11 hours ago, battlewraith said:

Your generic litany about "modern audiences not buying what they're selling" is a joke. There are so many variables about why films in general are decline but you're never at a loss to point out that it's because rankled fans aren't getting what they want.

 

Yeah there's lots of variables for why ticket sales are in decline, with a big part of that being movie studios are churning out crap that nobody wants to pay money to see.  Trying to claim that's not a big part of it is just silly and arguing just to argue. 

 

11 hours ago, battlewraith said:

The fact that you associate them with strong mother types is perhaps indicative of the problem--you can't seem to view them as anything else. Sue looking after her family and doing what she can to protect them doesn't require her to "mother" them.

 

What exactly do you think a "mother" figure is?  I don't think you're grasping how strong the maternal instinct and how important a matriarch figure is in a family.  Being "motherly" doesn't necessarily equate to a woman cooking dinner, cleaning the house, changing diapers and following the orders her husband barks at her.  Sarah Connor is a great example.  She didn't become what she became because she had an overabundance of testosterone and just liked shooting guns and blowing stuff up.  She was protecting her child.  That maternal instinct to protect her son was the motivation.  Look at Samantha Carter in SG-1, Princess Leia, Padme Amidala.  There's plenty of examples of matriarch female characters keeping the team together and standing shoulder to shoulder with her male counterparts, not above them.  Try looking at women who are matriarchs as something other than "shallow". 

[battlewraith]

7 hours ago, Excraft said:

 

1 .Bizarre response.  If "modern audiences" were getting what they want from Hollywood and buying what movie studios are selling, then Hollywood and box office receipts wouldn't be in decline.

 

 

2. Bizarre response.  No one other than you is suggesting that Sue Storm is June Cleaver sitting around the house baking cookies, making Reed dinner and doing the laundry.  That's not her character.  Neither is her character being the leader of the FF and the boss lady, which she is rumored to be in this film.  If that's the case, then that's diverging from the source material and the character that the built in fan base is familiar with.  This isn't rocket science to understand.

 

 

3. Bizarre response.  Yes, Ellen Ripley was a mother in the first film.  Watch Aliens again.  Nice attempt to deflect though.  No question Sarah Connor became a bad ass to protect her son. 

 

 

4. Bizarre response.  That's complete bullshit.  I've no issue with strong female characters.  You seem to have a real disdain for anything feminine about the maternal instinct.  That just shows you're very shallow and narrow minded and can't grasp that female characters asserting their maternal instincts doesn't make them "weak", "shallow", "boring", a "shit show" or whatever other bullshit you want to call them.

 

1. The film industry is probably suffering from competition from streaming platforms and other forms of entertainment. The notion that this decline is the result of the studios producing content that you don't like is silly. 

 

2. Most of the MCU depictions diverge from the source material--for good reason. It's 2025, I don't have an issue with a woman being the boss of something. I absolutely hope they give Sue more to do than following Reed's orders and getting whisked off by Namor in a speedo. As for the built in fanbase, how many of them are there? How old are they? What era of Fantastic Four did they read? And most importantly, how did you become these people's spokesman?

 

3. FFS. Aliens is the sequel. Ripley was not a mother in Alien. She was not Newt's mother in the second film either. You can't even get the facts right about your example.

 

4. You seem to have no problem as long as you ascribe it to maternal instinct or being some sort of matriarch. Which makes no sense for this team of adults.  Anyone should, I think, be able to see the stupidity of this by viewing Reed as the team's daddy. View everything Reed does in the team as being a father to his wife, her brother, and his college friend. You know because paternal instincts are a thing. Being a patriarch is a thing. Lol.  

[battlewraith]

8 hours ago, Excraft said:

 

 Who gives a shit if he didn't design the rocket? 

 

Anyone who has the mental capacity to actually engage with the argument.

Nuclear bombs have been around since the 40s. World leaders and governments can have them produced. Therefore, a fictionalized account of the Manhattan Project that features Oppenheimer, his wife, her kid brother, and their college football chum making the first such warhead is somehow not ridiculous. Not only in terms of feasibility, but in terms of what that says about Oppenheimer as a character.

[Glacier Peak]

On 2/14/2024 at 11:03 PM, Glacier Peak said:

I'm hoping no sky beams will be present in this one. 

Looks like they cast Galactus as the sky beam in this one. 

[battlewraith]

59 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

What exactly do you think a "mother" figure is?

 

Sue is Reed's wife. She is Johnny's sister. Ben's friend. Why is it that you think she would need to be a mother figure to these people?

It's not that matriarchs are shallow. It's that some people seem to have trouble viewing women as anything else.

[Ghost]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

 

Sue is Reed's wife. She is Johnny's sister. Ben's friend. Why is it that you think she would need to be a mother figure to these people?

 

Because that was her defining character trait.

She held the team together.

 

Just like yours is to find ways to argue with everyone here on this board, and always get the last word in.  

If they make a Battlewraith movie that features a main character that does not have those traits - I’ll be equally as upset.

Edited 2 hours ago by Ghost

[Excraft]

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

1. The film industry is probably suffering from competition from streaming platforms and other forms of entertainment. The notion that this decline is the result of the studios producing content that you don't like is silly.

 

Bizarre response.  If movie studios were producing content that people wanted to see and pay for, then they wouldn't be facing a decline.  Why is the market moving toward streaming?  Better product with better content that people are favoring over what they can get at movie theaters. 

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Most of the MCU depictions diverge from the source material--for good reason.

Bizarre response.  How's "diverging from the source material because its 2025" working out for them?  Is the MCU getting more popular or less?  

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

And most importantly, how did you become these people's spokesman?

 

Bizarre response.  When did I say I was? 

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

3. FFS. Aliens is the sequel. Ripley was not a mother in Alien. She was not Newt's mother in the second film either. You can't even get the facts right about your example.

 

Bizarre response.  Ripley had a daughter in the sequel, which means she had that child in the first film.  It's the "changing and evolving" characters and stories that you're on about.  Newt wasn't Ripley's biological child and everyone knows that.  Ripley's motivations for protecting Newt are obvious.  Newt represented the child that Ripley lost. 

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

You seem to have no problem as long as you ascribe it to maternal instinct or being some sort of matriarch. Which makes no sense for this team of adults. 

 

Bizarre response.  Adults don't need matriarchs to help with the family and the matriarch of the family doesn't have a vital role in the family?  What do you think someone like Queen Elizabeth was to the Windsor family?  If you need something to help you understand what a matriarch is and how important they are to a family, watch The Crown.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

Why is it that you think she would need to be a mother figure to these people?

It's not that matriarchs are shallow. It's that some people seem to have trouble viewing women as anything else.

 

Bizarre response.  Being "motherly" and a matriarch doesn't make a woman any less than any man.  It's you who seems to have trouble understanding how this is a source of strength for a female character.  It's you who has said that Sue being the mother/matriarch of the FF family is "shallow".  You're the one having the difficulty here.

 

1 hour ago, battlewraith said:

 

Anyone who has the mental capacity to actually engage with the argument.

Nuclear bombs have been around since the 40s. World leaders and governments can have them produced. Therefore, a fictionalized account of the Manhattan Project that features Oppenheimer, his wife, her kid brother, and their college football chum making the first such warhead is somehow not ridiculous. Not only in terms of feasibility, but in terms of what that says about Oppenheimer as a character.

 

Bizarre response.  Once again, how is what Reed does in the comics any more unbelievable than Peter Parker getting bitten by a radioactive spider and gaining super powers?  How is it any less believable than Bruce Banner surviving a full on nuclear blast?  How is it any less believable than Lex Luthor building all kinds of technology to defeat Superman, who is for all intents and purposes a god who can do anything?  How is it less believable than a warrior goddess being sculpted out of clay and her mother using magic to bring her to life?  All of those things - not ridiculous, but Reed building a space ship and taking his girlfriend and pals on a space flight - ridiculous.  That's truly bizarre. 

 

Rockets that can shoot into orbit have been around since the 1960s.  World leaders and governments can have them produced.  So can wealthy billionaires who are doing just that right now in real life.  Again, truly bizarre. 

[El D]

3 hours ago, ZacKing said:

 

This would have been infinitely better than the absolute sewage he turned out to be in Wakanda Forever.  Totally ruined the character in my opinion. 

 

I don't agree, though I do get why wanting something closer to the original version would leave the film version as disappointing. I think if T'challa had actually been part of the movie as the intended counter to him it might've gone better but that's all musings at this point. The MCU does try to course correct via fan response (look at Iron Man 3 and Mandarin for example) but no idea if/when that'll happen here.

 

With the way the MCU has advanced and was originally constrained via film rights, available characters, and chosen arcs, there's only so much room to adapt stuff in by this point. Like, as cool as an Invaders team up would have been, it's a bit hard to shoehorn Namor and the OG Human Torch into the background of Cap's first movie, especially considering they weren't even on the board when the initial MCU films were made.

 

Thinking about it, a more traditional Namor appearing in First Steps would make a lot of sense, and jive with the way the MCU seems to be using multiverse content anyway (Loki, Deadpool, Fox, etc.). Also he'd get to pine after Sue in a context that works a lot better if Namor is, like the FF, an already accepted part of that world's politics and history.

[battlewraith]

59 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Because that was her defining character trait.

She held the team together.

 

Just like yours is to find ways to argue with everyone here on this board, and always get the last word in.  

If they make a Battlewraith movie that features a main character that does not have those traits - I’ll be equally as upset.

 

Look at what I'm dealing with. 

You say that, instead of giving Sue any kind of leadership position, the filmmakers should do something like Alpha Flight. You'd be totally in to Heather Hudson leading a team.

Not being an Alpha Flight fan, I looked it up. She didn't make the team. She assumed leadership 12 issues in after husband seemingly dies. So...not a great example of why Sue couldn't have more of a leadership role.

 

When I pointed that out, you gaslit me saying "oh well he was already dead in issue one and it was told in flashback."

Someone else pointed out that you were wrong.

And then you bail on the character altogether. "In that case she definitely shouldn't be leading the team." Sad. Apparently out of some dogmatic adherence to how the characters were originally written. But neither the Marvel films or the comics themselves follow that dogmatism. Storytelling in general is something that involves constant revision and reinterpretation for contemporary audiences. 

 

The wikipedia entry for the movie cites Sue as the leader of the Future Foundation, which wasn't even a thing in the comics until 2010. 

 

 

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, Excraft said:

 

1. Bizarre response.  If movie studios were producing content that people wanted to see and pay for, then they wouldn't be facing a decline.  Why is the market moving toward streaming?  Better product with better content that people are favoring over what they can get at movie theaters. 

 

2. Bizarre response.  How's "diverging from the source material because its 2025" working out for them?  Is the MCU getting more popular or less?  

 

 

3. Bizarre response.  When did I say I was? 

 

 

4. Bizarre response.  Ripley had a daughter in the sequel, which means she had that child in the first film.  It's the "changing and evolving" characters and stories that you're on about.  Newt wasn't Ripley's biological child and everyone knows that.  Ripley's motivations for protecting Newt are obvious.  Newt represented the child that Ripley lost. 

 

 

5. Bizarre response.  Adults don't need matriarchs to help with the family and the matriarch of the family doesn't have a vital role in the family?  What do you think someone like Queen Elizabeth was to the Windsor family?  If you need something to help you understand what a matriarch is and how important they are to a family, watch The Crown.

 

 

6. Bizarre response.  Being "motherly" and a matriarch doesn't make a woman any less than any man.  It's you who seems to have trouble understanding how this is a source of strength for a female character.  It's you who has said that Sue being the mother/matriarch of the FF family is "shallow".  You're the one having the difficulty here.

 

 

7. Bizarre response.  Once again, how is what Reed does in the comics any more unbelievable than Peter Parker getting bitten by a radioactive spider and gaining super powers?  How is it any less believable than Bruce Banner surviving a full on nuclear blast?  How is it any less believable than Lex Luthor building all kinds of technology to defeat Superman, who is for all intents and purposes a god who can do anything?  How is it less believable than a warrior goddess being sculpted out of clay and her mother using magic to bring her to life?  All of those things - not ridiculous, but Reed building a space ship and taking his girlfriend and pals on a space flight - ridiculous.  That's truly bizarre. 

 

Rockets that can shoot into orbit have been around since the 1960s.  World leaders and governments can have them produced.  So can wealthy billionaires who are doing just that right now in real life.  Again, truly bizarre. 

 

1. Most streaming content from what I've seen is garbage. The market is probably moving towards streaming largely because it's cheaper to stream and people don't want to drag themselves to the theater. 

2. MCU is probably getting less popular and that probably has to do with people getting tired of cape flicks. Moreover, superhero comics are far less popular than when I was a kid reading them. There are a lot of reasons for these declines but the biggest is probably far more access to entertainment options. Not middle-aged fans being pissed that things were not the same as in their childhood.

3. It's inferred constantly. You're like the Lorax for aggrieved dogmatic comics nerds.

4. Ripley had no child or reference to being a mother in Alien. It was in no way a relevant aspect of her character in the first movie (The theatrical release of Aliens also did not include any reference). Ripley's character did not need any reference to motherhood in order to be a compelling protagonist. Cameron tacked that aspect on to the character in the sequel. If  people are whining about Sue's character in the team being potentially changed--then they should be against Cameron's addition to Ripley's character. But there's no logical consistency here. 

5. LMFAO you're trying to make the case for Sue being a matriarch by directing me to material about the fucking queen of England?

6. Yes I'm apparently the only one in this argument who would like more for Sue than stereotyped portrayals of her mothering her male friends and family.

7. Okay so it's a crazy comic book world where the unbelievable happens. So I'll stop taking issue with Super genius Reed taking his civilian friends on a dangerous space mission and you stop seething about Sue getting an expanded leadership role in the team. Mmmmkay?