|
Whalley posted:Didn't Burton's batmobile have machine guns too? Burton's Batman had zero qualms about killing people.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 04:23 |
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Burton's Batman had zero qualms about killing people. http://youtu.be/Zu_lw3cRz3k
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Luminous Obscurity posted:Batspoiler: Batman is a fascist. Sort of a fascist/corporatist/the kind of guy who if he wasn't dressing as a bat would be kicking hobos. This batmobile is frankly brilliant because it says everything about why Batman and Superman will be at odds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Whalley posted:Didn't Burton's batmobile have machine guns too? It has explosives, machineguns, and a flame thrower exhaust pipe that blows someone away fully on screen. But Jack Nicholson was amazing amirite? Man those movies are incredible. <----- Same people who get angry about stuff like the new batmobiles looking too militarized when they actually are like that to make a point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
I don't have much in the way of high hopes for the baman/ooperman movie, but at least that batmobile will make for a nice toy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
The last Nolan movie had Batman shooting truck drivers from his helicopter. Batman's been a one-man paramilitary unit ever since movie magic has been able to convincingly portray it, since that sells more tickets than a cowled detective musing over databases in the dark. Not sure why the Verge is so surprised.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Pretty much all 'geek journalism' is people pretending to be exited or angry about stuff they don't give a flying gently caress about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Basically. They're cultivating NOT MY BATMAN to provoke 'debate' and accrue pageviews from people linking the article, as Vintersong just did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Yeah, I should take that out.  Another guy I sorta follow on FB, Retroblasting, just posted about it and is pulling the NOT MY BATMAN. "Guns or no guns, the larger issue is just how slipshod the entire vehicle looks. The tires are exposed, so it isn't a good armored transport, the paneling is gap-ridden so it doesn't protect the internal mechanics...and there's ZERO style to the design. BARF"
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
This new batmobile seems to me like a neat mix between the Tumblr and the one from Arkham Knight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Yeah, I should take that out. No dis intended. I just find it interesting and mildly offputting that there is such an obvious slant, saying 'this is DIFFERENT and BAD' instead of making the least effort to actually read the design. It's put in baby terms because the text of the article is this shrivelling, vestigial thing that hangs uselessly from the title.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Maybe I'm not paying close enough attention, but that thing seems like Tumbler-lite more than anything, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
I just hope Superman throws it into the ocean
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
That's mostly because they both have the same inspiration point, which is the crazy tank Batmobile of Dark Knight Returns. Snyder's is just going more direct with it, minus the staggering size (because presumably they'll always make the Batmobile a practical, drivable thing and driving a literal, actual tank through city streets would be pressing a certain button too much).
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Watched Captain America: The Winter Soldier last night. Holy poo poo, that was a fantastic movie. My favorite Marvel movie so far (haven't seen Guardians yet). The stakes were high, the story and action were intense, and it re-shaped so much of the Marvel Movie Universe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Watched Captain America: The Winter Soldier last night. Holy poo poo, that was a fantastic movie. My favorite Marvel movie so far (haven't seen Guardians yet). The stakes were high, the story and action were intense, and it re-shaped so much of the Marvel Movie Universe. I hope that in Avengers 2/Cap 3 they're not just like "whelp good thing SHIELD was reformed successfully after that whole Hydra mess" but I know they will.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I hope that in Avengers 2/Cap 3 they're not just like "whelp good thing SHIELD was reformed successfully after that whole Hydra mess" but I know they will.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:The Agents of SHIELD show ties into everything, right? What did they do/are they doing after Cap 2? Edit: After Winter Soldier they were actually allowed to have a plot for the last few episodes. Here's hoping they don't have to spin their wheels next season waiting for another movie again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:The Agents of SHIELD show ties into everything, right? What did they do/are they doing after Cap 2? It actually became a watchable show. Jury is still out if they can maintain that momentum for the second season.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
e: Haha, poo poo, wrong thread.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Sep 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Holy loving 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I hope that in Avengers 2/Cap 3 they're not just like "whelp good thing SHIELD was reformed successfully after that whole Hydra mess" but I know they will. So far I haven't heard anything about SHIELD being in Avengers 2. Seems very unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:The Agents of SHIELD show ties into everything, right? What did they do/are they doing after Cap 2? You should really watch it for yourself, but if you want a cliffnotes version; After Cap 2, HYDRA sleeper agents are called into action, and wreck the poo poo out of SHIELD. SHIELD is completely brought down. At the end of the season, they are attempting to rebuild with resources left by Fury.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The end of WS sets up Cap and Falcon going after Hydra and Bucky. Since it's the same directors again I'm sure they will follow through with that. Avengers 2 appears to address that the absence of SHIELD by making Stark provide the resources for the team. Their new base is the Stark tower from the first Avengers, for example. This leads to him to creating an army of AI drones to make the team's job easier and that's how Ultron happens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Aren't those technically spoilers, though? Anyway, I really hope A2 ends with Stark going the way of Howard Hughes after creating Ultron. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Sep 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Aren't those technically spoilers, though? We know RDJ's contract with Marvel is expiring and there are no plans for Iron Man 4, so I won't be surprised if Stark dies in A2.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:We know RDJ's contract with Marvel is expiring and there are no plans for Iron Man 4, so I won't be surprised if Stark dies in A2. He will be in A3. Come on now. Seriously. A C17 full of money is going to be plopped in his yard. He's never going to die. He'll just be doing other stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:We know RDJ's contract with Marvel is expiring and there are no plans for Iron Man 4, so I won't be surprised if Stark dies in A2. Pretty much all of the actors have six movie deals, why would RDJ's be different?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Gatts posted:He will be in A3. Come on now. Seriously. A C17 full of money is going to be plopped in his yard. He's never going to die. He'll just be doing other stuff. On the other hand, the leaks are pretty unanimous about Ultron beating the poo poo out of the Avengers. Ultron killing Tony Stark would make a lot of dramatic and thematic sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
He's still signed for Avengers 3. But that's his last movie under the current contract. also Marvel has already said they are going the James Bond route for certain characters, so I don't see any chance they kill one of the big characters off except for possibly Cap.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:On the other hand, the leaks are pretty unanimous about Ultron beating the poo poo out of the Avengers. Ultron killing Tony Stark would make a lot of dramatic and thematic sense. And then he gets all jacked up on Extremis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:He's still signed for Avengers 3. But that's his last movie under the current contract. I know they have said this but I'd really hate it if they followed through with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
They've already done it though. Banner, Rhodey, and Fandral.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
You know, they don't even have to cast a new Tony Stark. They've got Don Cheadle's Rhodey, and then they can introduce other people to wear the suits, and just have Downey Jr. show up for brief cameos/in supporting roles. In fact, I kind of expect Cheadle's going to be Iron Man in most of Avengers 3. Maybe in the final climactic battle Stark comes out of retirement, only to get his rear end handed to him by Thanos. Stupid Avengers speculation: Stark totally quits being Iron Man. However, he is still involved in the Avengers in an advisory/support capacity. Thor goes back to Asgard. Steve Rodgers dies. Bucky replaces him. Hulk gets shot into space, eventually meets the Guardians. Hawkeye either dies or quits to do his own thing. Black Widow quits. New Avengers: Vision, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, War Machine (Rhodey), Black Panther, Ms. Marvel, Ant Man, Dr. Strange.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:Stupid Avengers speculation: OK, here's the pitch. Marvel Studios has made billions over the past 10 years by making an interconnected universe of movies with characters that audiences worldwide have grown to love. What we want to do with the next Avengers movie is this: get rid of them all and make a movie starring the B-team. Studio executive: "Hmm...I like it."
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
More like "they'll watch anything we make!" In other news, James McAvoy said that his next X-Men movie will see him losing his hair.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Buddington posted:OK, here's the pitch. Marvel Studios has made billions over the past 10 years by making an interconnected universe of movies with characters that audiences worldwide have grown to love. What we want to do with the next Avengers movie is this: get rid of them all and make a movie starring the B-team. Thing is, the more movies the main actors are in, the more they have to be paid. So of course it makes sense to phase them out and phase in cheaper actors/actresses. RINSE AND REPEAT.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind Anthony Mackie replacing Chris Evans. He's cool. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJGWFKGFTwY
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
Buddington posted:OK, here's the pitch. Marvel Studios has made billions over the past 10 years by making an interconnected universe of movies with characters that audiences worldwide have grown to love. What we want to do with the next Avengers movie is this: get rid of them all and make a movie starring the B-team. Worked for Guardians of the Galaxy...
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
The Avengers are already the B team. Marvel is just making lemonade out of the lemons nobody bought the rights to back in the movie rights fire sale when they were going out of business. The X-Men have always been Marvel's Justice League.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:08
|
|
