FabioClone posted:Also, does Batman just run around shouting "JOKER!" all day? In the 80s? Pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 13:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:48 |
|
|
KaosMachina posted:
I wanna say this was due to Kelly Jones' influence, but artists who were more grounded in reality couldn't really pull off the supernatural wraith look like he did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 13:52
|
|
|
KaosMachina posted:Phantom 2040 That was not a good show. Aside from using the Phantom name for a basically unrelated show, it's also just pretty generic and uninteresting. I will grant you that Maxwell Madison, Jr. could be pretty entertaining, and Graft had his moments, but neither one is in it enough to get you through the rest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
KaosMachina posted:You know, I really, really liked the style of animation in this, the MIB, and the Big Guy and Rusty series. thats early Ethan Van Sciver work for Impulse. When Todd Dezago was writer. And all of those animated works you listed were done by Adelaide Productions with Duane Capizzi as lead producer. SHame his name never gets mentioned as much as Timm or Weisman.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
FabioClone posted:Also, does Batman just run around shouting "JOKER!" all day?  yes i know
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Say Nothing posted:Skinny Velma. This cartoon is legit pretty good, though e: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WJo8AcuPT0 Wanamingo fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Jan 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Wanamingo posted:This cartoon is legit pretty good, though Nothing comes close to my love of 'Mystery Incorporated'. That show was pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Say Nothing posted:Skinny Velma. This looks like a cut away gag from Family Guy
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Dacap posted:This looks like a cut away gag from Family Guy That fact that isn't literally from Family Guy shocks me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Yeah, nobody likes how that new cartoon looks so much like family guy/poo poo. It probably won't last no matter how good it is simply due to that.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Doesn't help that the humor felt pretty similar too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:That fact that isn't literally from Family Guy shocks me. Someone in another thread also compared it to a CAD comic strip.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Wait, wait... Am I the only one that didn't have a problem with Cap's costume from the first movie?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
No, most people only dislike his costume from Avengers.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
Which they should. Whedon's Cap in the Avengers is markedly lamer on almost all fronts than in his solo movies, which is weird because didn't Whedon doctor The First Avenger's script? And the costume was a big part of that. Every time I see Evans from behind in the first movie I'm amazed at how much like pajamas it is. Really no one told Whedon it was a bad call?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
Instead of compromising with a look closer to the comics that no one likes, he should have given him exactly his costume from the comics, scale mail and actual wings included.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Which they should. Whedon's Cap in the Avengers is markedly lamer on almost all fronts than in his solo movies, which is weird because didn't Whedon doctor The First Avenger's script? The other day, Clickhole had an article about the Rugrats, and it made me remember that as a kid the second Rugrats movie was bizarrely high quality in it's animation-every thing was so clear and crisp, it felt HD, like everything had depth. I watched the trailer and was surprised it wasn't just nostalgic memory making things up, it really was that well produced. What I'm getting at is that even Rugrats loving 2 was more cinematic than anything Joss Whedon's directed. Dude's work has some good traits but the first Avengers was shot like a really lovely TV special from the early 2000s, including that dumb costume.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
The costumes are way too big of a marketing thing for it to have been Whedon's call.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
That's not the point. Even if he didn't sketch up the costume himself, it could have looked a lot better on screen. It wasn't a good suit to begin with, but Whedon didn't do it any favors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
Cap's World War II costume from the first movie is my favorite of all his costumes, ever. It still works for the modern era as well, with no updating required. It makes him look like a soldier, a pulpy sort of adventure hero, and a man out of time. I wish they had made a decent action figure of it (not including the super-expensive Hot Toys version). But then again, my all-time favorite look for Iron Man is his clunky Mark I armor from the first movie. The helmet reminds me vaguely of the Rocketeer, which probably has a lot to do with it. I have that action figure, but the head is tiny and it's generally too small and short.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:That's not the point. Even if he didn't sketch up the costume himself, it could have looked a lot better on screen. It wasn't a good suit to begin with, but Whedon didn't do it any favors. No it couldn't. It's that bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
It's Star Trek: The Motion Picture bad. Also yeah Whedon directing instead of co-directing is really going to hurt the legacy of the Avengers movies, but whatever they're done we're stuck with what we got.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
They need to just accept movie magic and stop giving Steve Rodgers a hood. He doesn't have a secret identity and any "tactical realism" arguments about go out the window when you realize Black Widow and Hawkeye don't wear helmets and are a poo poo ton less resilient than Captain America. You have Chris Evans in your movie, why the gently caress are you hiding his face?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 10:04
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:They need to just accept movie magic and stop giving Steve Rodgers a hood. He doesn't have a secret identity and any "tactical realism" arguments about go out the window when you realize Black Widow and Hawkeye don't wear helmets and are a poo poo ton less resilient than Captain America.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
VagueRant posted:A hood? In all the best versions of the costume it's a helmet. And it's loving rad. You're not wrong. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 13:07
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:You're not wrong. You made me remember that the 1970s Captain America movie existed. This might be the worst thing you've ever done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:You made me remember that the 1970s Captain America movie existed. There was a sequel! With Christopher Lee! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 21:59
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:You made me remember that the 1970s Captain America movie existed. You should be much angrier that I'm reminding you about the 1990s one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4qmXpF0z8M
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:There was a sequel! With Christopher Lee! Not even the only movie Lee and Reb Brown were in together!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:You should be much angrier that I'm reminding you about the 1990s one. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:They need to just accept movie magic and stop giving Steve Rodgers a hood. He doesn't have a secret identity and any "tactical realism" arguments about go out the window when you realize Black Widow and Hawkeye don't wear helmets and are a poo poo ton less resilient than Captain America. Are comic book movies just sort of gradually abandoning the the secret identity plot point, or making it less important, overall? The MCU films maybe started it with Iron Man 1 ending on something I, and several others, probably thought was shocking for the time: "I am Iron Man." No spending a few films trying to hide that Tony and IM are the same guy. No spending films hiding that Rhodey is War Machine frmo the general public. Thor doesn't do a Donald Blake secret life. Post-Avengers, Steve Rogers is maybe more publically known as Cap. America to some extent with or without his mask on. Man of Steel had him pretty much telling anyone who would listen or put pieces together that he's Clark Kent. From a few rumors and teasers of what I'm sort of hearing about a few other DC movies coming out that a semi-known secret identity thing feels like it will be present there, too. Is it just sort of a by product of the modern age that given the internet, social networking culture and camera phones that trying to keep stuff like this a complete secret is just unbelievable to the public, so we've got to have some degree of accepting that truly secret identities are a bit of a rarity that most active costumed characters just won't be able to have?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
This makes me think of some sort of HYDRA/The Office SNL Mashup. That isn't a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:Are comic book movies just sort of gradually abandoning the the secret identity plot point, or making it less important, overall? I feel like Iron Man 1 doing it started the real trend, but they did it because Tony Stark didn't have a secret identity at the time in the comics, so I dunno
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
I still think that was a good rendition of Red Skull. The skin is inflamed and swollen constantly cracking and seeping blood. Shame they just went with old dude later in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
KaosMachina posted:I feel like Iron Man 1 doing it started the real trend, but they did it because Tony Stark didn't have a secret identity at the time in the comics, so I dunno Yeah, none of the Avengers in the movies had secret identities in the comics at the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:Are comic book movies just sort of gradually abandoning the the secret identity plot point, or making it less important, overall? Having secret identities isn't core to the identity of most of the big movie superheroes right now in the way it is for Superman, Batman, Spider-Man or Daredevil. Note that these are the characters where it's still a big deal that they have IDs in the movies or TV. Iron Man for example always felt perfunctory, like it was just something they did because it's part of the genre. Warren Ellis pointed this out when Stark being Iron Man leaked and essentially nobody cared. My only problem is that outside of Spidey no Marvel movie (if the Spidey stuff even counts) has really gone into what superheroes do while they aren't supering around. For example aside from working out and visiting old friends from time to time, apparently Rogers being a Man Out of Time in the Marvel Cinematic Universe means he stands in a broom closet while he doesn't have his costume on. I get that they don't really have time to dig into it like in the comics but I mean jeez they could at the very least show Rogers doing art or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Having secret identities isn't core to the identity of most of the big movie superheroes right now in the way it is for Superman, Batman, Spider-Man or Daredevil. Note that these are the characters where it's still a big deal that they have IDs in the movies or TV. Lightning Lord posted:My only problem is that outside of Spidey no Marvel movie (if the Spidey stuff even counts) has really gone into what superheroes do while they aren't supering around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:X-Men as well, since their (in)ability to be a part of the rest of society is the basis for a lot of the movies, as is the paranoia towards what seemingly ordinary people could do. I'd say XMen was one of the first areas to dispense with secret IDs, probably around the time Jean Grey stopped having a superhero name, or Dani Moonstar mostly going by her own name. Early XFactor's schtick was probably the last heyday of mutant secret IDs. Anyway I didn't mean secret identities are unimportant to every other superhero, just that those are the ones who make them most central to their narrative. Green Lantern works just fine if everyone knows he's Hal or Guy or Kyle or John or an alien crystal, especially since they're cops. I'd even argue that Superman works fine if he was just Superman all the time like people in the DCU (used to?) think. But the identity stuff and Clark Kent's separate life is such an integral part that ejecting it seems wrongheaded. Doctor Spaceman posted:AoU had the Hawkeye stuff, but like you said that's an exception rather than the rule. I forgot about movie Hawkeye because he's the worst, especially compared to Gruenwald Clint and Hawkguy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:48 |
|
|
Jean Grey and Dani Moonstar didn't dispose of their codenames until the 90s, long after any concerns of being secret mutants at a college secretly for mutants had passed. Marvel, in general, has never had much of an interest in maintaining a secret identity unless it was a central part of the character - like, the Fantastic Four have no secret identities even though they have codenames; Doctor Strange doesn't even have a codename let alone a secret identity; and for most of his publication history The Hulk is the secret identity despite also being the superhero. On the flipside, Spider-man has a secret identity because his entire hook was that nobody likes Spider-man - they think he's a crook and a creep; Daredevil uses his to balance acting within and without the law; and Moon Knight has so many secret identities he starts losing himself in them. I think it's probably because they were comparatively late to superhero comics and came from a horror/drama background rather than pulp vigilantes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 04:41
|
|
