The Energon Pub

ZeroWolf wrote:I'm afraid they will destroy apocalypse, my favourite villain from the 92 series and so far I've seen nothing to alay those fears.

You know, I could see someone editing that speech into a fan trailer and it would work oh so very well.

Anyway, from what I've seen I think things are looking pretty cool. There are actual costumes. Psylocke looks like Psylocke this time! Forgot she was in X3? Don't blame you one bit. I like how Storm looks too, and Apocalypse, well at least it's out of the ordinary.

And it's got Nightcrawler, my favorite X-Man in it, so that's another huge plus for me.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/m ... ief-819205

Marvel Shake-Up: Film Chief Kevin Feige Breaks Free of CEO Ike Perlmutter

What does people think of these two ?

I had one bunch of internet types complaining about it being Feige who got Edgar's back up and another bunch saying Perlmutter's background in the Toy business was behind the reason Black Widow is so poorly treated at times as a Marvel Cinematic Character in marketing terms.

And yet others blame the Writing advisers for making a pigs ear out of Iron Man 3....

So I wonder in say 3 years time will we notice big changes and if so how ?

At least Ms. Marvel (Captain Marvel) might actually get promoted now. (maybe) assuming they ever make it at all.

RAR wrote:At least Ms. Marvel (Captain Marvel) might actually get promoted now. (maybe) assuming they ever make it at all.

Uh, dude, they ARE making a Captain Marvel film, as part of Phase 3. And it is Carol Danvers.

Do you just live under a media-free rock?

I know that There is a Carol Danvers Movie listed that is why I mentioned it.

I am however not going to count my chickens on it actually getting made until they start shooting the thing for the very reason that "female lead" Movies about super heroes are seen as a bad idea by people like Perlmutter so I can't rule out self-sabotage at Disney.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it morph into a Movie about the male Captain Marvel or have it cancelled outright in favour of a Black Widow Movie that people seem to think they want (but would probably be disappointed with if they got it).
Natasha maybe best suited to a Mini-series anyway.

Note that the Movie may well be called 'Captain Marvel' not 'Carol Danvers' and not 'Ms. Marvel' and for all we know could have a lot more of the actual proper Captain Marvel than you might think in it as a means to tell her origin.

I'd like a Carol Danvers Movie she's a useful character to link the Marvel Cosmic to the Marvel Urban themes and like Scott Lang she's someone who 'knows' a lot of people (often in the biblical sense).

But lets just say I wouldn't be at all surprised if it gets cancelled either even if it should be a useful Movie to have if done correctly to aid linkages with Guardians and Earth or even to the Defenders TV show and any Movie spin-off it might get should they manage to make something that doesn't suck.

She might even be useful for the potential Hulk spin-off that they are trying to keep a secret.

But yes someone who can link Guardian of the Galaxy to Luke Cage is a useful person to have in the MCU, not that I think very much of her as an individual however - as a character she can be either to aggressive or a doormat depending on the era and who is writing her. I would even suggest that she suffers from the same Character flaws sometimes attributed to Supergirl - flaws that I always saw as a bit sexist personally.

I suppose living under a rock is better than living under a bridge.

RAR wrote:she's someone who 'knows' a lot of people (often in the biblical sense).

You either don't know what that term means, or you don't know who Carol Danvers is. In all likelihood, you're probably thinking of She-Hulk, who actually has had sex with a large number of characters. But then, judging from the rest of your post, you really don't understand much of what you've said. And then judging from everything you said about Deadpool, I really don't think you put all that much effort into researching things before you write posts about them.

I think you are thinking of contemporary Carol Danvers - I'm thinking of the 1980's version. I did look up the Official Bio the other week on her and Marvel have heavily sanitised it much to my amusement.

To answer your question seriously.

No I don't know a huge amount about She-Hulk other than the times that she used to hang with the Fantastic Four and some people bringing her up lately as the proto-deadpool in terms of breaking the 4th wall - I can't say I know anything very about her love life either, But as she's a professional Woman and invulnerable I couldn't care less who she sleeps with - it's likely not as tragically funny as Carol Danvers' love life is/was though.

Carol Danvers baiting is a pet "Guilty Pleasure" of mine mocking the hell out of her is something I count as one of my quiet Hobbies. Her Car Crash of an Existance has given me much amusement for years. So Yes I do know who she is and I take particular dark amusement from the period after Rogue stole her Powers.

I've already admitted I don't know everything about Comics - but lets be fair here there is a lot of comics and it's simply not practical to read them all even if you just limit yourself to the SuperHeroes ones which I never did.

You're missing out on not reading green lantern to be fair, geoff did wonders with him. Back on topic though, times change and characters change with them. You should just look at the characters as they are now, in the present. Also there is no conspiracy going on, Carol Denvers will make it to screen, same as DC will make a wonder woman movie.

Times, they're a'changin

As much as I enjoyed the pre-Secret Wars Captain Marvel book ... I enjoyed the All-New Ms. Marvel even more. So much so I hope the rumoured TV series does come to fruition.

RAR wrote:I've already admitted I don't know everything about Comics

Then do some research once and a while.

I research the things that interest me.

And anyway as the subsequent posters alluded to I was referring to the earlier version of Ms. Marvel.

Characters change origins and back story and the like all the time - (just look at Wonder Woman Comics) I tend to pay more attention to the periods that define that Character best as my focus - 9/10 times that isn't the newer material as it's all to common now to rehash old stories.

Now that is also true of say the 1980's rehashing the 1950's but the stylistic change of comics between those points makes it more forgiveable. but to use a DC analogy I would rather have the original Red Hood origin than the modern one. (not that I expect I'd get it).

Or another example more than one person has been Giant Man - some of whom I simply couldn't care less about though.

If they do make Ms. Marvel in the Movies only based on the current one - boy that would be a bit dull. I'd rather they throw the entire history in the bin and start over than do that. But Marvel are good at capturing the tone of a Character while ignoring the specifics so I hope they do that job well with things like Black Panther - as I really liked him back in the day (no idea what he's like these days though).

I don't always want every ancient troupe dug up though - I like Iron Man more for him being less of a Boozer and I can do with out the drunkeness & self destructive bent on Doctor Strange to be over played to much either - it would make for a depressing Movie and break the tone of the MCU to much - I don't mind it being trippy weird and even a little bit horrific though. I can do without having to put up with 40 Minutes of someone's alcoholic depression though when we could be watching other things.

If they want to deal with the depressing stuff then do it on Daredevil that is where all the fun in the MCU goes to die.

RAR wrote:I research the things that interest me.

And from this thread, I'd say you don't have much interest in comics, considering you keep just saying things without understanding them. For instance:

RAR wrote:but to use a DC analogy I would rather have the original Red Hood origin than the modern one. (not that I expect I'd get it).

Joker's backstory is constantly changing, the incident at Ace Chemicals is the only thing anyone knows for sure. So it's a little difficult to tell his backstory when it's been deliberately shrouded in mystery.

RAR wrote:Characters change origins and back story and the like all the time - (just look at Wonder Woman Comics) I tend to pay more attention to the periods that define that Character best as my focus - 9/10 times that isn't the newer material as it's all to common now to rehash old stories.

Secret Wars aside, no they doubt.

But hey, prove my wrong by citing a few examples.

If they do make Ms. Marvel in the Movies only based on the current one - boy that would be a bit dull. I'd rather they throw the entire history in the bin and start over than do that.

Okay, for starters, it's Captain Marvel they're intending to make a movie of. CAPTAIN.

Ms. Marvel is a teenage Inhuman girl. The comics are brilliant, telling the story of a young Muslim girl coming into adulthood, a young girl who idolised Carol Danvers to the point that when her strange new Inhuman powers are thrust upon her, it's the example set by Carol Danvers that she strives to live up to.

If you haven't read any of the new Ms. Marvel books, then I highly recommend them, along with Hawkeye.

If they want to deal with the depressing stuff then do it on Daredevil that is where all the fun in the MCU goes to die.

Daredevil wasn't depressing, it had a darker tone than the rest of the MCU, but that's because it took the MCU down to the grassroots level, the common people, people without suits of iron or Norse Gods or some dude on super steroids, it was every day people and a highly skilled blind dude.

Right when I say rehash stories I DO NOT MEAN The title of the Stories.
I mean the events that take place in those stories.

Like for example the "Flying Graysons" Origin has been told many times so you have a choice of multiple versions of that.

As for the Red Hood I was talking about the distinction of proto-Joker as Red Hood and Jason Todd as Red Hood as an example of how the same character name can be applied to a different individual - so there are versions to choose from What I was saying was that I would rather see a Joker Origin tied to the Red Hood (even if the proto-Joker is just a patsy for the real Red Hood) than simply have some one show up calling themselves the Red Hood who later proves to be Jason Todd. Again the reason I mention it is that the Red Hood isn't always the Joker or the person who becomes the joker - heck he's even been a Hero as well as a villian.

So what I am saying is I would rather have the Red Hood used as part of a Joker origin story in some way than the character just be someone else who randomly shows up later who isn't the Joker.

----

They are making a 'Carol Danvers' Movie Carol Danvers WAS Ms. Marvel; Captain Marvel wasn't a name that applied to her in her early days she was Ms. marvel captain Marvel was an Alien Male Character for most of the period that name has existed with that use (in Marvel Comics form i.e. Not Shazam). The younger Ms. Marvel is a whole other thing that I was not talking about at all.

Heck they could just have easily made her an unpowered Shield/Sword (or whatever they are calling themselves this week) as a Super Hero and still not be wrong.

The whole point I'm making here that seems to be flying past people's heads is that Carol Danvers has a long and elaborate History with lots of periods to it where she had different powers and abilities and names, she's had her powers retconned too.

Heck the other thing that is interesting about her is often when you read up on her they often avoid mentioning Rogue at all.

The version I am talking about is the version that exists where for most of that time she was called Ms. Marvel.

Now if the MCU want's to use more recent sources that's fine - but for me that defeats the whole point of her usefulness as a character - I'm sure they will by the very virtue of her convoluted career have to gloss over stuff - but the only reason I brought her up is in a classic sense of Carol Danvers I saw her as useful as a bridge between the Cosmic and the mundane Earth stuff.

So all I'm saying is that I hope that is the way in which the MCU uses her.
Essentially I want to see her in the same room as the Guardians of the Galaxy and also Luke Cage or the Defenders at some point.

---

As for multiple versions of a characters origins existing well Doctor Doom has several, so does venom.

What I am alluding to here isn't a set period in comics 'Now' I'm actually often talking about much further in the past. I am more interested in the 1930's-to the early 1990's than I am anything after - that is why I was not very aware of Deadpool, I don't think just because I've never read a Miles Morales comic that it means I'm not allowed to voice an opinion on Spider-Man.

I'm very interested in comics - I'm just interested in it as a Historical Medium more than I am as a contemporary one is all. for 3 reasons 1) time 2) I'd rather spend money on toys than comics 3) I don't feel the need to see a Character retread what they have already done (Spider-Man I'm looking at you).

So yes I like comics, yes I am interested in them - just not the bleeding edge of them is all so much as the shall we say "5 colour" era stuff and a little past that.

-----

I wouldn't wish to try to dismiss anyone's enjoyment of Daredevil - I just lost interest in him as character and I don't like Gangster Movies so things like Daredevil and Punisher are far to close to that for me to have an interest in it - the same reason why I wouldn't watch the Tick or Dick Tracy very much - I just don't like Mobster stories very much - the closest I can come to tolerating them is in Batman's world I guess; But that is also why I don't watch Gotham either. I've just lost the taste for certain kinds of crime fiction I guess.

RAR wrote:They are making a 'Carol Danvers' Movie Carol Danvers WAS Ms. Marvel; Captain Marvel wasn't a name that applied to her in her early days she was Ms. marvel captain Marvel was an Alien Male Character for most of the period that name has existed with that use (in Marvel Comics form i.e. Not Shazam). The younger Ms. Marvel is a whole other thing that I was not talking about at all.

You said "Ms. Marvel" movie. Ms. Marvel is a teenage girl.

Carol Danvers is Captain Marvel.

They are making a Captain Marvel movie. Carol Danvers will be the title character.

I'm well aware of her history.

Times change, characters change. Clearly you're not reading modern stuff. The comics and the MCU are entwined the movies drawing portions from the comics and the comics adjusting to be closer in line with the movies.

Feel free to join us in this wonderful modern era.

RAR wrote:Right when I say rehash stories I DO NOT MEAN The title of the Stories.
I mean the events that take place in those stories.

Like for example the "Flying Graysons" Origin has been told many times so you have a choice of multiple versions of that.

As for the Red Hood I was talking about the distinction of proto-Joker as Red Hood and Jason Todd as Red Hood as an example of how the same character name can be applied to a different individual - so there are versions to choose from What I was saying was that I would rather see a Joker Origin tied to the Red Hood (even if the proto-Joker is just a patsy for the real Red Hood) than simply have some one show up calling themselves the Red Hood who later proves to be Jason Todd. Again the reason I mention it is that the Red Hood isn't always the Joker or the person who becomes the joker - heck he's even been a Hero as well as a villian.


So what I am saying is I would rather have the Red Hood used as part of a Joker origin story in some way than the character just be someone else who randomly shows up later who isn't the Joker.

Done. Though it's pretty weak to create a singular origin for the Joker. Even in that comic Joker admits that he's probably making the whole thing up, the only thing anyone has ever kept consistent about is the vat of chemicals.

Burn wrote:

RAR wrote:They are making a 'Carol Danvers' Movie Carol Danvers WAS Ms. Marvel; Captain Marvel wasn't a name that applied to her in her early days she was Ms. marvel captain Marvel was an Alien Male Character for most of the period that name has existed with that use (in Marvel Comics form i.e. Not Shazam). The younger Ms. Marvel is a whole other thing that I was not talking about at all.

You said "Ms. Marvel" movie. Ms. Marvel is a teenage girl.

Carol Danvers is Captain Marvel.

They are making a Captain Marvel movie. Carol Danvers will be the title character.

I'm well aware of her history.

Times change, characters change. Clearly you're not reading modern stuff. The comics and the MCU are entwined the movies drawing portions from the comics and the comics adjusting to be closer in line with the movies.

Feel free to join us in this wonderful modern era.

Do you want me to list off all of the major differences between the comics and the movies? Because I'm going to start with Thor not being a woman in the movies, and work my way out from there. Jarvis being an AI who later becomes the Vision is also on that list.

Just because it's going on in the comics, doesn't mean they have to mirror that in the movies. Rule of thumb is to always go with the more recognizable elements. It's why Robin is almost always Dick Grayson or Tim Drake.

So I got age of ultron on early release from sky. I enjoyed it a lot second time round but one thing bugged me, why was there a consciousness on the mind stone to begin with?

New trailer for the Jessica Jones series. Kinda trippy, man.

Hands up if you think the Purple Man not using Jessica Jones as a sex toy for the 8 months he had her captive is "Unlikely" the guy picks up teenage girls up of the street and does god knows what to them and then may even kill them afterwards for all anyone knows... he's one of the most deeply unlikeable people I can think of in Marvel comics simply because they've never really tried to hide that he uses his powers for sleazy sexual reasons, he's also just as likely to murder some one on a whim as the Joker would - perhaps even more so.

I can see the Joker let a Pretty Girl walk past without thinking of her as a object to possess or use (for a couple of reasons common to certain versions of the Character) The Purple Man is an especially unlikable creep as he's a slimeball, creepy pervert and a murderer.. though in a funny way he may actually be one of the more realistic "Serial Killer types" because of that so I suppose the dark corners of the Marvel TV/Netflix Universe is the right place for him.

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/mar ... 0226210343

Oh and If I could be a bit silly for a moment since there is no Fantastic Four in the Marvel TV universe who is Jessica going to be pleasuring herself to and then in typical media troupe way suffer a horrible fate for her "Perversions" since it can't be Johnny Storm now.

I think what they for some reason "Got away with" in Comics might raise some eyebrows even on the cesspit that is Netflix :

Strange Character to choose from they decide to make the 2 of the most controversial female characters they can think of into Tv & Movie stars.

I would say makes you wish for Susan Richards until you remember the things they did to her in comics are nearly as bad.

Anyway I await for the controversy to explode in their faces if they do even a tiny part of her comic stories in the same way - there will be people looking to start a fight over it perhaps.

There's a few points here but the first is: Netflix = cesspit? That's a bit weird . .

Now onto the Jessica Jones show, you'll be a bit surprised to know but that kind of content has already been used on TV, it's not groundbreaking or controversial so I won't worry. Next I think Jessica would be 'pleasuring' herself to her boyfriend and fellow Netflix star luke cage.

Far worse scenes have been put onto celluloid then Jessica Jones back story and plot so no fighting is coming. Also what's so controversial about carol danvers?

I think they're going to probably tone down the plot. Yes, I know the Purple Man arc, but I can't see Marvel, a name that basically goes with semi-family friendly action flicks, doing a story that is basically on par with The Girl with The Dragon Tattoos in terms of sickening crimes. My guess is we'll get a watered down version for the kids who will want to see this.

RAR wrote:who is Jessica going to be pleasuring herself to

Just say who she's sleeping with or who she's in a relationship with, because that sounds pretty much like you're describing something else.

RAR wrote:cesspit that is Netflix :

Oh yeah, really a cesspit, the same cesspit that's making some of the most entertaining shows these days. I suppose HBO and the CW are cesspits too then...

ZeroWolf wrote:Also what's so controversial about carol danvers?

I think it's the more present fact that Marvel doesn't want to make a female lead centered Marvel movie. The movies are aimed at boys, and I have a feeling Marvel is too focused on that. I'd go to see a girl centered superhero movie, Marvel or otherwise!

Madeus Prime wrote:

ZeroWolf wrote:Also what's so controversial about carol danvers?

I think it's the more present fact that Marvel doesn't want to make a female lead centered Marvel movie. The movies are aimed at boys, and I have a feeling Marvel is too focused on that. I'd go to see a girl centered superhero movie, Marvel or otherwise!

DC is the one who said that. Carol Danvers already has a movie scheduled for Phase 3.

Shadowman wrote:

Madeus Prime wrote:

ZeroWolf wrote:Also what's so controversial about carol danvers?

I think it's the more present fact that Marvel doesn't want to make a female lead centered Marvel movie. The movies are aimed at boys, and I have a feeling Marvel is too focused on that. I'd go to see a girl centered superhero movie, Marvel or otherwise!

DC is the one who said that. Carol Danvers already has a movie scheduled for Phase 3.

Ah, thanks for the correction!

Madeus Prime wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Madeus Prime wrote:

ZeroWolf wrote:Also what's so controversial about carol danvers?

I think it's the more present fact that Marvel doesn't want to make a female lead centered Marvel movie. The movies are aimed at boys, and I have a feeling Marvel is too focused on that. I'd go to see a girl centered superhero movie, Marvel or otherwise!

DC is the one who said that. Carol Danvers already has a movie scheduled for Phase 3.

Ah, thanks for the correction!

There's an image I like, it's a quote from DC saying it's "too risky" to make a female-centered superhero movie. Immediately following that is a quote from Marvel saying "Here's our new movie where Bradley Cooper voices a talking racoon and Vin Diesel plays a tree."

I honestly don't know if Marvel lives in self-depressed funk by virtue of living in such a niche Industry as comics have become these days - an industry that is mainly just used as a breeding pool for material to then sell to a more main stream via TV shows, Merchandis and Movies - but they seem to be suffering from some really weird behaviour - I'd almost call it baiting behaviour.

I can't tell if they do it on purpose or if they just hire weirdos though. I think the concern I have is if you have the Comics deliberately (or accidentally) trying to stir up trouble then that makes it harder for the later "Mainstream" spin off material to make use of it without then having to make drastic changes to make it acceptable to mainstream audiences.

I'm some what reminded of Philip Pullman related controversies for that reason.

-----

Oh and I've been researching Franklin Richards lately so I may have something to say about him in a later post.

TTFN