Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:IIRC, they mentioned that the reason for the Storm siblings being black is because they go to an alternate universe and it changes them.

you got to be joking right?

the reason is because Jonny and Sue's parents are a interracial couple in the reboot.

No, I seriously read that on a couple of moviesites in December. Doesn't mean it's true. I mean, I really don't care enough if it is. I won't be seeing the movie. At least Sue stays white.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:IIRC, they mentioned that the reason for the Storm siblings being black is because they go to an alternate universe and it changes them.

you got to be joking right?

the reason is because Jonny and Sue's parents are a interracial couple in the reboot.

No, I seriously read that on a couple of moviesites in December. Doesn't mean it's true. I mean, I really don't care enough if it is. I won't be seeing the movie. At least Sue stays white.

no offence, but stop reading crap from crappy movie sites

on a serious note, theres no reason to go into alternate universes stuff to explain it, its a reboot with no connection the old films.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:IIRC, they mentioned that the reason for the Storm siblings being black is because they go to an alternate universe and it changes them.

you got to be joking right?

the reason is because Jonny and Sue's parents are a interracial couple in the reboot.

No, I seriously read that on a couple of moviesites in December. Doesn't mean it's true. I mean, I really don't care enough if it is. I won't be seeing the movie. At least Sue stays white.

no offence, but stop reading crap from crappy movie sites

on a serious note, theres no reason to go into alternate universes stuff to explain it, its a reboot with no connection the old films.

From what's been reported on it, it barely has any connection to the source material.

Just remember, Marvel is actually cancelling the Fantastic Four title shortly. No announcement has been made on when it will return but most feel it's an effort to wrestle the movie rights back and to not associate with a train wreck.

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:IIRC, they mentioned that the reason for the Storm siblings being black is because they go to an alternate universe and it changes them.

you got to be joking right?

the reason is because Jonny and Sue's parents are a interracial couple in the reboot.

No, I seriously read that on a couple of moviesites in December. Doesn't mean it's true. I mean, I really don't care enough if it is. I won't be seeing the movie. At least Sue stays white.

no offence, but stop reading crap from crappy movie sites

on a serious note, theres no reason to go into alternate universes stuff to explain it, its a reboot with no connection the old films.

From what's been reported on it, it barely has any connection to the source material.

Just remember, Marvel is actually cancelling the Fantastic Four title shortly. No announcement has been made on when it will return but most feel it's an effort to wrestle the movie rights back and to not associate with a train wreck.

I;ve heard that too.

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:IIRC, they mentioned that the reason for the Storm siblings being black is because they go to an alternate universe and it changes them.

you got to be joking right?

the reason is because Jonny and Sue's parents are a interracial couple in the reboot.

No, I seriously read that on a couple of moviesites in December. Doesn't mean it's true. I mean, I really don't care enough if it is. I won't be seeing the movie. At least Sue stays white.

no offence, but stop reading crap from crappy movie sites

on a serious note, theres no reason to go into alternate universes stuff to explain it, its a reboot with no connection the old films.

From what's been reported on it, it barely has any connection to the source material.

Just remember, Marvel is actually cancelling the Fantastic Four title shortly. No announcement has been made on when it will return but most feel it's an effort to wrestle the movie rights back and to not associate with a train wreck.

I heard that's why they were killing Wolverine off in the comics as well. Kind of an Underpants Gnomes-quality plan there, though.

I figured as much when I read about ff ending. Isn't the same reason there has been a big push on the inhumans, a sort of counter to the fact they can't use mutants in the cinematic universe (seriously that can't be true though, characters are one thing but the word mutant? Bonkers)

As part of the X-Men deal it included characters and terms. So yeah, Fox owns "mutants" for the movies.

Hence why Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are "wonders". It's a term that will encompass all super powered folk in the MCU. Much like DC uses "Meta-humans"

Burn wrote:As part of the X-Men deal it included characters and terms. So yeah, Fox owns "mutants" for the movies.

Hence why Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are "wonders". It's a term that will encompass all super powered folk in the MCU. Much like DC uses "Meta-humans"

Agents of SHIELD has been using the term "Gifted" if I remember correctly.

Shadowman wrote:

Burn wrote:As part of the X-Men deal it included characters and terms. So yeah, Fox owns "mutants" for the movies.

Hence why Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are "wonders". It's a term that will encompass all super powered folk in the MCU. Much like DC uses "Meta-humans"

Agents of SHIELD has been using the term "Gifted" if I remember correctly.

ok, now I'm a bit behind on Agents of SHIELD episodes, still on season 1, but arent the people they are encountering not "mutants"?Meaning they got their "gifts/powers" throu devices or accidents?


so the people being called "gifted' wouldnt be mutants anyway.

We were introduced to Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch at the end of Winter Soldier, at which point they were referred to as "wonders" which is probably the new word for "mutants".

"Gifted" will be for those who have acquired their abilities through other means. Like radioactive spiders.

Seriously? Movie companies can own words now? I can understand (and disagree with) owning characters, but words?

"Mutants" is a very special case as it's part of X-Men lore. It makes more sense than the Arrow/Flash guys not being able to use "Metropolis" or "Gotham"

http://comicbook.com/2014/11/23/arrow-a ... olis-are-/

Burn wrote:"Mutants" is a very special case as it's part of X-Men lore. It makes more sense than the Arrow/Flash guys not being able to use "Metropolis" or "Gotham"

http://comicbook.com/2014/11/23/arrow-a ... olis-are-/

I think that makes about the same amount of sense. In both cases, it's terms that relate heavily to properties they're not allowed to mention or use. (X-Men in the MCU's case, Batman and Superman in Arrow/Flash's case) The difference is that while "mutant" is a very commonly-used term (Even DC has mutants in it) Gotham and Metropolis almost immediately bring Batman and Superman to mind.

I had heard that about the DC tv shows and frankly I think DC are missing a golden opportunity by not allowing those cities to be mentioned. Its more like "we can't mention them as we're not allowed to follow up on them"

You know, I thought of something. With the Marvel movies, they sort of introduced everything really slowly; for Phase 1, everything was just tied together with cameos and short scenes.Everything was set up slowly but surely, so that when Avengers came along, everything sort of flowed together. All of the concepts and characters were introduced long ago, so they could skip that and instead focus on the interaction and story.

DC isn't doing that. DC made one movie, with a short reference to Batman (Practically a dozen frames, something most people wouldn't even know about if they weren't told to look for it) and then bam crossover time. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Cyborg are getting crammed into a single movie with absolutely no set up. (Aside from Superman, and honestly if you don't 100% get what Batman is about at this point, shame on you) And this isn't even the main event!

Why, it's almost like they're just trying to cash in on it without truly understanding why it was so good. But that would just be silly.

That's what I've said when I heard about the extra characters being put into bvs. I want to believe that they know what they are doing but it screams cash grab.

Burn wrote:We were introduced to Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch at the end of Winter Soldier, at which point they were referred to as "wonders" which is probably the new word for "mutants".

"Gifted" will be for those who have acquired their abilities through other means. Like radioactive spiders.

Of course, as I'm hoping they do in Season 2 of Agents of Shield(and shown in the mid-season finale), there's also Inhumans, those who are decedents of the humans messed with by the Kree. Maybe they'll be to the Marvel Cinematic Universe what mutants are to the comic Marvel Universe.

Shadowman wrote: The difference is that while "mutant" is a very commonly-used term (Even DC has mutants in it) Gotham and Metropolis almost immediately bring Batman and Superman to mind.

I agree 100%

but the name Ra's al Ghul immediately brings Batman to mind, and yet they are useing the character in Arrow.

DC made one movie, with a short reference to Batman

what was that reference again?
I honestly dont remember

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:but the name Ra's al Ghul immediately brings Batman to mind, and yet they are useing the character in Arrow.

Actually it should be associated more with the League of Assassins who are not solely Batman related.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Shadowman wrote: The difference is that while "mutant" is a very commonly-used term (Even DC has mutants in it) Gotham and Metropolis almost immediately bring Batman and Superman to mind.

I agree 100%

but the name Ra's al Ghul immediately brings Batman to mind, and yet they are useing the character in Arrow.

Ra's al Ghul isn't strictly a Batman villain, though. That said, you're right, and that's actually something that massively bugs me about Arrow.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

DC made one movie, with a short reference to Batman

what was that reference again?
I honestly dont remember

When Superman and Zod end up fighting in space, they smash into a satellite with the Wayne Enterprises logo on the side. It's a blink and you miss it shot and I honestly don't blame you if you didn't catch it.

Aired last night during the CFB title game, with more Hulk vs. Stark awesomeness!

Shadowman wrote:Ra's al Ghul isn't strictly a Batman villain, though. That said, you're right, and that's actually something that massively bugs me about Arrow.

Batman is not the only hero of Gotham, likewise Superman is not Metropolis only hero.

"Ra's...not strictly a Batman villain"?
I would say that would be a long debate with no true right answer.DC loves to cross its Baddies to other book for mainly monetary reasons.

to tell the truth, bringing Ra's into the Arrow series didnt bug me in general, I just hope they do good with him.Although, with HA's long history, you would think his has enough of his own bad guys that they didnt need to dip into those of other characters.

When Superman and Zod end up fighting in space, they smash into a satellite with the Wayne Enterprises logo on the side. It's a blink and you miss it shot and I honestly don't blame you if you didn't catch it.

thank you very much

Burn wrote:Actually it should be associated more with the League of Assassins who are not solely Batman related.

Not to argue, but not as much as he is connected to Batman.

sure Ra's is the leader of the The League of Assassins/League of Shadows/Society of Shadows or what ever other name they have used over the years.But Ra's has always been connected to Batman.

not to mention the "loa" got it publication start in Batman comics.

Rodimus Prime wrote:Aired last night during the CFB title game, with more Hulk vs. Stark awesomeness!

very kool
still think they need to tweek Ultrons voice

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Batman is not the only hero of Gotham, likewise Superman is not Metropolis only hero.

And yet stories set in either city almost exclusively involve them, or someone closely tied to them, since they're both the main features of either city.

Shadowman wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Batman is not the only hero of Gotham, likewise Superman is not Metropolis only hero.

And yet stories set in either city almost exclusively involve them, or someone closely tied to them, since they're both the main features of either city.

true, but its also true that the use of Ra's and his league in other DC character comics were originally done in the hope that bat fans will buy books they do not normally buy.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Batman is not the only hero of Gotham, likewise Superman is not Metropolis only hero.

And yet stories set in either city almost exclusively involve them, or someone closely tied to them, since they're both the main features of either city.

true, but its also true that the use of Ra's and his league in other DC character comics were originally done in the hope that bat fans will buy books they do not normally buy.

That's probably why Ra's was on Arrow as well. Likewise, it could be they had a big list of "off limits" characters and Ra's wasn't listed. Or Firefly for that matter.