Originally Posted by soundofyousick
The themes in the X-Men films would not work as well without a character like her in there, she was needed for that story, much more important than simple run of the mill espionage stuff, that is something we have seen umpteen times in sci-fi/fantasy shows, and we got that all over X1 and X", why do we need more of that over deep character exploration?
Doesnt matter shes a bad representaiton on what Mystique should be. They ****ed her up. She works within the films story and thats it. She is a bad adaptation in FC even going from what she was like X1 and 2 films. Shes great there.
Avengers did not use the characters to their full advantage, the solo films *and*Avengers used the characters to their full advantage.
As I said, if the solo films did not exist, and you had no prior knowledge of the characters origins, the thrill would be far less felt.
I love the Cap/Loki fight, not for the choreographed action(although that is good), but because I know this was a wee skinny guy with asthma who is now standing up to a super-pwered villan.
The dicotomy of Iron-Man's seeming irreverence and heroics would be puzzling, if not for the explanation as to how he got started as a hero.
Thor's speeches to Loki on not being ready to lead would carry far less weight if we had not seen his journey in his movie.
This is why BW, HE and NF are far less effective characters in the film.
Disagree. All those characters were great representations of the comics. Can they do more? Hell yeah!
Hawkeye while not in the film as much was at least hinted at to have a strong past with Black Widow and had more screen time and dialogue then Storm and Cyc put together. It was very rewarding as a comic fan to see them fighting side by side. And at the least they tried to fit some sort of history in.