SHIELD/Avengers complaints...

[jmc]

Originally Posted by kaijunexus

I'm confused. Have you ever, in your entire life, read a comic book?

In essentially every Marvel or DC series, unless it is specifically stated that the series is stand-alone and unrelated to anything else, the characters ALWAYS cross-over into eachother's books.

Are you telling me that if you sit down to read Spider-Man and half-way through the Hulk shows up for some reason that pertinent to the story, you scowl and tear the book to pieces while exclaiming ''This is supposed to be SPIDER-MAN, not HULK!!!!!!!1111''

Or are you simply holding two different entertainment mediums to two completely different standards even when they're relating to the same story and characters?

Either way, you look pretty foolish.

And reading a comic book relates to film how exactly? And yes I have read comics but that's not what this is about. The two mediums are completely different and need to be treated as such, anyone who doesn't see that is deluded.

[kaijunexus]

Originally Posted by jmc

And reading a comic book relates to film how exactly? And yes I have read comics but that's not what this is about. The two mediums are completely different and need to be treated as such, anyone who doesn't see that is deluded.

So you want characters from comics to be accurately adapted to the screen with as few changes as possible while dropping everything from them that you deem "unfit" for film?

[jmc]

Where the hell did I say that? I'm a film fan first and comic fan second, I'm not one of these nutbag fanboys who needs everything from the comics to appear on film, change is inevitable. All I want is the character at hand to be the focus of the film, it's as simple as that. IM1 did that, IM2 started then dropped the ball.

[Figs]

Originally Posted by jmc

I'm not paying to watch Avenger/Shield stuff. I'm paying, and so are the majority of the people to watch IRON MAN. It's as simple as that, people can crap on about the whole Marvel universe thing but at the end of the day most people don't give a damn, they want to see and Iron Man movie, and a good one at that, what we got was below par. Your fine with mediocrity? More power to you then.

You are watching Iron Man, he's in it the entire time. With that first sentence i'm just going to assume you don't read the comics, whether they are Iron Man comics or other Marvel characters. The Avengers/SHIELD stuff wasn't taking over the entire movie so I don't get why people are complaining about it.

This is what happens when Marvel tries to make their films just like the comics so fans can get something they've never had before in regards to one whole Marvel universe. People truly do ***** about everything and at times don't know what they want.

Sorry jmc, I just don't get how those few scenes ruined it for you.

Also sorry for repeating what others just said, I didn't read their comments.

Originally Posted by jmc

And reading a comic book relates to film how exactly? And yes I have read comics but that's not what this is about. The two mediums are completely different and need to be treated as such, anyone who doesn't see that is deluded.

It's not us that are deluded in this case. Whether you like it or not Marvel is trying to make their films just like the comics, if you can't handle that then you're just going to have to stick with the characters owned by other companies. It cracks me up because years ago most, and I mean most if not all comic fans were wanting **** like this to happen and when it does some of them complain bigtime.

Originally Posted by jmc

Where the hell did I say that? I'm a film fan first and comic fan second, I'm not one of these nutbag fanboys who needs everything from the comics to appear on film, change is inevitable. All I want is the character at hand to be the focus of the film, it's as simple as that. IM1 did that, IM2 started then dropped the ball.

This is understandable and I agree for the most part.

Isn't Stark/Iron Man still the focus of the film though?

[UnionJack]

I liked the little easter eggs to Avengers and other characters it helps fill the world out more.

[psyonic]

No matter what they give us, you ****ers will never be satisfied.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by Figs

You are watching Iron Man, he's in it the entire time. With that first sentence i'm just going to assume you don't read the comics, whether they are Iron Man comics or other Marvel characters. The Avengers/SHIELD stuff wasn't taking over the entire movie so I don't get why people are complaining about it.

This is what happens when Marvel tries to make their films just like the comics so fans can get something they've never had before in regards to one whole Marvel universe. People truly do ***** about everything and at times don't know what they want.

Sorry jmc, I just don't get how those few scenes ruined it for you.
Also sorry for repeating what others just said, I didn't read their comments.

Wasn't just those scenes, it was the entire second and third act that dropped the ball, it's almost like act one is an entirely separate film. And I've admitted as such that I don't read IM comics, but again that's not the issue when we talk about film, the story has to work in its own right regardless of it's source material.

Originally Posted by Figs

It's not us that are deluded in this case. Whether you like it or not Marvel is trying to make their films just like the comics, if you can't handle that then you're just going to have to stick with the characters owned by other companies. It cracks me up because years ago most, and I mean most if not all comic fans were wanting **** like this to happen and when it does some of them complain bigtime.

I can't speak on behalf other of comics fans but I've been against this sort of thing for exactly the reasons shown in IM2. When you start funneling things to go a certain direction you run the risk of compromising the story at hand. Now the Shield stuff wasn't the sole reason for IM2 lack luster second and third acts, but it sure as hell didn't help it. Marvel can try all they like to make the films like comics but it's only ever going to be an abridged version at best. And in the end if the results are mediocre you have to ask was it worth in the first place.

Originally Posted by Figs

This is understandable and I agree for the most part.

Isn't Stark/Iron Man still the focus of the film though?

He is, but the story about Whiplash being a threat against Stark is totally halted. These plot points do nothing to enhance that story that was being told, they are simply 'there'. If they wanted the Shield stuff in, the story should have been built around it.

[dtud]

You know I have a little question about their name. In the first movie Agent Coulson constantly calls them Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division and then in the end says "just call us Shield" implying that they just came up with the acronym. (Must've been very hard for them.)

But in the second movie Fury says that Howard Stark was one of the founders of Shield thus saying that they have been around for say twenty years. so the question is, did it really take them twenty years to come up with that acronym?

Okay, I'm just messing around here as it was probably something that was just overlooked but whatever.

[Iron_Stark]

Good grief now people are complaining about SHIELD, Black Widow and Nick Fury being in an Iron Man movie??

WTF is next, people are going to complain that J.J. Jameson, The Daily Bugle and Mary Jane are going to be in the Spider-Man reboot?

Do people not know Iron Man's history?? Black Widow, SHIELD and Nick Fury were ALL part of Iron Man's history, in fact Black Widow deserved to be in the movie far more than War Machine who didn't make it's debut in '92.

[Tony Stark]

JMC's Shield complaints are entirely misguided. Those elements were all in the first movie, and they are all here now, and the Avengers point was brought up in the ending credits scene.

I agree a film can't rely on the viewer's knowledge of the comics, but it sure as hell can rely on assuming people saw the first movie.

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by Iron_Stark

Good grief now people are complaining about SHIELD, Black Widow and Nick Fury being in an Iron Man movie??

WTF is next, people are going to complain that J.J. Jameson, The Daily Bugle and Mary Jane are going to be in the Spider-Man reboot?

Do people not know Iron Man's history?? Black Widow, SHIELD and Nick Fury were ALL part of Iron Man's history, in fact Black Widow deserved to be in the movie far more than War Machine who didn't make it's debut in '92.

100% correct. People are acting as if this stuff were mutually exclusive. Perhaps they should pick up a copy of Tony Stark Director of Shield.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Iron_Stark

Good grief now people are complaining about SHIELD, Black Widow and Nick Fury being in an Iron Man movie??

WTF is next, people are going to complain that J.J. Jameson, The Daily Bugle and Mary Jane are going to be in the Spider-Man reboot?

Do people not know Iron Man's history?? Black Widow, SHIELD and Nick Fury were ALL part of Iron Man's history, in fact Black Widow deserved to be in the movie far more than War Machine who didn't make it's debut in '92.

Agreed. And if i am not mistaken, She-Hulk, Spiderwoman and Maria Hill are also part of Tony's "entourage".

So anyway, we are getting an Ironman, a Cap and a Thor movie franchise with Shield guest starring in all of them, watching over them, helping them and combining them into the Avengers? Man.... This sucks!

[Figs]

Originally Posted by jmc

When we talk about film, the story has to work in its own right regardless of it's source material.

That I agree with.

I can't speak on behalf other of comics fans but I've been against this sort of thing for exactly the reasons shown in IM2. When you start funneling things to go a certain direction you run the risk of compromising the story at hand.

But if done sparingly here and there which is what they seem to be doing for the most part, I don't see that affecting it that much. I think the faults with this film are mainly due to a bit of rushing and maybe the new writer who came on board. I just don't see the references to the rest of the Marvel universe being a major element in the film's problems.

Now the Shield stuff wasn't the sole reason for IM2 lack luster second and third acts, but it sure as hell didn't help it. Marvel can try all they like to make the films like comics but it's only ever going to be an abridged version at best. And in the end if the results are mediocre you have to ask was it worth in the first place.

Much like Ang Lee using the comic style editing in The Hulk, i'm glad he did because someone had to be the first. It may not have been liked by most but it was worth a shot. These comic characters are here to stay in film so maybe if this ends up not working in the next, oh I don't know, 5 years they'll realize that and go back to each character being the only heroe in his universe. Until then, I look forward to all the future Marvel projects.

He is, but the story about Whiplash being a threat against Stark is totally halted. These plot points do nothing to enhance that story that was being told, they are simply 'there'. If they wanted the Shield stuff in, the story should have been built around it.

I also think this problem was due to rushing the story too much when they were writing it. I remember way back before they started filming when there were rumours that Favreau wasn't entirely sure if he was going to come back right away. He went on to say that they would have less time to make this film then the first one and he wanted the end product to turn out great again. Well, instead of that break he wanted he jumped right back in because Marvel i'm sure were wanting another one pumped out as quick as possible after seeing the money the first raked in.

Maybe if they had an extra year to plan this film out it wouldn't have had those disjointed acts.

[RaZaTrOn]

To be perfectly honest I don't think we would be getting an Iron Man film if The Avengers wasn't going to be the end game.

You really have to see this as a build up towards The Avengers because that is really the purpose of the films. The films are here to establish the characters needed for The Avengers, nothing more than that.

[cryptic name]

Originally Posted by RaZaTrOn

To be perfectly honest I don't think we would be getting an Iron Man film if The Avengers wasn't going to be the end game.

You really have to see this as a build up towards The Avengers because that is really the purpose of the films. The films are here to establish the characters needed for The Avengers, nothing more than that.

I don't think that's entirely accurate

[Ace of Knaves]

JMC you STILL don't get it...

You say you want to see an IRON MAN film? Yea, you are... SHIELD/Avengers IS Iron Man. You can't bring Iron Mans mythos to the big screen without telling that part of it.

Like i have ****ing said dozens of times now, and this is going to be the last time, leaving SHIELD/Avengers out of an Iron Man movie is like leaving The Daily Bugle out of a Spider-Man movie.

It is that ****ing simple.

If you don't like it? Tough ****... go watch some other superhero, because all of this stuff is NATURAL to Iron Man.

[Venom]

While I wouldn't advocate cutting SHIELD/Avengers out entirely, I can totally understand JMC's point of view, because the SHIELD elements happened to be the bad parts of the movie, detracting instead of adding to it.

Yes, SHIELD is a vital part of the mythos, and we should get some of it in the movie, but it should be well integrated in the story. Iron Man 2 failed to do that. That's why complaints are arising regarding SHIELD's appearance in the movie.

[Ace of Knaves]

I don't think it did fail.

SHIELD weren't there that much. They only appeared after Tony started going on a self destructive rampage. They didn't even show up until the last 45 minutes. SHIELD came in to sort him out, that's what SHIELD do.

Obviously after his rampage at the party and his fight with Rhodey(where he was actually putting innocent lives at risk) Black Widow obviously realized now is the time to report to Fury. The guy had gone nucking futs and she couldn't handle it. Then Fury came in and talked some sense into him.

Again, it was NATURAL to the story.

[roach]

Having just come back from the midnight showing I dont know what people were complaining about...i didnt see shield/avengers taking over or slowing down the film

[FaT_tONle]

I think its more Sam Jackson exposure than anything. He's basically become a parody of himself. Coulson is a joke... he's the Jar Jar Binks of the universe. It's more to do with annoying characters as opposed to actually being there. I didn't think they overdid it. That scene in the middle kinda dragged, and the final scene, was well, a setup scene. Had to have something like that at some point. That was pretty much it.

[Venom]

Originally Posted by Ace of Knaves

I don't think it did fail.

Pretty subjective. Plenty of reasons to the contrary in this thread already.

[roach]

Originally Posted by FaT_tONle

I think its more Sam Jackson exposure than anything. He's basically become a parody of himself. Coulson is a joke... he's the Jar Jar Binks of the universe. It's more to do with annoying characters as opposed to actually being there. I didn't think they overdid it. That scene in the middle kinda dragged, and the final scene, was well, a setup scene. Had to have something like that at some point. That was pretty much it.

How was Coulson the Jar Jar Binks????

[TomPiltoff]

Originally Posted by dark_b

now that i know that they want to force characters in other movies to promote Avengers i will maybe not pay money for Thor.

You're a liar and a whiner.

[TNC9852002]

Originally Posted by roach

Having just come back from the midnight showing I dont know what people were complaining about...i didnt see shield/avengers taking over or slowing down the film

This is the Hype. The fans have to find SOMETHING to argue about...otherwise, what's the point?

[roach]

Originally Posted by TNC9852002

This is the Hype. The fans have to find SOMETHING to argue about...otherwise, what's the point?

yeah but it seems that posters here have gotten a bit stupid...people who argue that in the spider reboot Peter should make his own webspinners but have a crappy costume....complaints that Cap might promote steroid use....