Apocalypse Oscar Isaac IS Apocalypse - Part 1

[starscream22]

Fact of the matter is, you don't even give credit where credit is due with this movie.

That's a matter of opinion last time I checked. Besides your "proof" as it were falls a little askew when you take my comments out of context to exaggerate malice to begin with.

 

[starscream22]

^ Best to just ignore those who are overtly negative. If everyone does them they don't get the conflict and attention they desire, get bored and go elsewhere

Said the guy who quoted my signature hours ago.... I actually read more than I post. Some comments I agree with and others I don't but I can honestly do w/o all the outright snide counter-productive retorts when I do post. So you actually sticking to your own rule would be appreciated.

 

[Flint Marko]

I'm actually kind of blown away by it. People complained about Whedon using a large army of aliens in one movie and then a large army of robots in the next one.

But literally fight Magneto in every X-Men movie? Usually in the third act once he betrays you after you stupidly trusted him yet again? It's okay... because of reasons. I may be paraphrasing but I still stand by my point. I can't believe people actually can't see how Magneto has been the pretty much the main villain in all these films.

That's why I said his motives doesn't sound all that different from Ultrons. Building a better world by destroying the old one. Its been done over and over again.

Bingo. That's one of my main problems with this franchise - it's been running in place for 15 years now. People can criticize other franchises for being "formulaic", yet the X-films have their own formula they rarely ever stray from. Let's not turn a blind eye to that.
If we can move past said formula with this movie, I'll be incredibly happy. Apocalypse may not look anything like his comic book counterpart, but he at least looks to be bringing something different to the table this time around, which has me excited.

 

[starscream22]

^ Best to just ignore those who are overtly negative. If everyone does them they don't get the conflict and attention they desire, get bored and go elsewhere

Said the guy who quoted my signature hours ago.... I actually read more than I post. Some comment I argree with and others I don't but I can honestly do w/o all the snide counter productive retorts when I do post. So you actually sticking to your own rule would be appreciated.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

He pretty much was.



Him turning against them sooner doesn't negate anything. Sinner or not is not the point. I'm sure you're aware of this. Machine created to be used against mutants ends up in Magnetos hands and he uses it against the humans. Its more or less the same. He did it with Strykers cerebro in X-2 and Trasks sentinels in DofP.



How am I attacking this franchise? You're making it sound as if I'm being hostile? I'm no the only one who feels strongly about this. There have been people here who feel the same but I'm just more vocal about it. Let me break it down for you.

X1: Main villain
X-2: Works with the X-Men and Turns against them
X-3: Main villain
FC: Works with the X-Men and turns against them.
DofP: Works with the X-Men and turns against them.

That is my point^^ Notice a pattern here? That's why I'm saying its repetitive.



*sigh* I didn't criticize anything. All I said is that his motives sound too similar to what Ultron was trying to do. That is all. I didn't praise AoU at all in this thread. A couple pages ago I even said :



I drew similarities between the two villains.In fact when the trailer for Apocalypse first came out, I said I hope Apocalypse isn't just a "haha I'm gonna deatroy the world" villain (judging from his speech in the trailer) and actually a poster or two here responded saying his motives won't be that straight forward.



Where did I ever say it's okay for the MCU to do it and how dare the X-Men do it? I didn't even insinuate that. I just said its been done over and over again that when Apocalypse does do it, it won't be too different from what we've already seen from Ultron. But now you wanna make it a MCU vs X-Men debate when it wasn't even about that if you read my previous posts and what I was trying to say, yeesh. We're done here.

Apologies if I sounded hostile as that wasn't my intention. But I don't see how you are perfectly happy with an unfaithful Ultron but then complain about a faithful Apocalypse. It just sounds like hypocrisy to me. And I wasn't the one who brought the MCU/Ultron in the first place.

 

[Flint Marko]

Apologies if I sounded hostile as that wasn't my intention. But I don't see how you are perfectly happy with an unfaithful Ultron but then complain about a faithful Apocalypse. It just sounds like hypocrisy to me. And I wasn't the one who brought the MCU/Ultron in the first place.

Do you honestly think that Ultron will be as "unfaithful" as this version of Apocalypse?
People tried to use this same argument for the FFINO to compare the changes Marvel has made on their films to what Fox did with their most recent Marvel adaption. It doesn't work.

 

[BoredGuy]

I think Ultron and Apocalypse will be similarly the same but different from their comic counterparts

and again, I don't think TeeKay was saying he thought Ultron was Amazing and Apoc's gunna suck, he said he hopes Singer handles his villain better than Whedon, but presumably has doubts about it based on what he's seen...
where's the confusion?

 

[starscream22]

Do you honestly think that Ultron will be as "unfaithful" as this version of Apocalypse?
People tried to use this same argument for the FFINO to compare the changes Marvel has made on their films to what Fox did with their most recent Marvel adaption. It doesn't work.

Plus Apocalypse is a much more popular villain than Ultron is for me. I honestly had no stock in Ultron going in, and knew little about him. So when people bring him up as a counter a Fox-men flaw my initial response is always...."So what?". The good clearly outweighed the bad in the majority's eyes which is more than I can say for Fox's last Marvel movie.

Plus I had more invested in The Mandarin (90's IM cartoon) than I did with MCU changing Ultron's origin. But even that God awful "Twist" in IM3 isn't going win me over or miraculously shut down my disdain for ApocINO so why bring it up?

 

[starscream22]

I think Ultron and Apocalypse will be similarly the same but different from their comic counterparts

and again, I don't think TeeKay was saying he thought Ultron was Amazing and Apoc's gunna suck, he said he hopes Singer handles his villain better than Whedon, but presumably has doubts about it based on what he's seen...
where's the confusion?

It's the overall frustration in Fox being in 3rd place behind Marvel Studios and WB (4th place if you count Sony's MCU team up). They know there's a lot riding of this film.

So any quip about a flaw in this film from a known "naysayer" is grounds for MCU scorn.

Though as far as I'm concerned Tony Stark's snarky Ultron >>>> Ooze-pocalypse.

 

[CaptainWagner]

Would someone mind telling me just how Apocolypse is "In Name Only". What exactly has changed so much, other than him not having the generic villain voice from the cartoon that apparently was the greatest thing since sliced bread in certain circles?

 

[starscream22]

Would someone mind telling me just how Apocolypse is "In Name Only". What exactly has changed so much, other than him not having the generic villain voice from the cartoon that apparently was the greatest thing since sliced bread in certain circles?

While they're at it do they mind telling me how anyone could dismiss the voice in the 90's version as being in anyway "generic" as opposed to being "definitive"?

 

[CaptainWagner]

While they're at it do they mind telling me how anyone could dismiss the voice in the 90's version as being in anyway "generic" as opposed to being "definitive"?

Because it's nothing more than a stereotypical, booming villain voice. People remember it because it's the only voice they've heard from him. But that doesn't make him any different from 90% of cartoon villains.

 

[BoredGuy]

I did like the effect on his old voice
but just add a bavarian accent and you got Baron Underbheit from Venture Brothers lol

 

[First Avenger]

Would someone mind telling me just how Apocolypse is "In Name Only". What exactly has changed so much, other than him not having the generic villain voice from the cartoon that apparently was the greatest thing since sliced bread in certain circles?

To me Apocalypse looks like a great adaptation from the comics. Isaac looks fantastic in the role.

 

[starscream22]

Because it's nothing more than a stereotypical, booming villain voice. People remember it because it's the only voice they've heard from him. But that doesn't make him any different from 90% of cartoon villains.

No it's not. There's XM: Evolution's version and the version in that RPG Rise of Apocalypse. The reasons you don't recall them are because they're the ones that are actually generic. You're trying to dismiss the stand out Animated version in order to justify this movie's version.

No one had an issue with Fox's 90's animated version until now so nice try.

 

[Zant]

To me Apocalypse looks like a great adaptation from the comics. Isaac looks fantastic in the role.

Don't lets the haters hear you say that. Baron Zemo is going to be INO and I am still looking forward to him, mainly because of the talented actor they cast.

Ultron was cool. Its hard to take him seriously but he was ok. Better than most MCU baddies.

 

[jaymes_e06]

If a voice makes a character ino why we're there no complaints when they gave Mystique a multi-voice in X1-3?

 

[starscream22]

If a voice makes a character ino why we're there no complaints when they gave Mystique a multi-voice in X1-3?

That really doesn't bother me...(you know preference in all)

But with the JLaw hate train brewing from people actually supporting this film do you really wanna go there...?

 

[starscream22]

Don't lets the haters hear you say that. Baron Zemo is going to be INO and I am still looking forward to him, mainly because of the talented actor they cast.

Ultron was cool. Its hard to take him seriously but he was ok. Better than most MCU baddies.

Huh, the last Fox-Marvel film had an array of "Talented Actors" but lets hope for your sake that it doesn't end the same way...

"First Avenger" is entitled to his opinion (as is everyone who post here). Ironically that has never been an issue to me in these parts. So if anyone's stirring things up right now it's YOU!

 

[First Avenger]

Don't lets the haters hear you say that. Baron Zemo is going to be INO and I am still looking forward to him, mainly because of the talented actor they cast.

Ultron was cool. Its hard to take him seriously but he was ok. Better than most MCU baddies.

Agreed. I loved Ultron personally and I'm sure it'll be the same for Apocalypse.

 

[starscream22]

Agreed. I loved Ultron personally and I'm sure it'll be the same for Apocalypse.

 

[First Avenger]

Huh, the last Fox-Marvel film had an array of "Talented Actors" but lets hope for your sake that it doesn't end the same way...

"First Avenger" is entitled to his opinion (as is everyone who post here). Ironically that has never been an issue to me in these parts. So if anyone's stirring things up right now it's YOU!

SS I get you don't like Those movies at all,but maybe people would better accept your opinions if you were kinder in expressing them.

 

[x-er]

The one thing I'm not sure about is the fantasy-feel it has to it, especially with Apocalypse's crew's design. I understand they're trying to pull off a religious or hermetic concept (which has a lot of Christian people preaching about on the web). However, Apocalypse is supposed to be technologically enhanced by an alien race (which is transhumanism, another concept Christians are condemning).

The X-Men are meant to be sci-fi. So if the X-Men ever get to space, I'd like to see something closer to Start Trek and that type of thing. As for the way certain Christians are reacting online, I really think Fox needs to offer a counter-argument in the film, which is what the X-Men have to say on the matter (NIGHTCRAWLER!). We rarely get to see them shine over the villains, which is a pity.

I don't think the religious controversy will lose them viewers though. On the contrary, it makes people want to see it more. For example, Harry Potter was bashed so much by Christian people, yet it was one of the most successful franchises in the world. I've also met many Christian kids & adults that buy the books and watch the films, probably because they take it more as fiction & entertainment, as opposed to their spirituality.

 

[Majik1387]

It doesn't have a fantasy-feel at all, no idea where you got that idea from.

 

[jaymes_e06]

That really doesn't bother me...(you know preference in all)

But with the JLaw hate train brewing from people actually supporting this film do you really wanna go there...?

You make no sense with any of these statements as just this page you were talking about how important the voice was... which is it does it bother you or not?

And the "do you want to go there?" Really? Kind of childish don't you think? It's not Mystique people "hate" it's the fact that the writers had to make concessions for J.Law. Everyone loves Rebecca portrayal of the character which is what i was referring to so your point is moot.

You are more than welcome to have your own opinion but why not stand by it when challenged?