Rothman speaks...

[chaseter]

I really like Jackman but I would rather see all the X-Men get treated right instead of just one.

 

[Deaths Head II]

I just had to add that it makes sense to push a character when they are popular with fans (i.e. Gambit et al). What's kind of annoying about their pushing Cyke and Emma is that they aren't all that popular with the fans. Its like each one has fanboys at Marvel that are pushing them regardless of how the readership feels.

I'm glad Marvel does that. A character like Gambit shouldn't be given Cyclops' or Emma's role just like Spider-Man shouldn't be given Captain America's or Iron Man's role just because he's more popular. I even considering it damaging to those popular characters because usually the thing that makes them popular gets dampened the more popular and exposed they get. I much prefer Wolverine before they tried to make him more like a leader and more tame. And as much as I don't like the fact that Gambit hasn't been treated that well in comics lately, if they tried to do with him what they did to Wolverine I would be very pissed. DC does the same thing by keeping Wonder Woman in the "trinity" and all I can say is great. I don't think popularity should get in the way of story telling and characterization.

And if it weren't for that fanboy bias that you're complaining about so much, Claremont probably wouldn't have wrote so much about Wolverine in the 80s and writers in the 90s wouldn't have written about Gambit so much. And those characters might not have skyrocketed in popularity as much (Wolverine wan't popular when he was first introduced, he was viewed as a bully until Claremont made an effort to show his softer side in Japan and stuff like that). You don't mind it so much when it works in your favorite character's favor. Just like Canemacar, I'm pretty sure you're just bitter.

 

[Canemacar]

Thanks for the armchair psychology.

 

[Deaths Head II]

You're welcome.

 

[katie_girl09]

I'm glad Marvel does that. A character like Gambit shouldn't be given Cyclops' or Emma's role just like Spider-Man shouldn't be given Captain America's or Iron Man's role just because he's more popular....
You don't mind it so much when it works in your favorite character's favor. Just like Canemacar, I'm pretty sure you're just bitter.

Um... I didn't say that Gambit should head the X-men because he is popular?
My argument is that it makes *sense* to focus on characters that are popular because you're giving the greatest amount of people what they want. I was NOT saying that you couldn't focus on unpopular characters every now and then to flesh them out. Insistently focusing on them, however? That's just ridiculous.
Your accusation that I am bitter is laughable. How am I being bitter saying that they should focus on characters that people actally want to see instead of shoving others down our throats? And anyway, you strike me as one of those people that hates any character who becomes popular or well-liked.
EDIT: I love Chamber, but I don't expect them to go on and on about him while there are other far more popular characters awaiting storylines.

 

[JackBauer]

My argument is that it makes *sense* to focus on characters that are popular because you're giving the greatest amount of people what they want.

See, it's that kind of thinking that leads to s#!t like Spider-Man 3. Stop thinking about what people want, or think they want, and write based on what's best for the story at hand.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Like I said, some of those popular characters usually wouldn't have become popular if they hadn't overloaded on attention with them. Wolverine is good evidence of this. When he was first introduced they were even weighing the option of killing him or Thunderbird and Wolverine only won out basically because he had everything Thunderbird had and he had claws.

And I'm sorry if I put word in your mouth or whatever, but seeing as you've kind done the same with me with your last statment I'd say we're even. I don't hate popular characters. I just think that a character's popularity shouldn't be what decides their exposure. I don't call it forcing characters down your throat as it is sensible story telling. In the current stories, it makes absolute sense for the focus to be on Cyclops and Emma. I actually do wish they would even out the focus, but that's not because it's only focused on characters that aren't as popular. I also don't assume any Marvel X-Films would be the same way with this bias because there has never been any hint of this trend in the recent two Marvel films and because they have all-new, all-different professional film writers, not comic writers.

 

[katie_girl09]

See, it's that kind of thinking that leads to s#!t like Spider-Man 3.

No. Its crappy writing and casting that made Spider-Man 3 suck, actually.

 

[Deaths Head II]

No. Its crappy writing and casting that made Spider-Man 3 suck, actally.

I'd say crappy writers try too hard to give fans what they want.

 

[katie_girl09]

Like I said, some of those popular characters usually wouldn't have become popular if they hadn't overloaded on attention with them. Wolverine is good evidence of this. When he was first introduced they were even weighing the option of killing him or Thunderbird and Wolverine only won out basically because he had everything Thunderbird had and he had claws.

And I'm sorry if I put word in your mouth or whatever, but seeing as you've kind done the same with me with your last statment I'd say we're even. I don't hate popular characters. I just think that a character's popularity shouldn't be what decides their exposure. I don't call it forcing characters down your throat as it is sensible story telling. In the current stories, it makes absolute sense for the focus to be on Cyclops and Emma. I actually do wish they would even out the focus, but that's not because it's only focused on characters that aren't as popular. I also don't assume any Marvel X-Films would be the same way with this bias because there has never been any hint of this trend in the recent two Marvel films and because they have all-new, all-different professional film writers, not comic writers.

Like I said. I am not saying that they can't focus on unpopular characters. I am just saying that you shouldn't focus on them while ignoring other far more popular ones. And what 2 recent Marvel films are you basing this off of?
And yes. We are even. Very even! t:

 

[katie_girl09]

I'd say crappy writers try too hard to give fans what they want.

That still wouldn't make it wrong to give fans what they want.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Like I said. I am not saying that they can't focus on unpopular characters. I am just saying that you shouldn't focus on them while ignoring other far more popular ones.

Fair enough.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

I really like Jackman but I would rather see all the X-Men get treated right instead of just one.

wolverine was over used imo. the first xmen movie should of been about the first class and the first group of the brother hood. with good adaptions of thier first costumes.
the second movie should introduce wolvie and others like in deadly genisis, and also intrduce sentinels. and rise of the phoenix

and the third movie should introduce rouge, gambit, and psylocke. the villians should be phoenix,the brotherhood and the hellfire club.


and finally the fourth movie would be all for apacalypse, sinister, archangel, cable and bishop.

 

[Cyma]

I knew it, but then again, "how many times do you have to be @%&@ by a goat before you begin to baaaaaaa." I'll never give Fox one red cent of my hard earned, until they prove they're capable of getting it right.

Including Narnia!

Just leave Rothman... you hack!

Narnia? FOX? They're going to make Chronicles of Narnia 3? *faints*

 

[Deaths Head II]

Narnia? FOX? They're going to make Chronicles of Narnia 3? *faints*

Yep. And The Seeker and Eragon shows us how well Fox handles fantasy movies.

 

[dark_b]

Yep. And The Seeker and Eragon shows us how well Fox handles fantasy movies.

i hope narnia 3 will not be like ERAGON 2 and THE SEEKER 2

 

[Theweepeople]

Narnia? FOX? They're going to make Chronicles of Narnia 3? *faints*

Fortunately, I'm not a Narnia fan. I couldn't care any less about Fox screwing up property rights that don't interest me.

 

[Peter McCabe]

wolverine was over used imo. the first xmen movie should of been about the first class and the first group of the brother hood. with good adaptions of thier first costumes.

 

[FrostBite]

...Waaaay too much overreacting on these forums. Rothman is not some evil incarnate being, nor does he want to ruin a franchise. He may be stupid and he may be a liar but he isn't purposely setting forth to reek havoc on all of your childhoods.

I see people wishing they could kill him / beat him... over a movie.

Like I said, overreact much?

 

[danoyse]

...Waaaay too much overreacting on these forums. Rothman is not some evil incarnate being, nor does he want to ruin a franchise. He may be stupid and he may be a liar but he isn't purposely setting forth to reek havoc on all of your childhoods.

I see people wishing they could kill him / beat him... over a movie.

Like I said, overreact much?

I find the violence talk disturbing as well.

 

[Anita18]

I find the violence talk disturbing as well.

But that's the fun part about hanging out with fanboys - the utter righteous indignation that comes with disrespecting fictional characters.

 

[danoyse]

But that's the fun part about hanging out with fanboys - the utter righteous indignation that comes with disrespecting fictional characters.

It's fun to watch the looks on the faces of the people who don't read these boards when you describe these things to them.

 

[BMM]

I don't know why people bother listening to Rothman anymore. He's about as trustworthy as a used car salesman, and I don't mean the from the embittered fanboy perspective. It's common sense. He's a businessman, and he is going to say or do anything to sell his product, whether the product is good or a lemon.

 

[dark_b]

I don't know why people bother listening to Rothman anymore. He's about as trustworthy as a used car salesman, and I don't mean the from the embittered fanboy perspective. It's common sense. He's a businessman, and he is going to say or do anything to sell his product, whether the product is good or a lemon.

thats not true. its no smart to lie on a video.

lying in an interview that will be in a magazine? sure. because you can always say that they twisted hes words.

but in a video interview?

 

[BMM]

That's not what I'm saying. I mean it's common sense not to trust Rothman because he is going to do or say anything to sell his product.