First Avenger The "OFFICIAL" CA:TFA Negative Reaction Thread

[JAK®]

Can anyone explain to me why wings on a helmet is any more relevant now than it would be in the '40s?

Especially when considering that Cap's costume had the wings back when it was first designed ...in the 40's?

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Well first of all, there is a difference in how something would practically be applied in the real world in the 40's and how something creatively would be approached in the 40's. Comics in the 40's through to the beginning of the 60's were very different, it was more about escapism, flawless heroes who endlessly did good deeds. Especially during the war, from a creative standpoint, it was seen important to have optimistic beacons of hope for people to enjoy.

Overtime though, the art form grew to start reflecting social issues like the civil rights movement, the peace movement during vietnam etc.


Now, considering this is a movie being made TODAY, we obviously take into account modern sensibilities when approaching fantasy movies. Especially superhero films, it's important that you take whatever core concept you have, regardless of how fantastical it is, and you bound that in realism, give it a realistic context, so that while said fantasy elements are not the norm, the real elements are the things the audience can grapple onto to help buy into the story and see it as something real to them, rather than just a pure, larger than life fantasy experience.

Today, we view WWII as a gritty, dark period of history when everyone just dug in and did their bit to fight for freedom. It doesn't matter if Cap will actually be on the frontlines or not, the effect and tone of WWII was felt everywhere by everyone, and that seriousness should definitely be present in the movie. Sure he could have had wings, but would that have seemed like a priority to them during the war, that his costume has wings? First they give him the USO suit, which is entirely cosmetic and non-functional.

Then the suit he gets given by Stark is purely functional, with basic colour schemes. Now none of us really know how they lead into that, Cap may well have established himself as a hero type so it seemed fitting or maybe Stark, like his future son, just has a flair for stylising things.

I do see where you're coming from, but this is a whole discussion thats been going on for a while, I don't want to cover old ground. All i'll say is that whilst I would indeed love to see pure, faithfully made Cap costume, I entirely understand their reasons for not doing that and I don't think it should detract from the overall movie experience, nor does it rule out a more faithful Cap costume for the Avengers.

 

[afan]

I didn't realise Flash was set in WWII

Jay Garrick.

 

[roach]

Well first of all, there is a difference in how something would practically be applied in the real world in the 40's and how something creatively would be approached in the 40's. Comics in the 40's through to the beginning of the 60's were very different, it was more about escapism, flawless heroes who endlessly did good deeds. Especially during the war, from a creative standpoint, it was seen important to have optimistic beacons of hope for people to enjoy.

Overtime though, the art form grew to start reflecting social issues like the civil rights movement, the peace movement during vietnam etc.


Now, considering this is a movie being made TODAY, we obviously take into account modern sensibilities when approaching fantasy movies. Especially superhero films, it's important that you take whatever core concept you have, regardless of how fantastical it is, and you bound that in realism, give it a realistic context, so that while said fantasy elements are not the norm, the real elements are the things the audience can grapple onto to help buy into the story and see it as something real to them, rather than just a pure, larger than life fantasy experience.

Today, we view WWII as a gritty, dark period of history when everyone just dug in and did their bit to fight for freedom. It doesn't matter if Cap will actually be on the frontlines or not, the effect and tone of WWII was felt everywhere by everyone, and that seriousness should definitely be present in the movie. Sure he could have had wings, but would that have seemed like a priority to them during the war, that his costume has wings? First they give him the USO suit, which is entirely cosmetic and non-functional.

Then the suit he gets given by Stark is purely functional, with basic colour schemes. Now none of us really know how they lead into that, Cap may well have established himself as a hero type so it seemed fitting or maybe Stark, like his future son, just has a flair for stylising things.

I do see where you're coming from, but this is a whole discussion thats been going on for a while, I don't want to cover old ground. All i'll say is that whilst I would indeed love to see pure, faithfully made Cap costume, I entirely understand their reasons for not doing that and I don't think it should detract from the overall movie experience, nor does it rule out a more faithful Cap costume for the Avengers.

exactly no one in todays audience would take seriously a hero with wings on his head....I for one am glad that Marvel did away with them

 

[Wolvieboy17]

You know thats a ridiculous example. Wings on a viking gods helmet over wings on a soldier in WWII's helmet? Surely you can see the distinction!

Cap, in WWII, serves as a functional soldier. Therefore he would use a functional uniform. That means the creative choices for his costume are limited without a strong chance of breaking out of his apparent context. If it was Cap in modern times, with Fury wanting him as a leader of a superhero team, thats different, he's not fighting in a war and they can justify it better.

But considering in the context of this movie, where Steve resents the USO show style persona and wants to be more like a Soldier, can you see him going "Oh, wings? Sweet, thanks Howard."

Thor is obviously different, being an otherworldly being as his context, the GA doesn't have any pre-concieved notion of what an Asgardian should actually look like.

I don't understand so many notions of this continual argument. I know the wings are part of the costume, and they're cool, and it's a shame we don't get to see that on Cap (in THIS movie anyway) but does that really destroy things for you? And can you really not understand at all their reasons for doing it? I know I have my opinions, but I feel like I am clearly seeing things from both sides and sometimes this argument just seems like a snake eating it's own tail.

 

[roach]

You know thats a ridiculous example. Wings on a viking gods helmet over wings on a soldier in WWII's helmet? Surely you can see the distinction!

Cap, in WWII, serves as a functional soldier. Therefore he would use a functional uniform. That means the creative choices for his costume are limited without a strong chance of breaking out of his apparent context. If it was Cap in modern times, with Fury wanting him as a leader of a superhero team, thats different, he's not fighting in a war and they can justify it better.

But considering in the context of this movie, where Steve resents the USO show style persona and wants to be more like a Soldier, can you see him going "Oh, wings? Sweet, thanks Howard."

Thor is obviously different, being an otherworldly being as his context, the GA doesn't have any pre-concieved notion of what an Asgardian should actually look like.

I don't understand so many notions of this continual argument. I know the wings are part of the costume, and they're cool, and it's a shame we don't get to see that on Cap (in THIS movie anyway) but does that really destroy things for you? And can you really not understand at all their reasons for doing it? I know I have my opinions, but I feel like I am clearly seeing things from both sides and sometimes this argument just seems like a snake eating it's own tail.

but the "A" on the helmet is completely functional

 

[Mercurius]

The whole problem with your "realistic" approach, Wolvieboy, to try and explain why it would be ridiculous to have the wings is that a well-done faithful costume would work no matter what.

I take it that you like the final result in Johnston's flick, and that's perfectly fair, it's your taste.

But the argument that some iconic costume in comicbookdom can't be faithfully translated is baloney: a great wardrobe team would take the challenge and make every naysayer eat their words.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I never used those words Mercurius... I never said that it would be ridiculous, nor am I being a naysayer. If you read my comments carefully, I said that it could work against the tone and context they are trying to establish. And no an 'A' isn't functional, but nor is the colour of any soldiers uniform, or the swastika on a Nazi's armband. What is your point? All I see the wings as is something symbolic and I don't see how the painted on ones don't achieve that.

 

[Mercurius]

I never used those words Mercurius... I never said that it would be ridiculous, nor am I being a naysayer. If you read my comments carefully, I said that it could work against the tone and context they are trying to establish. And no an 'A' isn't functional, but nor is the colour of any soldiers uniform, or the swastika on a Nazi's armband. What is your point? All I see the wings as is something symbolic and I don't see how the painted on ones don't achieve that.

I presumed you thought it ridiculous, cause you are defending this movie version. But I wouldn't call you naysayer: that was a more broad, general assertion against those who are indeed naysayers.

Now: not only I can't see why it would work against the tone, but also I find the painted wings a cowardly solution from the part of the designers.

IF we could accept, love and be moved by the story of Superman, back when Chris Reeve would dress himself like that (and would be at the same time Clark Kent), this argument of "against the tone" is rotten.

As I said, a great team can make anything happen.

 

[Iceman]

I don't understand so many notions of this continual argument. I know the wings are part of the costume, and they're cool, and it's a shame we don't get to see that on Cap (in THIS movie anyway) but does that really destroy things for you? And can you really not understand at all their reasons for doing it? I know I have my opinions, but I feel like I am clearly seeing things from both sides and sometimes this argument just seems like a snake eating it's own tail.

Cap's wings are iconic & without them you can make an amazing film, but it is that much less "Cap" to me.

I think it's fine to have the wings as they are now for the purposes of this film as long as they definitely turn up in Avengers. These significant identification features I think are more important than they sometimes sound when being discussed. Eg does it really matter to the story & quality of Avengers whether Hulk is green or a different colour? A Cap who doesn't get his wings at some stage is like a different hero to me, very reminiscent of Cap & with all of his positive & inspirational qualities, but not quite Cap himself.

 

[JAK®]

Well first of all, there is a difference in how something would practically be applied in the real world in the 40's and how something creatively would be approached in the 40's. Comics in the 40's through to the beginning of the 60's were very different, it was more about escapism, flawless heroes who endlessly did good deeds. Especially during the war, from a creative standpoint, it was seen important to have optimistic beacons of hope for people to enjoy.

Overtime though, the art form grew to start reflecting social issues like the civil rights movement, the peace movement during vietnam etc.


Now, considering this is a movie being made TODAY, we obviously take into account modern sensibilities when approaching fantasy movies. Especially superhero films, it's important that you take whatever core concept you have, regardless of how fantastical it is, and you bound that in realism, give it a realistic context, so that while said fantasy elements are not the norm, the real elements are the things the audience can grapple onto to help buy into the story and see it as something real to them, rather than just a pure, larger than life fantasy experience.

Today, we view WWII as a gritty, dark period of history when everyone just dug in and did their bit to fight for freedom. It doesn't matter if Cap will actually be on the frontlines or not, the effect and tone of WWII was felt everywhere by everyone, and that seriousness should definitely be present in the movie. Sure he could have had wings, but would that have seemed like a priority to them during the war, that his costume has wings? First they give him the USO suit, which is entirely cosmetic and non-functional.

Then the suit he gets given by Stark is purely functional, with basic colour schemes. Now none of us really know how they lead into that, Cap may well have established himself as a hero type so it seemed fitting or maybe Stark, like his future son, just has a flair for stylising things.

I do see where you're coming from, but this is a whole discussion thats been going on for a while, I don't want to cover old ground. All i'll say is that whilst I would indeed love to see pure, faithfully made Cap costume, I entirely understand their reasons for not doing that and I don't think it should detract from the overall movie experience, nor does it rule out a more faithful Cap costume for the Avengers.

A lot of what you say here is true, but when applied to the actual topic of discussion, your reasoning is flawed.

The wings on the helmet are purely aesthetic and serve no real function, yes, but no more than his red, white and blue colour scheme. In fact his colour scheme is way more of a detriment than the wings would ever be. Cap has effectively lost all his stealth and made himself a target.

My opinion of the suit is positive and I actually support the idea of integrating practical elements into the comic's design (provided that the practical elements don't get in the way of the design, like Nolan's Batsuits)

However, most of the arguments being made against a more traditional suit aren't satisfactory. They are full of circular reasoning, hypocrisy and ignorance of the subject at hand.

Statements like "you can't have wings because it's the 1940s" are one of them. I don't understand the logic there, if there is indeed any logic at all.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Well I never actually made that statement, nor did I say you couldn't have them, merely that it works against the tone of WWII.

Anyway, i'm withdrawing from this discussion. It's gone on long enough for my tastes and I know it's not going anywhere. Everyone's already made their own mind up and the only thing I can see changing that is the movie itself, if even that does it.

This isn't me being *****y or bitter, I just honestly have run out of things to say. Enjoy, i'm sure i'll see you guys in other threads.

 

[Rock Sexton]

You know thats a ridiculous example. Wings on a viking gods helmet over wings on a soldier in WWII's helmet? Surely you can see the distinction!

Cap, in WWII, serves as a functional soldier. Therefore he would use a functional uniform. That means the creative choices for his costume are limited without a strong chance of breaking out of his apparent context. If it was Cap in modern times, with Fury wanting him as a leader of a superhero team, thats different, he's not fighting in a war and they can justify it better.

But considering in the context of this movie, where Steve resents the USO show style persona and wants to be more like a Soldier, can you see him going "Oh, wings? Sweet, thanks Howard."

Thor is obviously different, being an otherworldly being as his context, the GA doesn't have any pre-concieved notion of what an Asgardian should actually look like.

I don't understand so many notions of this continual argument. I know the wings are part of the costume, and they're cool, and it's a shame we don't get to see that on Cap (in THIS movie anyway) but does that really destroy things for you? And can you really not understand at all their reasons for doing it? I know I have my opinions, but I feel like I am clearly seeing things from both sides and sometimes this argument just seems like a snake eating it's own tail.

Hey Wolvie,

Is bright Smurf blue "functional" in the context of WWII?

 

[Wolvieboy17]

*sigh* I don't know Rock, I guess not. I've been rumbled.

 

[Rock Sexton]

*sigh* I don't know Rock, I guess not. I've been rumbled.

Haha ....

It's all good man .... I just find it hard to buy into the justifications when I see plenty of elements of the movie that conflict with them. I know it's not going to change any time soon though.

 

[TikkiEXX]

we,re on wings again? didnt we already do this months ago? just sayin. lol

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Well I find it all pointless Rock. I mean, what it comes down to is some people like it some don't. All we can do then is justify the reasons we do or do not like it. Beyond that, what else is there apart from having JJ and the people responsible answer questions?

I just think perhaps i never should have entered this thread. Too much negative thinking gets me down, and I think negative thinking is alot more than just having a contrary opinion. Some of the comments here by people who like the costume make me more annoyed than others. I think i'll stay away from this thread. Now how do you unsubscribe?

 

[Mercurius]

Wolviepal, I think you should not take criticism for negativity. When you take one for the other it really gets you down.

Criticism may be discernment only.

Acknowledging that something is wrong is not necessarily bitter, nor anything like that. And an argument is an argument, hopefully, not personal stuff: just thinking and evaluating.

Well, that's just to say: even when in an argument, don't let the circumstances be negative for you.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Well I find it all pointless Rock.

Well for me, the internet is a way to voice my opinion. You never know who's reading these things so in some ways I hope that a Marvel exec somehow finds his way on here and reads what I have to say .... regardless of whether it has any effect or not.

 

[StylishHokie21]

No. The wings do look goofy. They BARELY don't look goofy in comics and they can get away with a lot more in comics...but in live-action...the wings would just look stupid. I don't what how "cool" you try to make them look. Wings on a guys helmet is freaking stupid.

If done correctly, I believe they wouldn't look goofy. You're entitled to your opinion, but the fact is that the wings have been a part of his costume since the 40's. If people can buy a man with a red skull, then they should have no problems with tiny wings sticking out of someone's head.

 

[WildcatNC]

Can anyone explain to me why wings on a helmet is any more relevant now than it would be in the '40s?

Especially when considering that Cap's costume had the wings back when it was first designed ...in the 40's?

Because it was a different uniform. What I personally meant was it wouldn't work on the more WWII style outfit they designed for the movie.

I could see how it might work on a different design though, just not the one they ended up with.

I imagine they spent much time in designing the uniform and poured over the ascetics for quite a while. I imagine there was discussion of the wings.

I'm also pretty sure they thought it didn't fit with the hybrid realistic tone of uniform they were going with but still wanted them there somehow that fit ascetically. Without seeing how all the incarnations of the uniform looked its hard for us to say what looked best.

We may still see a more traditional scale top costume with wings in Avengers, who knows. I want them to do whatever looks best and fits the movie. As long as its undeniably Captain America and looks badass, i'm good.

Painted on or not JJ "checked" the boxes on the outfit. Some people wouldn't like it no matter what the uniform looked like.

The Raimi Spiderman costume was awesome but I remember many people moaning about the silver webbing.

I would have done the costume differently myself, but i'm pretty happy with it and thinks it looks awesome for the first incarnation and is as era appropriate as you could get and still keep the Cap feel.

 

[BigThor]

exactly no one in todays audience would take seriously a hero with wings on his head....I for one am glad that Marvel did away with them

Thor's helmet design looks great in my opinion, it fits tighter on his head in the film than it does on this toy.

I'm glad they went with that particular shape for the wings instead of the feather-like wings. I also like how it guards the side of his face, like on Avengers: EMH.

 

[captaintass]

Well I never actually made that statement, nor did I say you couldn't have them, merely that it works against the tone of WWII.

I disagree. Our real-life soldiers were painting snarling teeth and angry eyes on the noses of their aircraft in WWII. They painted pictures of women on the sides of their planes, too. Those were cartoony and symbolic. They weren't necessary for the plane to function properly but they were inspirational and cool.

That's how I think of Cap's 3D wings...inspirational and cool.

 

[TheVileOne]

Wait are Hitler and Nazis not in the movie?

 

[WildcatNC]

Wait are Hitler and Nazis not in the movie?