What was the biggest problem with Dr. Doom?

[zer00]

That doesn't even make sense.

 

[Carp Man]

That doesn't even make sense.

You see a troll, behind every negative comment. lol or mabey it's McCarthyism.

 

[zer00]

No I see a troll when I see a troll. I can also see an idiot.

 

[spiderwasp]

I somehow made the mistake of thinking this was a thread about Dr. Doom. It turns out to be about Carp Man instead. As far as what I thought was wrong with Doom, it was that there was no real motivation for his evil. He wasn't trying to take over the world, or even the corporation. He was mostly just mad because he lost the girl and wasn't getting as much attention as the other 4 people who had been on the flight. It didn't seem to be enough for me. Overall, I liked the movie and even enjoyed the character to some degree- but he wasn't the Doom I know.
As far as what's wrong with Carp Man, maybe that could be another thread. There seems to be plenty of material.

 

[Carp Man]

I somehow made the mistake of thinking this was a thread about Dr. Doom. It turns out to be about Carp Man instead. As far as what I thought was wrong with Doom, it was that there was no real motivation for his evil. He wasn't trying to take over the world, or even the corporation. He was mostly just mad because he lost the girl and wasn't getting as much attention as the other 4 people who had been on the flight. It didn't seem to be enough for me. Overall, I liked the movie and even enjoyed the character to some degree- but he wasn't the Doom I know.
As far as what's wrong with Carp Man, maybe that could be another thread. There seems to be plenty of material.

Some get carried away. A thread on me ? Mabey a statue also.

 

[zer00]

I somehow made the mistake of thinking this was a thread about Dr. Doom. It turns out to be about Carp Man instead. As far as what I thought was wrong with Doom, it was that there was no real motivation for his evil. He wasn't trying to take over the world, or even the corporation. He was mostly just mad because he lost the girl and wasn't getting as much attention as the other 4 people who had been on the flight.

I disagree with that to a degree. I've discussed this with people and even the ones who hate movie Doom agree he still had motivation. He blames Reed for the accident just the same as the comic(a different anlge but he still blames him). Victor is losing everything he hoped for and he sees it as Reed's fault and wants to destroy him in every way possible. The space trip was supposed to be the triumph of his life. Hence why he asked Sue to marry him. Not because he wanted to but imagine him coming down, engaged, having a scientific achievment. And getting al the credit for it. Victor didn't want to abort(though I'm confused as to what that would have done) So it's probobly in truth Reed's fault but Vic didn't want to abort(once again no idea what that would have done)

 

[Kelly]

I somehow made the mistake of thinking this was a thread about Dr. Doom. It turns out to be about Carp Man instead. As far as what I thought was wrong with Doom, it was that there was no real motivation for his evil. He wasn't trying to take over the world, or even the corporation. He was mostly just mad because he lost the girl and wasn't getting as much attention as the other 4 people who had been on the flight. It didn't seem to be enough for me. Overall, I liked the movie and even enjoyed the character to some degree- but he wasn't the Doom I know.
As far as what's wrong with Carp Man, maybe that could be another thread. There seems to be plenty of material.

The script, the novelization gave him motivation far beyond losing Sue, who in reality never had....BUT what we got in the movie was a love triangle....editing a good portion of Victor's scenes really, really, really killed his motivation in my opinion.

 

[zer00]

Yeah I guess it helps I read the script and saw the most of the deleted scenes But even those who didn't still got it.

 

[Kelly]

Yeah I guess it helps I read the script and saw the most of the deleted scenes But even those who didn't still got it.

Not all...most I know saw the motivation yes against Reed, BUT they by far thought that his loss of Sue was the larger of the two motivations, too me it should have been the lesser of the two.....the shot when he realizes Sue was with Reed and missed his dinner with her....the shot of his face, after the bridge scene, when Reed puts his arm around Sue, people saw that and commented at the time, when Reed walks into the room while Victor and Sue are about to argue...OVER THE FACT that Sue wants to stay at the Baxter Bldg...she says to be with her brother.....its obvious he sees through that....when he sees how Sue is so upset when Reed almost kills himself testing the machine...people saw that and commented on it....several places specifically shown as Victor's jealousy of Reed because of Sue.....the only scene that to me really showed Victor upset at the space mission was when he tells Reed to get to work and find a cure.....where else was it shown?

Even before the mission...

**puts his arm around Sue in the meeting room....why? to show he had the girl....

**on the space ship....***I need to speak with SUE, why? to show he had the girl....

I also think another motivation was shown even more than being mad over the mission and that was the fact that the 4 were getting alot of positive reaction from the public.....the magazine covers......he got....nuttin.

 

[spiderwasp]

And still missing was the whole political, power hungry part. Maybe that will come in a sequel.

 

[zer00]

I personally thought the "love" triangle was a bit non-existent. And some of that is looking too much into things. Victor is pissed at Reed for taking Sue but that does mean Vic lost at his goal. Taking everything away from Reed. To me Victor was more angry about losing everything including Sue about the same. The extra development scenes would have helped this greatly. In one you even see that he's using Sue to get to Reed. But that's my opinion on the matter. I think he had pleanty more motivation. I think it'll be much better shown in the DC.

 

[Kelly]

I personally thought the "love" triangle was a bit non-existent. And some of that is looking too much into things. Victor is pissed at Reed for taking Sue but that does mean Vic lost at his goal. Taking everything away from Reed. To me Victor was more angry about losing everything including Sue about the same. The extra development scenes would have helped this greatly. In one you even see that he's using Sue to get to Reed. But that's my opinion on the matter. I think he had pleanty more motivation. I think it'll be much better shown in the DC.

Or looking at it as a teenager (not putting you down by any means, I happen to think teenagers are awesome...), but....adults look at things differently.....and they did not have to "read between the lines" in any of the scenes I mentioned....at all....it was written in the dialogue, eyes meeting eyes, body language....etc.

You didn't give me any specific scenes to show what you mean?

I agree using Sue, but again, I didn't see that in the movie, I read it in the script and novelization....In fact as I talked about it before the movie...I SAID THIS WAS HIS MOTIVATION, AND HE WAS USING SUE.....but unfortunately I did not see that as much in the movie as I read in the script and novelization...hell I believe I argued with WG over that specific thing....Sue as a pawn...

 

[Iron Maiden]

I think the reason why the romance angle didn't work is because as for Sue's part, there was no romance. We women know that in two years time, he would have gotten a clue by then I mean, as far as we know, they never even went on a date and then Victor brings a ring on the mission?? I guess you could chalk it up to Victor's ego that he made the assumption that she couldn't help but be in love with a guy as "with more money than God", etc.

Deleting some of Julian's scenes, as Kel says, certainly didn't help matters. It was a poor substitute for what should have been intellectual rivalry, with Reed being not entirely innocent. I liked Dwayne McDuffie's "My Dinner with Doom" story, where Reed admits with some degree of guilt that he felt vindicated in his feeling that his was the superior intellect when Doom's college experiment exploded in his face. Chris Claremont also picked up on this in the "Reed in Doom Armor" storyline as Reed grew more and more frustrated in his attempts to unlock the armor. Sue reminded him that he always assumes that whatever Victor could do, Reed could match or top him at.

 

[Kelly]

I think the reason why the romance angle didn't work is because as for Sue's part, there was no romance. We women know that in two years time, he would have gotten a clue by then I mean, as far as we know, they never even went on a date and then Victor brings a ring on the mission?? I guess you could chalk it up to Victor's ego that he made the assumption that she couldn't help but be in love with a guy as "with more money than God", etc.

Deleting some of Julian's scenes, as Kel says, certainly didn't help matters. It was a poor substitute for what should have been intellectual rivalry, with Reed being not entirely innocent. I liked Dwayne McDuffie's "My Dinner with Doom" story, where Reed admits with some degree of guilt that he felt vindicated in his feeling that his was the superior intellect when Doom's college experiment exploded in his face. Chris Claremont also picked up on this in the "Reed in Doom Armor" storyline as Reed grew more and more frustrated in his attempts to unlock the armor. Sue reminded him that he always assumes that whatever Victor could do, Reed could match or top him at.

I agree the relationship of Victor and Sue was TOTALLY one sided, as written and portrayed in the script and movie....but apparently Vic didn't get that.....Victor's ego was huge.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I think it may have been a mistake to try too hard to attribute rational motivation to an irrational character like Doom.

At some point, you just have to accept the fact that Doom's wired differently than you and I. When you think about it, you almost need a lack of true motivation. Otherwise, he remains a human reacting in human ways, not a truly unique and frightening individual.

Look at Ras Al Ghul (I'm probably not spelling that right). He had no real, rational motivation, but did that hurt or help the character?

 

[Kelly]

I think it may have been a mistake to try too hard to attribute rational motivation to an irrational character like Doom.

At some point, you just have to accept the fact that Doom's wired differently than you and I. When you think about it, you almost need a lack of true motivation. Otherwise, he remains a human reacting in human ways, not a truly unique and frightening individual.

Look at Ras Al Ghul (I'm probably not spelling that right). He had no real, rational motivation, but did that hurt or help the character?

I would have rather them go that way....

 

[zer00]

Or looking at it as a teenager (not putting you down by any means, I happen to think teenagers are awesome...), but....adults look at things differently.....and they did not have to "read between the lines" in any of the scenes I mentioned....at all....it was written in the dialogue, eyes meeting eyes, body language....etc.

\

Bit of an insult to my intelligence That's why I hate being considered a teen. During arguments or discussions it's always said that teens know less. How frustrated and sad. But for which side?

 

[zer00]

I think it may have been a mistake to try too hard to attribute rational motivation to an irrational character like Doom.

At some point, you just have to accept the fact that Doom's wired differently than you and I. When you think about it, you almost need a lack of true motivation. Otherwise, he remains a human reacting in human ways, not a truly unique and frightening individual.

Look at Ras Al Ghul (I'm probably not spelling that right). He had no real, rational motivation, but did that hurt or help the character?

I agree completely.

 

[Kelly]

Bit of an insult to my intelligence That's why I hate being considered a teen. During arguments or discussions it's always said that teens know less. How frustrated and sad. But for which side?

NOT AT ALL.......no way was that an insult....I simply was saying sometimes adults look at things differently....which is possibly why some saw things differently....has nothing to do with intelligence it has EVERYTHING to do with perception........never will I ever put you down for being a teenager.....NEVER....NEVER....and the people that do....they are the unintelligent ones....not you...

Theres not a right or wrong answer here babe....its simply looking at things differently....thats all...

 

[zer00]

NOT AT ALL.......no way was that an insult....I simply was saying sometimes adults look at things differently....which is possibly why some saw things differently....has nothing to do with intelligence it has EVERYTHING to do with perception........never will I ever put you down for being a teenager.....NEVER....NEVER....and the people that do....they are the unintelligent ones....not you...

Theres not a right or wrong answer here babe....its simply looking at things differently....thats all...

Thank you

...but seriously never do that again.

 

[Kelly]

Thank you

...but seriously never do that again.

Maybe I could have worded it better, but never was my intention to put you down, or make you feel less.......I will always speak of different perception of age, gendre, comic-fan, non-comic fan, etc....so I can't tell you I won't speak of different perceptions w/ different ages, but I will try and word it better next time.....

 

[zer00]

I try not to look at comic-films as a comic-fan when writing reviews or discussing them. A mix of a regular person and a student of film. You get a btter perception. I mean look at the X-3 reviews. I swear to god I'd like to get more than one review that mentions how the acting is....

 

[Kelly]

I try not to look at comic-films as a comic-fan when writing reviews or discussing them. A mix of a regular person and a student of film. You get a btter perception. I mean look at the X-3 reviews. I swear to god I'd like to get more than one review that mentions how the acting is....

I don't read reviews....I go in as pretty much a normal movie goer....if I enjoy it....AWESOME....if not, then I don't. My sister and brother-in-law see usually on average 2-3 movies a week....so they pretty much see everything....they go in looking for the same thing I do, enjoyment and entertainment...so I will go with what they say about a movie, my sister knows me really well...so if she says it sucks...I'll probably think the same thing.....but some reviewer saying it sucks....doesn't mean crap to me....

 

[zer00]

I don't throw out any reviews. Some yes because you can tell by how it's written. You can't throw out a good review even if you disagree with it. I do try not to read them though, I learned my lesson from reading negative Punisher reviews that tained my feelings towards the movie. Took me seeing it twice to get those to go away. ****ing *******s

 

[Kelly]

I don't throw out any reviews. Some yes because you can tell by how it's written. You can't throw out a good review even if you disagree with it. I do try not to read them though, I learned my lesson from reading negative Punisher reviews that tained my feelings towards the movie. Took me seeing it twice to get those to go away. ****ing *******s

I'm my most reliable critic...