Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Captain America: The First Avenger' started by Norm3, Jul 29, 2010.
If batman can have big pointed ears..
Cap can have his wings.
I agree but Marvel gives to much freedom to these directors. They let them make any change they want. When there should be some do's & don't list with each character. guideline list or something.
Will he?.First time I hear this .
Who knows whats going to happen by the time we get to the Avengers. Joe Johnstons against the wings on Capt & Namor but if Joss wanted them then maybe who knows.
Wings, obviously. Without them, it seems that something is lacking in his headpiece.
And it was shown here, in a manip, in these threads, that there's a very proper way to make it, EVEN with the stupid helmet.
Why is there not an option for "don't care." But really, wings or no wings, it's still Cap.
An interesting option in keeping with the painted on style is why not have Cap himself dip 3 fingers in white paint and streak the side of the helmet in a slight upward angle? It would look like the wings, look really aggro and have that very DIY vibe like many other soldiers who mark their stuff. Give it a war-paint vibe.
like i said we got thor's loki's and odin's helmets and capes, iron man's armor, a cg hulk, what is wrong with 2 little wings. thors and odins are huge. its a movie you must suspend disbelief or else you didn't want to purposefully.
Cosmic Cube, Infinity Gauntlet
and people are gonna find the movie hard to believe...over a couple of wings on his mask/helmet? Please.
Apparenty directer Joe Johnston feels that way & Marvel agrees because their letting him have his way.
That's the part that get's me. Why would Marvel not have certain guidelines when developing their characters. I mean come on not even stenciled ones?
This has been my argument for years. Marvel lets any directer come in & in one film changes the whole history or look of a character for all the future movies. Unless of course they bomb. Then Marvel looks for scapegoats. When its them for letting these asinine changes happen to begin with.
Although I'm very suspicious of this Captain America movie, we must be fair: Marvel has done a GREAT job in the two Iron Man installments, and it seems that Thor is going that way, too.
Concerning superhero movies, so far, Marvel studios are doing a helluva job.
If Captain America bombs, or if the fans will notice serious problems in the way they have adapted it, it will be the first mistake.
First big mistake was The Hulk. They let Ang Lee run wild & change anything he wanted. Did you ever see the Manthing movie what a disgrace.
I really don't like Ang Lee's Hulk, but it is a take on the character I can respect.
The Manthing: other times, and surely a disgrace. t:
One thing I feel that affects this matter is that Johnson doesn't come off as being overly enthusiastic or respect the source material like Favreau, Letterier, and Brannagh have. I don't know if it's age or what. I just hope this attitude doesn't spread through out the production. Marvel should not allow this to start happening to their self-produced titles. You hear me Marvel?
those were movies made by other studios. the only movies marvel can be held directly responsible for are the two Iron Man flicks and The Incredible Hulk, all three of which were great adaptations of the source material.
i think it has to do with marvel just being new and excited to have their movies made. so far they have gotten lucky with fav, and as far as TIH i enjoyed it but thought it could use more hulk. we shall see what happens with thor and cap. so far thor is looking great. just hope cap can folow through with the hype for avengers.
Yes, but in combat only painted on, or some kind of helmet embroidery. I don't want big sticking out ridiculous wings while he's on the battlefield.
Ridiculous in that sense is a matter of opinion.
See, superhero stuff is somewhat a way of bringing back those ancient gods of polytheistic civilizations.
Thus you have Flash being like Mercury, Superman who is a Hercules in strenght, and sometimes you have gods themselves turned into superheroes, like Thor.
Anyway: gods can have animal heads, like the Egyptian Horus; a god can have something attached to his anthropoid anatomy, like the wings in Hermes's feet, etc.
Thus, Captain America symbolizes a superhuman entity, emblematic of some ideals. He naturally can have, without being ridiculous, some little wings attached to his head.
There are those who want him to look, on the other hand, like a mere jarhead. Those do not find him ridiculous with a stupid helmet (insert that Seinfeld joke here) nor for carrying a gun.
I find him ABSOLUTELY infamous AND ridiculous with that miserable appendix of ordinary lunatics.
That's an opinion. And I would prefer CA WITH his wings and WITHOUT that monstruous toy.
i somewhat agree with you on the wings, but i think it's a little silly to have a problem with a soldier in WWII carrying a side arm
We've only seen a rendered picture of one of the suits he will be wearing. For all we know his USO suit may have wings on it and he ditches it in favor of a helmet. Once we get closer to the films release, we should know what he looks like through the course of the film. Now as for him carrying a side arm, I don't see the big problem with it, maybe in future sequels or even the Avengers film, he may not use a firearm. It could also be explained that since the last battle he was involved in prior to being frozen was WWII, all of the violence that he witnessed made him stray away from using guns to subdue enemies in present day.
painted on wings vs wings. i would go for wings,lol
im joking but if you don't know your past you are doomed to repeat it, just saying. between the 2 designs i like the wings sticking out.
What are these Brubaker Cap issues that Director Joe Johnston is always talking about? I hope they don't deviate away too much from the original Cap storyline.