The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Avengers, Batman, Superman, etc Discussion about comic mainstream movies and TV shows.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

You've been waiting for Monica Rambeau in the Photon costume - here she is.
And Brie's suit somehow looks tighter than it was before, or is that my imagination?

They fight some blue guys, so that would be...Kree maybe?
Also, they swap places every time they use their powers..so what does that mean? They physically move in time and space? (Yes, they do.)
A whole movie full of Freaky Friday jokes, I guess.

Also, a lot of young people seem very excited about some guy named Park Seo-Joon. No idea who he is - some kind of South Korean soap opera actor.

Comes out November 10, 2023.
They're superheroines, so this is a prime topic of discussion. Let the games begin!

Last edited by shevek 10 months ago, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

at 1:40 looks like she's wearing a suit in the style of the actual OG Mrs. Marvel suit (Before the lightningbolt)
VegaTaxeca
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 205
Joined: 1 year ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by VegaTaxeca »

I'm looking forward to this one. Though this means, I will avoid watching the trailer, to not spoil myself.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

Femina wrote: 10 months ago at 1:40 looks like she's wearing a suit in the style of the actual OG Mrs. Marvel suit (Before the lightningbolt)
It just has the bigger Hala star from the old suit, that's all. It's still her Captain Marvel jumpsuit. She just has boobs now, because the suit is tighter. Which is certainly an improvement.

Also, I just watched the trailer on Twitter, too, and it had subtitles, so I noticed that The Beastie Boys' song used in the trailer, "I'm Gonna Rock Right Now" has the lyrical line "Don't you tell me to smile". That *has* to be why they used that song, even though it just so happened to work OK for the scene. Because almost everything else about the movie is female (including the soundtrack composer), but this track is blatantly not.
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

shevek wrote: 10 months ago
Femina wrote: 10 months ago at 1:40 looks like she's wearing a suit in the style of the actual OG Mrs. Marvel suit (Before the lightningbolt)
It just has the bigger Hala star from the old suit, that's all. It's still her Captain Marvel jumpsuit. She just has boobs now, because the suit is tighter. Which is certainly an improvement.

Also, I just watched the trailer on Twitter, too, and it had subtitles, so I noticed that The Beastie Boys' song used in the trailer, "I'm Gonna Rock Right Now" has the lyrical line "Don't you tell me to smile". That *has* to be why they used that song, even though it just so happened to work OK for the scene. Because almost everything else about the movie is female (including the soundtrack composer), but this track is blatantly not.
no look at the design and color split. It's a full bodysuit yeah and not a leotard with a belly hole, but the design and coloring is clearly meant to harken back to her original outfit.
User avatar
Heroineaddicted
Sargeant
Sargeant
Posts: 138
Joined: 1 year ago
Location: Steel City, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Heroineaddicted »

Femina wrote: 10 months ago at 1:40 looks like she's wearing a suit in the style of the actual OG Mrs. Marvel suit (Before the lightningbolt)
Yup. Someone on Twitter pointed that out it’s inspired by both OG Captain Marvel & Phyla-Vell design pre-lighting bolt as you stated. I’m might peep the this when it comes out.
Attachments
38E67DE1-F98D-46DB-96AB-A8E9439ED714.jpeg
38E67DE1-F98D-46DB-96AB-A8E9439ED714.jpeg (25.08 KiB) Viewed 22821 times
349621BF-B02A-4DC7-91D9-F4F6EEC35508.jpeg
349621BF-B02A-4DC7-91D9-F4F6EEC35508.jpeg (632.63 KiB) Viewed 22821 times
159C0D1F-D9FC-4C1A-8FC1-B03DB4F9A0FF.jpeg
159C0D1F-D9FC-4C1A-8FC1-B03DB4F9A0FF.jpeg (58.78 KiB) Viewed 22821 times
Just a man who loves powerful ladies in skintight spandex. Tight is right.
User avatar
lionbadger
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 12 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by lionbadger »

looks good, I just hope they down the goofiness that they went a bit overboard on in Love and Thunder
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

I did notice they all three have very vague power sets with no clear set of rules.
User avatar
lionbadger
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 12 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by lionbadger »

Mr. X wrote: 10 months ago I did notice they all three have very vague power sets with no clear set of rules.
I blame Iron Man for setting this precedent "oh yeah, my suit does T1000 magic spikes and I can fly to Jupiter now....cause....we need the story to happen and the merch to shift.....I guess"
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

lionbadger wrote: 10 months ago
Mr. X wrote: 10 months ago I did notice they all three have very vague power sets with no clear set of rules.
I blame Iron Man for setting this precedent "oh yeah, my suit does T1000 magic spikes and I can fly to Jupiter now....cause....we need the story to happen and the merch to shift.....I guess"
Yes we lost tech nerd fetish. Ironman 2 was the best when he suits up at the race track. Still kinda magic but it made sense. Now its all tech that is so far beyond humans and yet they can't solve poverty or cure cancer.
Lurkndog
Elder Member
Elder Member
Posts: 373
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Lurkndog »

shevek wrote: 10 months ago Also, I just watched the trailer on Twitter, too, and it had subtitles, so I noticed that The Beastie Boys' song used in the trailer, "I'm Gonna Rock Right Now" has the lyrical line "Don't you tell me to smile". That *has* to be why they used that song, even though it just so happened to work OK for the scene. Because almost everything else about the movie is female (including the soundtrack composer), but this track is blatantly not.
Sorry to nitpick, but the Beastie Boys song is "Intergalactic" which also works.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

Lurkndog wrote: 10 months ago
shevek wrote: 10 months ago Also, I just watched the trailer on Twitter, too, and it had subtitles, so I noticed that The Beastie Boys' song used in the trailer, "I'm Gonna Rock Right Now" has the lyrical line "Don't you tell me to smile". That *has* to be why they used that song, even though it just so happened to work OK for the scene. Because almost everything else about the movie is female (including the soundtrack composer), but this track is blatantly not.
Sorry to nitpick, but the Beastie Boys song is "Intergalactic" which also works.
Wow, you're right...been so long since I heard that song that somehow I conflated it with parts of "It Takes Two" (Rob Base & DJ EZ Rock).
First time I watched the trailer I was looking at the images so intently that I didn't even hear "another dimension...another dimension"
but of course it's there. Thanks for the correction!

Also: it looks like Youtubers are noticing how there are thousands of comments on the Marvels trailer which seem to be Bots that the company has placed there to create positive reaction. This has led to a meme being posted over and over: "You can tell that Goose The Cat has really settled into his role and improved his comedic timing." Pretty funny.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

shevek wrote: 10 months ago"You can tell that Goose The Cat has really settled into his role and improved his comedic timing." Pretty funny.
Or
"This has an amazing color palette"
"Going to be a special effects extravaganza"
"A visual treat"
"Just like the last movie"
"The main character is back with their classic swagger and style"
"What an incredible musical score"
"Just like the comics"
"looks like a rollercoaster ride of fun and adventure"
"I've been waiting all year for this"
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

Chato has an offbeat take, as usual.

I already mentioned Freaky Friday, but I forgot about the Parent Trap.

Dogfish
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Dogfish »

Looks like the cottage industry built out of outraged noises on Youtube about Captain Marvel is back. Hooray.
User avatar
tallyho
Ambassador
Ambassador
Posts: 5390
Joined: 13 years ago
Location: Land of No Hope and Past Glories

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by tallyho »

Does she smile in this one?
:giggle:
How strange are the ways of the gods ...........and how cruel.

I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
User avatar
tallyho
Ambassador
Ambassador
Posts: 5390
Joined: 13 years ago
Location: Land of No Hope and Past Glories

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by tallyho »

And before the backlash starts I'm taking the piss
How strange are the ways of the gods ...........and how cruel.

I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

Dogfish wrote: 10 months ago Looks like the cottage industry built out of outraged noises on Youtube about Captain Marvel is back. Hooray.
Yes gets old. Not like Disney listens.
phopho
Neophyte Lvl 2
Neophyte Lvl 2
Posts: 11
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by phopho »

A movie like this is the kind of thing that should create a generation of superheroine fetishists if it's done right. If they make Kamala's costume a little tighter and have her struggle to wriggle free from bonds at some point, it could work.
Dogfish
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Dogfish »

Mr. X wrote: 10 months ago
Dogfish wrote: 10 months ago Looks like the cottage industry built out of outraged noises on Youtube about Captain Marvel is back. Hooray.
Yes gets old. Not like Disney listens.
They're not there for Disney to listen to them. The outrage is the product.

It's the same deal that talk radio was for older folks. A lot of millenials and Gen Xers straight up turned into boomers without even seeing it coming.
User avatar
sugarcoater
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1189
Joined: 15 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by sugarcoater »

The question is: to what extent is the product--the "outrage"--desired because there is a righteous outrage. Is the outrage merited? If the outrage was off-base and irrational, would it have the legs it seems to have? I'm not tapped into all that is happening in Hollywood and Disney, so I'm not suggesting the outrage is on target or off-base. I have started watching a few videos criticizing recent issues in the industry, and it seems the frustration (or outrage, if we want to continue with the hyperbolic term) has merit.
Ignore any virtue-signaling; it's clearly just you.

Ignore any activism; it clearly doesn't exist.

Be very careful!
Don't be indoctrinated!
Ignore your common sense!

Everything is entirely normal and ignore the radical changes to culture.
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

sugarcoater wrote: 7 months ago The question is: to what extent is the product--the "outrage"--desired because there is a righteous outrage. Is the outrage merited? If the outrage was off-base and irrational, would it have the legs it seems to have? I'm not tapped into all that is happening in Hollywood and Disney, so I'm not suggesting the outrage is on target or off-base. I have started watching a few videos criticizing recent issues in the industry, and it seems the frustration (or outrage, if we want to continue with the hyperbolic term) has merit.
In this particular case the outrage was that Brie Larson is a racist white genocidalist due to the marketing of a CAREFULLY tailored quote cut out that had no valid meaning outside of the full context of what she actually said... and it all idiot-spiraled from there. The sexist outrage engine got chugging hard and loud in that particular enormously noisy corner of the internet until abasically EVERYONE's youtube feed was chuck full of the 'Brie Larson is a racist and here's the PROOF in this quote' videos... none of which, of course, linked in any way to the place they cut the quote from because they couldn't afford to post the entire speech lest they be, rightly, laughed out of the room as a bunch of outrage generating trolls.

I'm VERY serious, what was done was essentially the same as if I got up on my soapbox right now and declared "People of The Ultimate Superheroine Forum, We should never be comfortable with mass murder!" and then the youtube video machine got running quoting that I had said "Be comfortable with mass murder!" and provide no information easily leading back to where they got the quote so that the normies would all righteously agree that anybody who would say such a thing is a psychotic monster... ignorant to the reality that they are all Bobo the Clown
phopho wrote: 7 months ago A movie like this is the kind of thing that should create a generation of superheroine fetishists if it's done right. If they make Kamala's costume a little tighter and have her struggle to wriggle free from bonds at some point, it could work.
Well Captain Marvel's outfit in the trailer (the one that looks to be her 'new uniform/upgrade suit or whatever) is actually looking pretty tight fitting and stylish. It's got a lot of the classic 'Miss Marvel' in the design (CLASSIC classic Ms. Marvel, not the all black lightning bolt Miss Marvel)
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

I'm VERY serious, what was done was essentially the same as if I got up on my soapbox right now and declared "People of The Ultimate Superheroine Forum, We should never be comfortable with mass murder!"
No it was not quoted in that way. Her speech is online. she's very distinct about what she said. And so what. In other interviews she's pretty snotty, doesn't care, always gets offended, doesn't care about the fans.

And Capt Marvel is a horrible character. She's been rebooted like 20 times. She's the equivalent of the super hero you see in the side of a Plumber van.

Also WHY does anyone have to like her? Nobody tells women what men they are supposed to like.
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

Mr. X wrote: 7 months ago
I'm VERY serious, what was done was essentially the same as if I got up on my soapbox right now and declared "People of The Ultimate Superheroine Forum, We should never be comfortable with mass murder!"
No it was not quoted in that way. Her speech is online. she's very distinct about what she said. And so what. In other interviews she's pretty snotty, doesn't care, always gets offended, doesn't care about the fans.

And Capt Marvel is a horrible character. She's been rebooted like 20 times. She's the equivalent of the super hero you see in the side of a Plumber van.

Also WHY does anyone have to like her? Nobody tells women what men they are supposed to like.
I've highlighted in your quote your most egregious nonsense. The 'so what' is that it was cookie cutter reporting to slant it in the most dishonest way possible. I believe the term YOU like to bandy about so much, ze 'Strawman'. People don't have to like her, people don't have to think she's cool and polite, but we DO have to take her by her actual spoken WORDS in a speech, ALL of them, or else we're just deciding she's said whatever the fuck we WANT her to have said, contributing to the collapse of discourse and dialogue entirely, and acting like little spoiled, ignorant, entitled, disruptive societal garbage, preadolescent shits. You gotta LISTEN to what someone says, not just react to it. Otherwise you find yourself commonly coming to the wrong conclusion.

And also! Nobodies' 'telling you what women' you're supposed to like. Grow up. Who Mr. X (or anyone else) likes and doesn't like as a general rule wasn't part of the conversation, go fuck a tree for all anybody cares. I'm simply reporting the incident as it occurred in response to a person who seemed to be interested in the details. Indeed what she said IS online, but you have to go directly to the source to get it ALL... cause it's also online, cut to pieces to fit a narrative, in a FUCKTON more places.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

The Captain Marvel comic has indeed been rebooted (i.e. started again from #1 issue) nine times since 2013.

Kamala Khan has been rebooted three times. She was recently also killed off in an issue of Amazing Spider-Man. It's a book she has nothing to do with,
but it's the highest-selling book in the Marvel line, so that was why they put the story there, so it would get as many eyes as possible.
Then she was resurrected as a mutant, and as we all know, the actual actress (Iman Vellani) will be co-credited with writing the new comic series.
The purpose of that is to increase her popularity by having her join the X-Men, as a zoomer version of Kitty Pryde.

I've said this before: if they stopped making Kamala Khan a high school self-insert of her creator Sana Amanat, and made her college-age instead, leaning into her sexy appearance as a beautiful South Asian girl in a tight costume, there would be a lot more male readers (who actually buy comics) interested in her than there currently are. But Sana doesn't care if men like her character.

As for The Marvels movie, if the costumes are tight and the heroines are placed in peril, there will be new SHIP fetishists emerging from this film.
If they're not, they won't. Just like Phopho says.
Last edited by shevek 7 months ago, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

The 'so what' is that it was cookie cutter reporting to slant it in the most dishonest way possible.
I don't have to like someone. People can have abrasive personalities.
but we DO have to take her by her actual spoken WORDS in a speech
The speech


Note at 2:07
"I don't need a 40 year old white dude to tell me what didn't work for him about A Wrinkle in Time"

Why do people assume if there is a numerical imbalance it must be due to skullduggery. And BTW conservative rednecks in trailers do not make these products or review these movies. Liberals and progressives do. So I think someone need to clean their own house first.
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

Mr. X wrote: 7 months ago
The 'so what' is that it was cookie cutter reporting to slant it in the most dishonest way possible.
I don't have to like someone. People can have abrasive personalities.


Yes, agreed, but you still don't get to DECIDE what they've said. You CAN posit if you believe they're hiding something, speaking dishonestly, MEAN something different 'maybe'... but you can't say 'what they actually said was this' without becoming dishonest.
but we DO have to take her by her actual spoken WORDS in a speech
The speech


Note at 2:07
"I don't need a 40 year old white dude to tell me what didn't work for him about A Wrinkle in Time"

Why do people assume if there is a numerical imbalance it must be due to skullduggery. And BTW conservative rednecks in trailers do not make these products or review these movies. Liberals and progressives do. So I think someone need to clean their own house first.
I consider that a valid 'enough' exposition of what she said 'clarifications' and all so thanks for posting that up here, though it's awful funny how Brie Larson's 'EXACT WORDS' still have like... fifteen cuts to static and jumps ahead ain't it? Nothin in that speech was white genocidal hate speech the way she was continually being lambasted in the outrage machine on youtube at the time. She also spoke about bringing more people of color to the TABLE, 'reported' by the outrage machine to be 'replace all the white dudes at the table!' even though she clearly differentiates that she doesn't want seats REMOVED, just more seats period.

Numerical imbalance is numerical imbalance. Skullduggery is inconsequential. If there's a numerical imbalance to the people dying vs living, it doesn't matter whose 'fault' it is, man or nature, the solution is still to find a way to stop people from dying. You don't understand numbers though, we've been through this, we can't talk about numbers you and I, it leads nowhere.
Last edited by Femina 7 months ago, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

Show us the speech WITH context. The wording is pretty clear.
Numerical imbalance is numerical imbalance. Skullduggery is inconsequential. If there's a numerical imbalance to the people dying vs living, it doesn't matter whose 'fault' it is, man or nature, the solution is still to find a way to stop people from dying. You don't understand numbers though, we've been through this, we can't talk about numbers you and I, it leads nowhere.
You didn't listen to the speech. Her whole talk was discussing numbers of white males to the general population then talking about WOC.

BTW I love, LOVE, how she complains about white men dominating the industry then she, a white woman, is some spokes person for women of color. The Brie Karen self electing herself the savior of the down trodden. If she cared so much about WOC she'd get the F*ck off the stage and give that time to a WOC.
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

Mr. X wrote: 7 months ago Show us the speech WITH context. The wording is pretty clear.
Yeah no, I'm not fighting you on this (in the perfectly sincere sense of the phrase). THAT there, which YOU have posted IS indeed 'basically' the speech. I assume you and I interpret it differently but that's as be. What it ISN'T... is everything the majority of the cookie cutter outrage machine was reporting. They took a single sentence that sold particularly well for their crowd and pushed it (The very quote that you noted underneath the video). THAT'S what I was talking about. With the video here everyone's free to come to their own opinions with the correct context. Hence, why I thanked you for including it.
Numerical imbalance is numerical imbalance. Skullduggery is inconsequential. If there's a numerical imbalance to the people dying vs living, it doesn't matter whose 'fault' it is, man or nature, the solution is still to find a way to stop people from dying. You don't understand numbers though, we've been through this, we can't talk about numbers you and I, it leads nowhere.
You didn't listen to the speech. Her whole talk was discussing numbers of white males to the general population then talking about WOC.

BTW I love, LOVE, how she complains about white men dominating the industry then she, a white woman, is some spokes person for women of color. The Brie Karen self electing herself the savior of the down trodden. If she cared so much about WOC she'd get the F*ck off the stage and give that time to a WOC.
I wouldn't say it were a bad thing if she gave the stage to a WoC, but the fact of the matter was that she was on stage *Shrugs* which I'm pretty sure Marvel was pushing for her to be as it was during the whole Captain Marvel press blitz. Might shock you to know, but I'm not actually the sort of person that feels a persons skin tone disqualifies them from noting discrepancy. I know that attitude DOES exist, I don't particularly agree. Far as I'm concerned, see bad - report bad. Moreover, the whole 'pfft get the hell off the stage and make room for a PoC' downvote, feels a bit of a disingenuous 'whistle' to me? Like just in general as a rule. Like a convenient excuse for a person to downvote someone talking about racial issues. 'Oh you're white? Well stop talking about black people then.' AS THOUGH they'd actually maybe be listening to the words if it WAS from a woman of color, when in reality their response wouldn't change no matter who was saying it.

Look, nowhere has it been written anywhere here that you MUST like her. That's an interpretation only you've made. She DOES come off a certain way, particularly in interviews and such. I tend to detect a discomfort with being in interviews and things from her and nervous machismo sorta shit that's not particularly endearing. That's fine? You are allowed... not that you need anyone's permission for that either? A question was asked. So I answered it. Then you were apparently compelled to argue about it (which is also fine? As you noted above you don't HAVE to love the woman... sometimes I wonder if you don't realize the inverse is also true... that nobody has to HATE her either.) We don't need to anymore! :D The video's there. Thanks' for that.
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by theScribbler »

Here's a video of Brie Larson's Crystal Award for Excellence in Film acceptance speech at the Crystal + Lucy Awards way back in 2018. The full speech.

https://variety.com/video/brie-larson-c ... s-critics/


Here's my take on it months later in Feb 2019, over 4 years ago, in the good ol' Captain Marvel News thread, and my transcript of the full speech.

https://www.superheroineforum.com/viewt ... 4&#p162114
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

No interest in back-analysis of speeches.

But I just saw the new Marvels trailer. Between that and the updates on the movie's Wikipedia page, something is made quite abundantly clear, and I guarantee you that a roomful of decision-making executives led by Kevin Feige sat down and arrived at this conclusion.
There is a certain demographic type of human, much maligned in the past few years despite creating much of civilization as we know it (including comic books themselves) that is completely absent in this film. No villains, no significant side characters, nothing.

Now, I'm quite a secure individual, and I have no need to constantly "see myself" in the movies that I watch, the way the woke crowd constantly requires its self-validation and representation. But....isn't the majority of the movie-attending Marvel fanbase normally going to be folks of my, uh, genteel persuasion?

And if the response to such an observation is "well, then, this movie just isn't for you" (and I don't know that for a fact yet, since there could well be worthwhile moments of superheroines in tight spandex - Brie Larson already looks attractive in some of the scenes), isn't that cutting out quite a large portion of the movie's potential audience, not just here but around the world in places like China, India and the Gulf States etc where cultures are much more oriented towards the masculine?

I don't mean to be indelicate about it (and I don't think I am) but last I checked, isn't Disney a business that wants to make money?
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by theScribbler »

the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

shevek wrote: 7 months ago No interest in back-analysis of speeches.

But I just saw the new Marvels trailer. Between that and the updates on the movie's Wikipedia page, something is made quite abundantly clear, and I guarantee you that a roomful of decision-making executives led by Kevin Feige sat down and arrived at this conclusion.
There is a certain demographic type of human, much maligned in the past few years despite creating much of civilization as we know it (including comic books themselves) that is completely absent in this film. No villains, no significant side characters, nothing.

Now, I'm quite a secure individual, and I have no need to constantly "see myself" in the movies that I watch, the way the woke crowd constantly requires its self-validation and representation. But....isn't the majority of the movie-attending Marvel fanbase normally going to be folks of my, uh, genteel persuasion?

And if the response to such an observation is "well, then, this movie just isn't for you" (and I don't know that for a fact yet, since there could well be worthwhile moments of superheroines in tight spandex - Brie Larson already looks attractive in some of the scenes), isn't that cutting out quite a large portion of the movie's potential audience, not just here but around the world in places like China, India and the Gulf States etc where cultures are much more oriented towards the masculine?

I don't mean to be indelicate about it (and I don't think I am) but last I checked, isn't Disney a business that wants to make money?
Maybe the enormous backlash from said demographic over nothing in tandem with the bottom line of the first film going essentially unchanged taught them the lesson that said demographic was unnecessary to the films success. (For the record this is a BAD lesson! I realized reading over this it sounded like I agree with this line of thinking, I don't.... but when a demographic of bad actors present outrage in bad faith, it ordinarily teaches problematic lessons.)

IDK what you mean though. Nick Fury is still clearly a primary character in the particular series, and as a man with his own disney+ series happening literally as we speak, he is NOT small cheese. Khamala's Dad is in it. I imagine Talos will be in it unless he dies in Secret Invasion or something. There ARE men in this film, there just aren't any male superheroes in it... which... basically true of the first film as well. Are you speaking specifically about WHITE men? Why is it that, if a film is about white people, all white people and only white people, no one here EVER worries about if the movie is for everyone or if it's audience will show up... but if it's Black Panther suddenly we're concerned about demographic representation? If this bother's you, you should speak up in the places it matters... and then ask yourself the big questions like 'if this bothers me right now, how much does it bother everyone else whose been just DEALING with it for basically 50 years of cinema?'

I'm being sincere here. I don't personally think it's a GOOD thing when a film has no white men, or the only white men in it are villains. I'm generally in agreement with my white friends who look at said things and say 'it's not really for me though is it... and I'm kinda tired of seeing my representation being the bad guys' The bit I don't get, is why no one ever takes that, puts two and two together, and recognizes the problem as has been. If it BOTHERS you there aren't any white men in this film. Then you should recognize and understand why so many for so long were bothered that movies BASICALLY only had white people in them for so long. OTHER than that, I mostly agree in a generalized sense (rarely an individual example) it'd be nice if films 'overall' were doing a better job portraying all sorts in all sorts of roles, AS all sorts... rather than stereotyping... and I agree that there's been a fair degree of 'burn the white man' in television of late, which I often only let slide cause the character is ALSO like a Senetor or government man or somesuch where it does at least make sense the jerk would be white... but typically said shows/movies still have perfectly decent white guys in them still.

Honestly where this movie is concerned I'm VASTLY more worried about the scripting level. This is Carol's first film to just BE herself for the whole film, she REALLY needs this movie to take itself at least semi-seriously, and dig into who she IS... Khamala and Photon are both newer characters and yet still entirely fully formed characters vs Carol... who is basically still just 'Vers' and after the state of current MCU plotting I don't know if the current management has what it takes to do what it NEEDS to do in order to get Captain Marvel AS A CHARACTER up to snuff with the rest of the MCU's staple of heroes. She REALLY needs this movie to be about her, and show why the MCU needs her, while presenting some kind of vulnerability or endearing trait.

I've talked about this some with friends, I feel like they should lean into her long disappearing act as like, she's ALWAYS busy cause in space there's ALWAYS someone who needs her, and it' kept her away from visiting any friends or family to the point where she's become afraid to reach out to anyone she knew, sorta 'self-reinforced' exile that became harder and harder the longer she was away, and the excuse that she ALWAYS had someone who needed to be saved out in the Galaxy at large provided a convenient outlet for soothing that fear and allowing her to keep retreating more and more inward. FORGET the comic books, make the MCU's Captain Marvel's cocksure attitude a 'front' for a shy and socially awkward character whose trapped by the weight of her responsibilities and the fear that everyone she's ever known or loved is dead and gone and she's waisted her chance to be with any of them.................... but again, I don't think the current MCU has the guts to make a character like that anymore. She'll probably just be exchanging pointless jokes with Ms Marvel and Photon... there'll probably be some multiverse bullshit... Nick Fury won't remember anything from the Secret Invasion show, convenient amnesia or something idfk... the MCU isn't quality enough anymore to do what it NEEDS to in order to get Captain Marvel where she needs to be.
Last edited by Femina 7 months ago, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DrDominator9
Emissary
Emissary
Posts: 2446
Joined: 13 years ago
Location: On the Border of the Neutral Zone

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by DrDominator9 »

You outline a very interesting character Femina, that I would love to see up on the screen. Like you, however, I fear that the heads of Marvel won't allow such a "weakness" to be attributed to a major character in their stable.
Follow this link to descriptions of my stories and easy links to them:

viewtopic.php?f=70&t=32025
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

shevek wrote: 7 months ago I don't mean to be indelicate about it (and I don't think I am) but last I checked, isn't Disney a business that wants to make money?
At this point we should be encouraging more of these movies at double and triple the budget. Its past the point of saving. Bankrupt them. Same with comics. The faster DC and Marvel bankrupt the faster the characters go into public domain.

As for this movie, foreigners will cut it up into youtube clips. No need to see it. Oh and I'm sure this movie will do awesome in China. Gang busters.

As for profit, I think Hollywood and Disney is a massive money laundering scheme and make work program. Why does it cost exponentially more to do special FX than 20 years ago that looked better than today.
I'm being sincere here. I don't personally think it's a GOOD thing when a film has no white men, or the only white men in it are villains.
We're disconnecting and staying away. That's what's wanted. But then our money is not necessary either.

I personally don't agree with the demographic argument. So what a film has no W men in it. They can make what they like. Again numerical imbalance != skullduggery necessarily. But the question becomes will the Chinese accept this demographic. I personally would NOT want some representation out of representation sake.

But don't worry. All those woke progressives will rush to the theater and spend gobs of money on this movie and support.... oh....
User avatar
Femina
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: 14 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Femina »

Mr. X wrote: 7 months ago
shevek wrote: 7 months ago I don't mean to be indelicate about it (and I don't think I am) but last I checked, isn't Disney a business that wants to make money?
At this point we should be encouraging more of these movies at double and triple the budget. Its past the point of saving. Bankrupt them. Same with comics. The faster DC and Marvel bankrupt the faster the characters go into public domain.

As for this movie, foreigners will cut it up into youtube clips. No need to see it. Oh and I'm sure this movie will do awesome in China. Gang busters.

As for profit, I think Hollywood and Disney is a massive money laundering scheme and make work program. Why does it cost exponentially more to do special FX than 20 years ago that looked better than today.
Aces all around on this take. It absolutely DOESN'T cost that much to get even half the product is the thing. I mean look back at a film like Lord of the Rings which didn't cost as much for the whole trilogy as one of these films does now and the quality of that trilogy and it's f'kn ludicrous!!! I imagine it only costs this much if you're LAZY and wanna get it out ASAP and don't want to do any of the work and planning involved to properly budget your work? I guess it doesn't help when you know Robert is taking 15% of your final gross profits.... but still... the Iron Man situation was fairly unique. Now he's gone so they don't even have THAT... They just overwork a bunch of CG guys in a booth way beyond their stress tolerance and shunt it out... the 'brevity' of the scheduling has to be accounting for some of the bloat?
Dogfish
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Dogfish »

New trailer looks okay. The whole powers switching things around conceit looks like an interesting mutator on the standard formula. Might check it out although my backlog of MCU stuff is getting chunkier.

I don't expect it'll do that well, but the dirty little secret here is I don't think it looks like a very expensive movie either. I expect Marvel will scale back the smaller movies now that the whole superhero thing is winding down.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

Femina wrote: 7 months ago
Mr. X wrote: 7 months ago
shevek wrote: 7 months ago I don't mean to be indelicate about it (and I don't think I am) but last I checked, isn't Disney a business that wants to make money?
At this point we should be encouraging more of these movies at double and triple the budget. Its past the point of saving. Bankrupt them. Same with comics. The faster DC and Marvel bankrupt the faster the characters go into public domain.

As for this movie, foreigners will cut it up into youtube clips. No need to see it. Oh and I'm sure this movie will do awesome in China. Gang busters.

As for profit, I think Hollywood and Disney is a massive money laundering scheme and make work program. Why does it cost exponentially more to do special FX than 20 years ago that looked better than today.
Aces all around on this take. It absolutely DOESN'T cost that much to get even half the product is the thing. I mean look back at a film like Lord of the Rings which didn't cost as much for the whole trilogy as one of these films does now and the quality of that trilogy and it's f'kn ludicrous!!! I imagine it only costs this much if you're LAZY and wanna get it out ASAP and don't want to do any of the work and planning involved to properly budget your work? I guess it doesn't help when you know Robert is taking 15% of your final gross profits.... but still... the Iron Man situation was fairly unique. Now he's gone so they don't even have THAT... They just overwork a bunch of CG guys in a booth way beyond their stress tolerance and shunt it out... the 'brevity' of the scheduling has to be accounting for some of the bloat?
As someone who does graphics programming for a living the costs now are much lower on the technical end than 20 years ago. They have dedicated farms now you can send your work to for rendering so you don't need a render farm of machines anymore, you just rent time on a remote farm. And a lot of the dev work is done now. if you're not Avatar trying to break ground, all the modelling is white papered and stock and most packages have plugins already made. CW even pulls off some better stuff.

I think these business are merely milking large budgets and I think investors are using this as a way to funnel their money back to themselves then declare a loss. They invest in a movie, the money goes to the dev studios they own or invest in, the movie is a flop and they write off the loss. Something like that.

In video gaming the huge expense now is mismanagement as you said. I forgot the name of the game but it was like Tribes. The studio dragged on zero dev for 2-3 years then pushed the team with 80 hour weeks to get out a game they had no design for. Most didn't even know what they were making.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

The vast majority of us are simply uninterested in "learning a lesson" when we watch a TV show or a movie.
We are not interested in an entertainment vehicle being DIDACTIC.
We want to product to be ESCAPIST, and that's true of the *vast majority* of the consumer audience worldwide.

So, for example, when we watch a TV series about The Watchmen, we are not interested in Damon Lindelof teaching us about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921. If we wanted to learn about it, we would read a history book. What we want to see is Dr Manhattan, Owlman, Silk Spectre, Rorschach and the gang.

That is just one example, but entertainment is so rife with didactics at this point that it's actually refreshing when an entertainment vehicle either *doesn't* include teaching points, or includes certain points of view that, perhaps, the academic elites don't approve because it doesn't fit their narrative.

The Youtuber Romanian TVee ("Vee") has a common phrase that he uses for this problem of didacticism vs escapism.
His phrase is "WE CAN STAY DISINTERESTED LONGER THAN YOU CAN STAY SOLVENT."
As Mr X says, we have checked out, and we're waiting until the sanity in entertainment returns.
We can wait, and in the meantime, some of us can even create our own product.

Nuff sed!
Dogfish
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Dogfish »

shevek wrote: 7 months ago The vast majority of us are simply uninterested in "learning a lesson" when we watch a TV show or a movie.
We are not interested in an entertainment vehicle being DIDACTIC.
We want to product to be ESCAPIST, and that's true of the *vast majority* of the consumer audience worldwide.

So, for example, when we watch a TV series about The Watchmen, we are not interested in Damon Lindelof teaching us about the Tulsa Massacre of 1921. If we wanted to learn about it, we would read a history book. What we want to see is Dr Manhattan, Owlman, Silk Spectre, Rorschach and the gang.

That is just one example, but entertainment is so rife with didactics at this point that it's actually refreshing when an entertainment vehicle either *doesn't* include teaching points, or includes certain points of view that, perhaps, the academic elites don't approve because it doesn't fit their narrative.

The Youtuber Romanian TVee ("Vee") has a common phrase that he uses for this problem of didacticism vs escapism.
His phrase is "WE CAN STAY DISINTERESTED LONGER THAN YOU CAN STAY SOLVENT."
As Mr X says, we have checked out, and we're waiting until the sanity in entertainment returns.
We can wait, and in the meantime, some of us can even create our own product.

Nuff sed!
You do remember though that the stuff we grew up on was didactic. Those old He-Man cartoons used to take it as far as to stop for a PSA. Star Trek taught lessons. The X-Men was always about being nice to minorities. Captain America always punched Nazis. Superman went after the KKK in 1946. Maybe those lessons didn't take for a lot of the fans, but they have always been there.

And the key thing with most of this stuff is that it is not aimed at an older audience in the first place. The cinema is for young people who can sit and watch a movie that is two hours long without needing to pee. So they are essentially getting the same thing we grew up with*, positive citizenship subtext and all.


*Except way less horny, like, in general. Unless this generation just relies on fanfic and rule 34 art rather than the source material.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

Dogfish wrote: 7 months ago
You do remember though that the stuff we grew up on was didactic. Those old He-Man cartoons used to take it as far as to stop for a PSA. Star Trek taught lessons. The X-Men was always about being nice to minorities. Captain America always punched Nazis. Superman went after the KKK in 1946. Maybe those lessons didn't take for a lot of the fans, but they have always been there.
The older stuff was just as bad though it came more from a moral majority angle. But still bad. Those Heman PSAs were lame. On Star Trek TOS they presented a dilemma but they rarely told you how to think. They let you think about it. Like the episode with the guys who were half black and half white.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

Dogfish wrote: 7 months ago
You do remember though that the stuff we grew up on was didactic. Those old He-Man cartoons used to take it as far as to stop for a PSA. Star Trek taught lessons. The X-Men was always about being nice to minorities. Captain America always punched Nazis. Superman went after the KKK in 1946. Maybe those lessons didn't take for a lot of the fans, but they have always been there.

And the key thing with most of this stuff is that it is not aimed at an older audience in the first place. The cinema is for young people who can sit and watch a movie that is two hours long without needing to pee. So they are essentially getting the same thing we grew up with*, positive citizenship subtext and all.


*Except way less horny, like, in general. Unless this generation just relies on fanfic and rule 34 art rather than the source material.
Come on, man, please stop being disingenuous.
This was all before intersectionalism, which didn't even exist until 1988.

You're trying to fumble around by a combination of cherrypicking and presentism.

He-Man cartoons had PSAs because if they didn't, a toy cartoon couldn't be considered an educational kids' program, and they wanted to fill that slot in the programming schedule. Same thing with GI Joe, which clearly glorified militarism.

Star Trek was utopianist but in a positive 1960s hippie way, like much of the sci-fi of the time. Lately, haven't you noticed that everything is dystopian? Not the same attitude nowadays - remember "kum ba ya"? Nothing like that today, only vengeance of group against group.

The X-Men promoted equality among the races and ethnicities, emphasizing diversity for that reason. It used to be called the United States as a welcoming melting pot. Not because some oppressed people needed to take revenge on the oppressors. The guy who played identity politics - Magneto - who tried to have people who thought they were better to rule over others - was a VILLAIN.

Captain America punched Nazis for the same reason he punched Communists, or mad scientists, or the Japanese. To defend patriotism, democracy and freedom. Not because white people, the United States, and the whole West are bad.

Superman's crusade against the KKK was just *one story* among thousands of stories where he stopped criminals or fought alien baddies.
He didn't crusade against capitalism, declare himself gay, or picket for climate justice.

If we can both agree that things have become a lot less sexy (but in fact, quite a bit more violent), then we should be to agree that the overbearing philosophy of why a writer produced a socially relevant story in, say, the Bronze Age is *not* the same philosophy of someone today who produces the same kind of socially relevant story.
Dogfish
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Dogfish »

shevek wrote: 7 months ago
Dogfish wrote: 7 months ago
You do remember though that the stuff we grew up on was didactic. Those old He-Man cartoons used to take it as far as to stop for a PSA. Star Trek taught lessons. The X-Men was always about being nice to minorities. Captain America always punched Nazis. Superman went after the KKK in 1946. Maybe those lessons didn't take for a lot of the fans, but they have always been there.

And the key thing with most of this stuff is that it is not aimed at an older audience in the first place. The cinema is for young people who can sit and watch a movie that is two hours long without needing to pee. So they are essentially getting the same thing we grew up with*, positive citizenship subtext and all.


*Except way less horny, like, in general. Unless this generation just relies on fanfic and rule 34 art rather than the source material.
Come on, man, please stop being disingenuous.
This was all before intersectionalism, which didn't even exist until 1988.

You're trying to fumble around by a combination of cherrypicking and presentism.

He-Man cartoons had PSAs because if they didn't, a toy cartoon couldn't be considered an educational kids' program, and they wanted to fill that slot in the programming schedule. Same thing with GI Joe, which clearly glorified militarism.

Star Trek was utopianist but in a positive 1960s hippie way, like much of the sci-fi of the time. Lately, haven't you noticed that everything is dystopian? Not the same attitude nowadays - remember "kum ba ya"? Nothing like that today, only vengeance of group against group.

The X-Men promoted equality among the races and ethnicities, emphasizing diversity for that reason. It used to be called the United States as a welcoming melting pot. Not because some oppressed people needed to take revenge on the oppressors. The guy who played identity politics - Magneto - who tried to have people who thought they were better to rule over others - was a VILLAIN.

Captain America punched Nazis for the same reason he punched Communists, or mad scientists, or the Japanese. To defend patriotism, democracy and freedom. Not because white people, the United States, and the whole West are bad.

Superman's crusade against the KKK was just *one story* among thousands of stories where he stopped criminals or fought alien baddies.
He didn't crusade against capitalism, declare himself gay, or picket for climate justice.

If we can both agree that things have become a lot less sexy (but in fact, quite a bit more violent), then we should be to agree that the overbearing philosophy of why a writer produced a socially relevant story in, say, the Bronze Age is *not* the same philosophy of someone today who produces the same kind of socially relevant story.
The fundamental messages of comic book stuff and kids entertainment generally have always been fairly standard don't be prejudiced, don't be racist, don't be greedy, stuff like that. I don't think that's ever really changed. Being good and kind and nice to people isn't new. That Jesus bloke on the cross was well into it too. It's wild to me that shows featuring those messages now get called out for being 'woke' when those values have always been considered to be good things.

Also Captain America punched Hitler because Cap was created by the son of Austrian-Jewish migrants and it was definitely personal. Especially as the Hitler punching took place well before the USA entered WW2. It was quite controversial at the time.


The less hotness, more violence thing, that's so weird. Probably needs its own thread. I think it's pandering to the more censorious international markets. That's been a general vibe in the 21st century. Instead of western culture just saying, "Yeah, well, fuck your rules" and trumpeting its own values as loudly as it could like it did in the 1980s instead we get this sort of bowdlerised, sanitised vision of America in its cultural output. No sex. Barely any swearing. No gay characters who can't be easily cut out. Plenty of violence though because that seems universally welcome. Effectively nothing that is going to challenge China or any other despotic regime. It's a victory mostly for Chinese soft power and something people should be more worried about.

The concern there is that people are painting it as a 'wokeness' or 'feminism' thing when it's clearly a case of Disney and the other entertainment corporations knowing they can make a product less interesting, within tighter cultural constraints, and that'll get them more money than making something that has greater creative freedom but that upsets Winnie the Pooh.
User avatar
jlocke
Sargeant
Sargeant
Posts: 130
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by jlocke »

cap1.jpg
cap1.jpg (360.37 KiB) Viewed 21861 times
cap2.jpg
cap2.jpg (77.73 KiB) Viewed 21861 times
I'm really looking forward to this one. I loved Captain Marvel, Wanda Vison, and Ms. Marvel so this is right down my alley. Brie looks amazing.

I'm really confused by the it's not sexy enough arguments. Like, we have an entire fetish industry dedicated to sexy superheroines. Mavel/DC/Independent mainstream superheroine movies/shows aren't made to jerk off too. They're GREAT material for us to create erotic stories/custom vids. But the 80's are over. When I was young, I would sit through a shitty, badly written, poorly acted 2 hour movie just so I could see some B-cup boobs. I'm never fucking going to do that ever again! No one is ever going to make money off that shit again. When porn was really hard to get and seeing a little jiggle and some cleavage was very exciting. People would pay money for it. Now, when you can see so much explicit nudity/hardcore porn/fetish material there is NO market for a 100 million dollar 1970's jiggle TV superheroine movie.

There is so much whining about Captain Marvel it's pathetic. An entire cottage industry of delusional Youtube incel cry babies. Like, if you don't like it, don't fucking watch it. When you spend hours/days of your life talking about something, pretending to be a victim of woke culture, it just comes off as so ingenuine.

Now I get the point about oppressed White Men. I get it. We only have 3 Captain America movies, 4 Thor Movies, 3 Iron Man movies, 3 Ant-Man movies, 3 Spider-Man movies, 2 Doctor Strange Movies, 3 Star-Lord (Guardians) Movies, and Incredible Hulk. I mean, that's only 22 movies with White Male Main Protagonist. I mean, come on Marvel! White Men are under attack! We built western civilization, and now, we're being forced at gun point to watch a movie with 3 female leads! It's so unfair!
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3695
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by shevek »

Dogfish wrote: 7 months ago
The fundamental messages of comic book stuff and kids entertainment generally have always been fairly standard don't be prejudiced, don't be racist, don't be greedy, stuff like that. I don't think that's ever really changed. Being good and kind and nice to people isn't new. That Jesus bloke on the cross was well into it too. It's wild to me that shows featuring those messages now get called out for being 'woke' when those values have always been considered to be good things.

Also Captain America punched Hitler because Cap was created by the son of Austrian-Jewish migrants and it was definitely personal. Especially as the Hitler punching took place well before the USA entered WW2. It was quite controversial at the time.

Effectively nothing that is going to challenge China or any other despotic regime. It's a victory mostly for Chinese soft power and something people should be more worried about.

The concern there is that people are painting it as a 'wokeness' or 'feminism' thing when it's clearly a case of Disney and the other entertainment corporations knowing they can make a product less interesting, within tighter cultural constraints, and that'll get them more money than making something that has greater creative freedom but that upsets Winnie the Pooh.
You're getting so close to why these times are different than those times but you refuse to recognize it because you're still being disingenuous about the similarities and differences.

Yes! Fair play, don't discriminate, values like that existed in American history but JUST LIKE YOU SAY those values were from sources that UPHELD Western Civ: Judeo-Christian values and Greco-Roman politics and philosophy. None of that was explicitly anti-capitalist ("anti-greed" is different than opposing capitalism in its entirety) and the anti-Semitism of the time (against which the Jewish comic creators railed, quite rightly as you say) came from right-wing and religious fundamentalist sources (the Bund, Father Coughlin, etc.) not the left wing, which was in fact mostly Jewish itself. One of the big reasons Nazis hated Communists back then is because *a lot of them were Jews*!

'Wokeness' is not the same thing as classical Western Enlightenment values. It's clearly Communist, but it's not even classical Communist. It's neo-Communist, based on the teachings of intersectionalism and critical race theory, etc. It's anti-capitalist, anti-American, anti-Western, and anti-Zionist (with a constant undercurrent of anti-Semitism as a whole), like the anti-colonialist attitudes of new African countries in the 60s (they were all of those things) but updated to include women, POCs, LGBTs, and several other intersections. It wants to tear down every Western power structure and hand the power over to those who claim to be oppressed. Wokeness is a revolutionary doctrine; basic Western values are not at this point.

That's why I say you're being disingenuous about it. Yes, China is a huge problem. China is an even bigger problem because it basically owns Africa which is the final place on Earth that needs serious uplifting in quality of life. But so is wokeness ("intersectionalism") which was birthed in American academia and coddled in European Antifa groups. Both are the problems, and they are intertwined. China hates wokeness in its own homeland, but it is more than happy to encourage it in the West, because neo-Marxism makes the West weak, decadent, and polarized. Much easier for China to take over that way.

So yes, we should be worried a lot about China (which is why I don't have a Tiktok). But wokeness is also a considerable albatross.
jlocke wrote: 7 months ago cap1.jpgcap2.jpg

I'm really looking forward to this one. I loved Captain Marvel, Wanda Vison, and Ms. Marvel so this is right down my alley. Brie looks amazing.

I'm really confused by the it's not sexy enough arguments. Like, we have an entire fetish industry dedicated to sexy superheroines.

When you spend hours/days of your life talking about something, pretending to be a victim of woke culture, it just comes off as so ingenuine.

Now I get the point about oppressed White Men. I get it... We built western civilization, and now, we're being forced at gun point to watch a movie with 3 female leads! It's so unfair!
You're allowed to like whatever you want. Unfortunately, Ms. Marvel was an extremely low-rated TV series that wasn't watched very much, so not everyone shares your enthusiasm, obviously. It was so poorly received that Disney is running that series again on ABC, whose demographic average age is above 60 years old. That's how desperate they are to get Sana Amanat some significant audience for her self-insert character. It's their last chance to try and boost Kamala's Khan popularity before The Marvels comes out.

I can tell which of these characters is popular in middle America based on the numbers of cosplay I see at Comicons (I've been to ten Cons so far this year), and by far, the most popular of those three is SCARLET WITCH, not Captain Marvel and not Kamala Khan, whom I barely see at all. But there are always several Scarlet Witches in the perfect costume from the end of Wandavision. Nobody tries to make Carol Danvers or Kamala sexy, but there are dozens of hot cosplays of Wanda Maximoff.

The reason "it's not sexy enough" is because the current generation of producers won't let it be sexy enough because of third-wave feminism. You've noted above, by posting two photos of Brie Larson, that they have made her significantly more beautiful in this upcoming movie (see my final paragraph). The reason for that is they are DESPERATE for men to see it, who are more than half of the superhero movie viewing audience. They know that the audience is getting tired of these movies. If the men don't pay the ticket, the movie is dead in the water.

I agree that one can definitely overdo it talking about woke culture on the Internet. There are tons of Youtube channels that pound the topic into the ground, and it gets to be a bit much, and yes "ingenuine" because you know they are doing it for clicks. I, however, am not. I don't post about this stuff anywhere but on this Forum. So, I'm not ingenuine about it. I actually care.

And nor am I a "victim" of woke culture. I think you're confusing me with the phenomenon of "victim culture", which is in fact a big part of the Woke-Industrial Complex. I'm a creator. So I actively create things that are NOT WOKE, and so do many others. These creators who create alternatives to woke media (such as Eric July, for example) are not victims at all.

Finally, yes, we built Western Civilization. But nobody is forcing us to watch this movie, or at least forcing us to pay for it, or to give Marvel or Disney money in any way. I don't give them anything. I get all of this stuff on the waves. Again, like Vee said, WE CAN STAY DISINTERESTED (i.e. not paying for it) LONGER THAN THEY CAN STAY SOLVENT.

In conclusion: there could be some moments of peril and tight costumes in this upcoming Marvels movie. If so, a new generation of SHIP fetishists could be inspired (there were some nice fetish moments in the first few seasons of Supergirl, and new interest in SHIP was created from that).
If there isn't, there won't be new SHIP fetishists created, and the current crop of interest will remain the size that it is. That's about it, really.
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by theScribbler »

jlocke wrote: 7 months ago cap1.jpgcap2.jpg

I'm really looking forward to this one. I loved Captain Marvel, Wanda Vison, and Ms. Marvel so this is right down my alley. Brie looks amazing.

I'm really confused by the it's not sexy enough arguments. Like, we have an entire fetish industry dedicated to sexy superheroines. Mavel/DC/Independent mainstream superheroine movies/shows aren't made to jerk off too. They're GREAT material for us to create erotic stories/custom vids. But the 80's are over. When I was young, I would sit through a shitty, badly written, poorly acted 2 hour movie just so I could see some B-cup boobs. I'm never fucking going to do that ever again! No one is ever going to make money off that shit again. When porn was really hard to get and seeing a little jiggle and some cleavage was very exciting. People would pay money for it. Now, when you can see so much explicit nudity/hardcore porn/fetish material there is NO market for a 100 million dollar 1970's jiggle TV superheroine movie.

There is so much whining about Captain Marvel it's pathetic. An entire cottage industry of delusional Youtube incel cry babies. Like, if you don't like it, don't fucking watch it. When you spend hours/days of your life talking about something, pretending to be a victim of woke culture, it just comes off as so ingenuine.

Now I get the point about oppressed White Men. I get it. We only have 3 Captain America movies, 4 Thor Movies, 3 Iron Man movies, 3 Ant-Man movies, 3 Spider-Man movies, 2 Doctor Strange Movies, 3 Star-Lord (Guardians) Movies, and Incredible Hulk. I mean, that's only 22 movies with White Male Main Protagonist. I mean, come on Marvel! White Men are under attack! We built western civilization, and now, we're being forced at gun point to watch a movie with 3 female leads! It's so unfair!
Agree with you entirely.

I miss the thumbs up button.

:thumbup:
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

jlocke wrote: 7 months ago Now I get the point about oppressed White Men. I get it. We only have 3 Captain America movies, 4 Thor Movies, 3 Iron Man movies, 3 Ant-Man movies, 3 Spider-Man movies, 2 Doctor Strange Movies, 3 Star-Lord (Guardians) Movies, and Incredible Hulk. I mean, that's only 22 movies with White Male Main Protagonist. I mean, come on Marvel! White Men are under attack! We built western civilization, and now, we're being forced at gun point to watch a movie with 3 female leads! It's so unfair!
You mean the jacked, shirtless Capt America, Thor, Star Lord, Ant man, Hawkeye etc? That fan service? Isn't it funny how Hemsworth poses literally nude in Love and Thunder, chained down and forcibly stripped and he's all jacked and buff BUT men are unreasonable if they want a little fan service. BTW can anyone name one Marvel movie that has shown any bare legs? Any? How about cleavage, and real cleavage not some slightly pulled down zipper. Try chaining down an actress and forcibly stripping her onscreen to butt nakedness and see how that works out.

I don't care if this movie only has midgets in it. However a crowd that demands diversity quotas who then toss out the rules is a group no one should trust.
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by theScribbler »

Mr. X wrote: 7 months ago
jlocke wrote: 7 months ago Now I get the point about oppressed White Men. I get it. We only have 3 Captain America movies, 4 Thor Movies, 3 Iron Man movies, 3 Ant-Man movies, 3 Spider-Man movies, 2 Doctor Strange Movies, 3 Star-Lord (Guardians) Movies, and Incredible Hulk. I mean, that's only 22 movies with White Male Main Protagonist. I mean, come on Marvel! White Men are under attack! We built western civilization, and now, we're being forced at gun point to watch a movie with 3 female leads! It's so unfair!
You mean the jacked, shirtless Capt America, Thor, Star Lord, Ant man, Hawkeye etc? That fan service? Isn't it funny how Hemsworth poses literally nude in Love and Thunder, chained down and forcibly stripped and he's all jacked and buff BUT men are unreasonable if they want a little fan service. BTW can anyone name one Marvel movie that has shown any bare legs? Any? How about cleavage, and real cleavage not some slightly pulled down zipper. Try chaining down an actress and forcibly stripping her onscreen to butt nakedness and see how that works out.

I don't care if this movie only has midgets in it. However a crowd that demands diversity quotas who then toss out the rules is a group no one should trust.
Wow. What a complete off the wall jump from his quote to twisting it into having anything to do with your usual shirtless pet peeve!

However, this would be a great topic in Misc forum as a new thread titled "Mr. X's well known pet peeve" or "Female cheese cake golden age has passed." Another good topic for Misc forum would be "For the millionth time not all ice creams are the same." And maybe something about crayon colors. :cap:
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by theScribbler »

shevek wrote: 7 months ago
jlocke wrote: 7 months ago

I'm really looking forward to this one. I loved Captain Marvel, Wanda Vison, and Ms. Marvel so this is right down my alley. Brie looks amazing.

I'm really confused by the it's not sexy enough arguments. Like, we have an entire fetish industry dedicated to sexy superheroines.

When you spend hours/days of your life talking about something, pretending to be a victim of woke culture, it just comes off as so ingenuine.

Now I get the point about oppressed White Men. I get it... We built western civilization, and now, we're being forced at gun point to watch a movie with 3 female leads! It's so unfair!
You're allowed to like whatever you want. Unfortunately, Ms. Marvel was an extremely low-rated TV series that wasn't watched very much, so not everyone shares your enthusiasm, obviously. It was so poorly received that Disney is running that series again on ABC, whose demographic average age is above 60 years old. That's how desperate they are to get Sana Amanat some significant audience for her self-insert character. It's their last chance to try and boost Kamala's Khan popularity before The Marvels comes out.
Ms Marvel Tomato.png
Ms Marvel Tomato.png (369.04 KiB) Viewed 21805 times
Ms Marvel Googled.png
Ms Marvel Googled.png (356.15 KiB) Viewed 21805 times
Contrary to your statement: Ms. Marvel is highly rated TV series. Please stop publishing your false propaganda here.

I will note that 775,000 household viewership in the first 5 days is low compared to other Marvel series, but compared to H-burghs under 100 viewers it's SO MANY thousands more you shouldn't be talking!

So what are you 'desperately' doing to 'boost' H-burgh 'popularity!?' Newsflash: it's not working!
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
I can tell which of these characters is popular in middle America based on the numbers of cosplay I see at Comicons (I've been to ten Cons so far this year), and by far, the most popular of those three is SCARLET WITCH, not Captain Marvel and not Kamala Khan, whom I barely see at all. But there are always several Scarlet Witches in the perfect costume from the end of Wandavision. Nobody tries to make Carol Danvers or Kamala sexy, but there are dozens of hot cosplays of Wanda Maximoff.
And no one at any comicon is cosplaying H-burgh characters other than within your group of.... I'll refrain from what I was about to write.
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
The reason "it's not sexy enough" is because the current generation of producers won't let it be sexy enough because of third-wave feminism. You've noted above, by posting two photos of Brie Larson, that they have made her significantly more beautiful in this upcoming movie (see my final paragraph). The reason for that is they are DESPERATE for men to see it, who are more than half of the superhero movie viewing audience. They know that the audience is getting tired of these movies. If the men don't pay the ticket, the movie is dead in the water.
Men will pay to see this, just like men are paying to see Barbie!
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
I agree that one can definitely overdo it talking about woke culture on the Internet.
By 'one' you mean 'shevek.'
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
There are tons of Youtube channels that pound the topic into the ground, and it gets to be a bit much, and yes "ingenuine" because you know they are doing it for clicks. I, however, am not. I don't post about this stuff anywhere but on this Forum.
Is that why you post your political agenda stuff here FAR FAR too often? Feel free to post shevek crap somewhere else, everywhere else, if it helps reduce it here.
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
So, I'm not ingenuine about it. I actually care.
No one cares about the manbaby propaganda you care about.
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
And nor am I a "victim" of woke culture. I think you're confusing me with the phenomenon of "victim culture", which is in fact a big part of the Woke-Industrial Complex. I'm a creator. So I actively create things that are NOT WOKE, and so do many others. These creators who create alternatives to woke media (such as Eric July, for example) are not victims at all.
Really, cause You act like a total victim of woke culture.
On and on you go about it. Drivel blah blah propaganda blah blah.... snooze blah blah.
And everyone here knows it, and is tired of it. (Except maybe a couple people. Could you form your own small Private Messages group perhaps?)

And finally, some real comments about Eric July mediocre comics output. I have looked before, but couldn't find anything...till today...

reddit thread = is Eric July's Isom comic actually any good?

I imagine H-burgh is similarly meh, but if Eric has a market that will support his mehness, why don't you? Why aren't you cleaning up with the manbabies like he is?
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
So I actively create things that are NOT WOKE, and so do many others.
And virtually no one is watching your creations! So very sad. But not surprising.
shevek wrote: 7 months ago
Finally, yes, we built Western Civilization. But nobody is forcing us to watch this movie, or at least forcing us to pay for it, or to give Marvel or Disney money in any way. I don't give them anything. I get all of this stuff on the waves.
AKA you steal it. You should not be stealing it. Sure, don't pay, but then don't watch it either.
Last edited by theScribbler 7 months ago, edited 3 times in total.
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4561
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: The Marvels (2023, Marvel)

Post by Mr. X »

theScribbler wrote: 7 months ago Wow. What a complete off the wall jump from his quote to twisting it into having anything to do with your usual shirtless pet peeve!

However, this would be a great topic in Misc forum as a new thread titled "Mr. X's well known pet peeve" or "Female cheese cake golden age has passed." Another good topic for Misc forum would be "For the millionth time not all ice creams are the same." And maybe something about crayon colors. :cap:
He stated
I'm really confused by the it's not sexy enough arguments.
I merely replied. Plenty of sexy from what I can see.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 2 guests