PDA

View Full Version : I'm not a fan of cinematic universes


Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 12:02 PM
Okay, I'm going to ask this; am I the only one out here who has come to dislike the idea of Movie cinematic universes? Am I the only one who actually feels something has been lost with this stupid trend? I know every fandom is fanboying/fangirling over this concept since it was introduced, but I want to consider what we might be losing here;

Let's take superhero flicks. Before this concept started, a movie about hero A would be just about him, his struggles, and his effort to save his family/friends/the world/whatever the stakes are. A mention of other heroes/a bigger world was cool, but what this hero is doing right now was important in THIS film. Hero A saving the day was important, and the stakes were high, because if hero A failed, there was nobody else to come to the rescue. Then, you have a movie about heroine B. She's in the same universe, and their could even be a mention of him in her movie, or vice versa. But it's still her movie, her villain, her struggle to be the heroine who saves the day. No interference from other heroes or heroines.

But now, here comes the cinematic universe! Other heroes and their supporting casts start eroding over into hero A's movie, taking screen time away from hero A, and flooding his movie with plots and characters from the other heroes in your cinematic universe. Or heroine B's movie doesn't lead into her next sequel, but leads in Hero C's movie, which leads into heroine D's movie, which leads into the big crossover team film. You a fan of heroine B, but don't like the other characters! TOUGH! They're going to crowd your favorite heroine out of her own movie, and if you try to just follow her films exclusively, you'll be totally lost, because the story first continues in the movies of six other heroes and heroines before it comes back to the sequel.

Frankly... I don't care for cinematic universes, at all. I like just 2 or 3 different heroes, and I don't WANT to see their films flooded with all this GARBAGE I don't care about. Save the crossover stuff for team movies and team-up movies, and give each solo film back to it's titular heroine or hero. I've stopped going to see films set in cinematic universes because of the B.S.. I wonder if anyone else wants movies about a certain character, could just go back to being about that character and his or her supporting cast?

Candy Kappa
06-24-2017, 12:08 PM
Yes, you are the only one.

TurtleTitan97
06-24-2017, 12:09 PM
I bet you hate superhero comics too considering heroes have been crossing over into each others books since the Golden Age.

Cure
06-24-2017, 12:12 PM
Good for you.

plastroncafe
06-24-2017, 12:14 PM
You might actually be the only one who feels this.

Congrats!

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 12:16 PM
I bet you hate comics too considering heroes have been crossing over with each other since the Golden Age.

No, that's different. a character will appear in a team-up issue or story arc, than go back to their own book. Each series still has it's own ongoing story and supporting cast. But yes, I do despise the endless string of annual inter-company crossovers that break up the flow of the story in a book I'm following, and force a tie-in issue to big event A that I really don't care about. A tie in event whose 'earth-shattering ramifications' and 'shockign deaths' will be retconned out by the comic company next week.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 12:21 PM
And okay, I get it. Everybody likes the giant interconnected movie series, while I prefer following just one or two heroes film series. I'll be quiet now.

Aaronardo
06-24-2017, 12:22 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes, I hate bad cinematic universes that are clearly just trying to cash in on the success Marvel has had. Marvel comics liked to have crossovers and they all took place in the same world, so I think Marvel having a cinematic universe makes complete sense even if not every movie is a home run. The same goes for DC.

But damn it, if you want to make a Mummy movie, make a Mummy movie. You don't need this over-complicated universe that ends with the Mummy crossing over with the Werewolf and the Once-Removed Cousin of the Fly or whatever. You're just wasting your time and everyone else's.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 12:29 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes, I hate bad cinematic universes that are clearly just trying to cash in on the success Marvel has had. Marvel comics liked to have crossovers and they all took place in the same world, so I think Marvel having a cinematic universe makes complete sense even if not every movie is a home run. The same goes for DC.

But damn it, if you want to make a Mummy movie, make a Mummy movie. You don't need this over-complicated universe that ends with the Mummy crossing over with the Werewolf and the Once-Removed Cousin of the Fly or whatever. You're just wasting your time and everyone else's.

This... covers what my problem is; I LOVE the Justice League style team films that bring everybody together. But When I go to see a superman film, I want to see superman, followed by superman 2. I don't want a team up movie where he gets beat up by batman and then killed, followed by another team movie where he has to come back from the dead, before FINALLY getting back to a sequel. I loved how wonder Woman handled this- you only had references at the beginning and end- and hated how Bvs S handled it, crammed with references and cameos that served no purpose to the plot.

If you're doing a superman film, just use superman asnd his cast. If you're doing a superman/batman/Wonder Woman team up film, just keep it to them. A justice league film should concentrate on the whole league. But don't have ongoing plots in the 'universe' films I have to watch EVERY movie to get!

Aaronardo
06-24-2017, 12:40 PM
This... covers what my problem is; I LOVE the Justice League style team films that bring everybody together. But When I go to see a superman film, I want to see superman, followed by superman 2. I don't want a team up movie where he gets beat up by batman and then killed, followed by another team movie where he has to come back from the dead, before FINALLY getting back to a sequel. I loved how wonder Woman handled this- you only had references at the beginning and end- and hated how Bvs S handled it, crammed with references and cameos that served no purpose to the plot.

If you're doing a superman film, just use superman asnd his cast. If you're doing a superman/batman/Wonder Woman team up film, just keep it to them. A justice league film should concentrate on the whole league. But don't have ongoing plots in the 'universe' films I have to watch EVERY movie to get!

This is very fair. A large reason why Iron Man 2 is so despised is it couldn't just be an Iron Man movie. It kept getting caught up in setting up movies that wouldn't come out for another couple of years. Then they did it again with Avengers: Age of Ultron. It's gotta set up Civil War, but it's also gotta set up Black Panther, but it's also gotta set up World War Hulk (that movie still happening?). It couldn't do a very simple thing: be an Avengers movie about the Avengers beating Ultron. It got too complicated for its own good and became a mess of a movie.

I'm someone who gets a kick out of watching things as a series, so I've never had a problem with having big plots in these universes as long as they made sense, but that's a me thing. I feel like a good cinematic universe can make strong movies that stands strong on their own while still setting up future events. It's all in good storytelling.

Tetsu Deinonychus
06-24-2017, 12:57 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes, I hate bad cinematic universes that are clearly just trying to cash in on the success Marvel has had. Marvel comics liked to have crossovers and they all took place in the same world, so I think Marvel having a cinematic universe makes complete sense even if not every movie is a home run. The same goes for DC.

But damn it, if you want to make a Mummy movie, make a Mummy movie. You don't need this over-complicated universe that ends with the Mummy crossing over with the Werewolf and the Once-Removed Cousin of the Fly or whatever. You're just wasting your time and everyone else's.
But, the Universal Monsters were kinda already doing the cinematic universe way back in the 40s with films like Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman, House of Frankenstein, House of Dracula, Abbott and Costello Meet The Wolfman, etc.

So if they did it first, they might as well do it again.

But, yeah I like the cinematic universes, but they should maybe tone down the continuity gimmicks, just a bit, and try to make the films watchable on their own too.

ProphetofGanja
06-24-2017, 01:15 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes, I hate bad cinematic universes that are clearly just trying to cash in on the success Marvel has had. Marvel comics liked to have crossovers and they all took place in the same world, so I think Marvel having a cinematic universe makes complete sense even if not every movie is a home run. The same goes for DC.

But damn it, if you want to make a Mummy movie, make a Mummy movie. You don't need this over-complicated universe that ends with the Mummy crossing over with the Werewolf and the Once-Removed Cousin of the Fly or whatever. You're just wasting your time and everyone else's.

Yeah, I don't mind the idea of a connected cinematic universe at all, but it's got to be done well. Marvel is showing everyone that it can be done nowadays successfully.

But, the Universal Monsters were kinda already doing the cinematic universe way back in the 40s with films like Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman, House of Frankenstein, House of Dracula, Abbott and Costello Meet The Wolfman, etc.

So if they did it first, they might as well do it again.

But, yeah I like the cinematic universes, but they should maybe tone down the continuity gimmicks, just a bit, and try to make the films watchable on their own too.

Yeah, I feel like Universal could make a really cool cinematic universe but this new Mummy movie just seems like a really wobbly first step. Just like their Dracula movie that came out some years back. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they're scrapping all their plans. I just think a mummy movie needs to be a period piece to be effective. Some monsters just don't work in the age of social media

Cure
06-24-2017, 01:40 PM
And okay, I get it. Everybody likes the giant interconnected movie series, while I prefer following just one or two heroes film series. I'll be quiet now.

Maybe not everyone is 100% for them, but like, it's pretty clear you just wanted some kind of fanfare and validation for your opinion; most people can see through it and don't care.

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
06-24-2017, 01:42 PM
I'm actually with Panda; I prefer separate, isolated series and characters. Doesn't mean I don't like the MCU, but I generally despise crossovers.

snake
06-24-2017, 01:46 PM
I don't like them either. It's the cancer that's killing film.

plastroncafe
06-24-2017, 01:55 PM
Okay now I'm legit curious:

What's your stance on sequels or trilogies?
Are you the only one to hate them too?

Does this extend to other forms of media?
Like television: Do you prefer shows that are self-contained "monster of the week" stories?

Or is it just things that are bad at what they're attempting to do that earn your ire?

snake
06-24-2017, 02:02 PM
Okay now I'm legit curious:

What's your stance on sequels or trilogies?
Are you the only one to hate them too?

Does this extend to other forms of media?
Like television: Do you prefer shows that are self-contained "monster of the week" stories?

Or is it just things that are bad at what they're attempting to do that earn your ire?

Sequels are fine as long as they're good.

TV is a different medium. Season long arcs are told a lot better with 8 hours over a few weeks than 2 in one sitting.


I don't like the execution of all the cinematic universes so far. MCU is bland, safe, and colorless. DC is a mess. All other attempts have been so blatant and laughable you gotta pity the studios. Everyone is trying the Marvel formula and it's killing the industry.

It's not the concept of a cinematic universe that's bad, it's the execution and the way they've taken over the film scene.

It's not about making a good film anymore. It's about generating as much interest for the next one as possible. These movies have no artistic value whatsoever. You don't get anything of value from Civil War, but you do get to talk about how great those quips were, or who's going to get a spin off, or what the end credits scene "means", or what MCU branded Funko POP you want to buy.

GoldMutant
06-24-2017, 02:08 PM
Pretty much with snake here, the execution hurts a lot of cinematic universes.

I still enjoy the MCU. Even if safe with what it does, it's still fun to watch in my eyes. They appeal to the child within us to see legendary heroes coming together on the big screen.

However, most "universes" are clearly trying too hard with marketing instead of telling good movies. Granted, I think the Godzilla/Kong universe being done is okay so far. Others that are being done, such as the classic monsters, or future ones, such as Hanna-Barbara, just reek of desperation. It's unsatisfying for me.

snake
06-24-2017, 02:13 PM
Godzilla gets a pass. He's always been part of a "cinematic universe". It's just unfortunate he's being brought back at a time filled with everyone trying the same thing. (Skull Island was great though)

Can we stop calling it a cinematic universe? It's such a dumb word. What's wrong with "series" or "franchise"?

GoldMutant
06-24-2017, 02:18 PM
Godzilla gets a pass. He's always been part of a "cinematic universe". It's just unfortunate he's being brought back at a time filled with everyone trying the same thing. (Skull Island was great though)

Can we stop calling it a cinematic universe? It's such a dumb word. What's wrong with "series" or "franchise"?

Skull Island was awesome. Still waiting on Gamera one day. :(

Besides snake, "cinematic universe" is almost a buzz word, they gotta take advantage! :lol:

All seriousness, it is irritating. Some things are more franchise-oriented or series based, it gets monotonous.

TigerClaw
06-24-2017, 02:21 PM
I love cinematic universes, its the only way to tell stories without cramming every hero in one movie, once you get to an Avengers movie, every movie that has come before it builds up to it.

snake
06-24-2017, 02:24 PM
The culture that's sprung from these is just disgusting. Suddenly it's cool to be a "nerd", and you gotta flaunt it by showing off your latest Funko POP and Star Wars shirt. These movies are fashion accessories to a personality carefully crafted through focus groups and corperate executives.


It'll crash though, soon. The western did in the 60s and the cinematic universe will in the near future.

PApagreg
06-24-2017, 02:28 PM
@Snake bland and safe I can understand but how is the MCU "colorless"

TigerClaw
06-24-2017, 02:28 PM
Sounds like some people here are jaded.

snake
06-24-2017, 02:39 PM
@Snake bland and safe I can understand but how is the MCU "colorless"

Are you color blind? These movies have terrible cinematography. Everything is gray and visually bland.

CyberCubed
06-24-2017, 02:45 PM
Ever since the original Star Wars trilogy and Back to the Future had multi-part continuation between movies, I felt this was tradition. You can even go further back with the original Planet of the Apes movies which was basically a 5-part movie.

I'm reluctant to include the James Bond films in this since most of them seem standalone, at least when they change actors. Are all the James Bond films intended to be in the same continuity when they change actors, or is just all reboots?

PApagreg
06-24-2017, 02:52 PM
Are you color blind? These movies have terrible cinematography. Everything is gray and visually bland.
Alright fair enough

chrisdude
06-24-2017, 03:11 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes, but I agree that there are disadvantages. Movies having to build up to an event, or certain character is not being utilized, because they are plans for them elsewear. Blanket expectations of how mature the content can get. It's just a trend, and it will pass, some day.

I look at something like Spider-Man, and it bums me out. I've always thought of him as a character who is completely alone, and has no one to turn to for advice or help. But that's mainly a product of the specific Spider-Man content I grew up on. Plenty of other fans are thrilled to see him share a universe wth characters they're used to seeing him fight alongside in the comics.

At the same time, who is Captain Marvel if not an Avenger? I would argue that the modern version of Carol Dangers could not be done justice without a universe like the MCU having been established.

I'm more bothered by these movies being forced into a format. MCU films are mostly the same, in terms of story. They even look the same, visually. Only a couple stand out as great, in my opinion. (They're both Captain America movies.) And people can trash the X-Men movies, but at least they feel different. There's a different vision behind them. And they're free from whatever the next MCU event film is. Their freedom also allows them to make movies like Deadpool and Logan, which would never fly in the MCU. Nobody loved Fantastic Four, but, at least, it was a different angle on superhero movies.

I just think it's cool when different people are allowed to make different types of movies. That's why it bugs me when everyone says that such and such property needs to go back to Marvel Studios. You would just get those characters in the same old bland, 3.5-star movies you've been watching for almost 10 years.

Team ups and crossovers are fun, but I don't thing they're a BETTER way of doing things. Just different. It's got pluses and minuses.

sdp
06-24-2017, 04:54 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes but I agree with most of your points Panda Khan. I've written about this on my blog and a few times here in the drome in misc. threads.

Quick points. Cinematic Universes are a buzzword that became a thing when Avengers became a B.O hit, they have always existed, it's just that the "modern" version of them was made by Marvel and yeah, it kind of sucks. Too many crossovers, I can't even believe I"m saying this but even TV shows like Arrowverse have become too bloated because of them while they should be mostly single shows with a crossover every once in a while and the reason many universes are failing is because they are doing it wrong putting too much effort into it besides a good single moviel

Still waiting on Gamera one day. :(


They announced a new Gamera movie when Shin Gojira was announced, whatever happened to that?

GoldMutant
06-24-2017, 06:42 PM
They announced a new Gamera movie when Shin Gojira was announced, whatever happened to that?

I'm referring to using Gamera in the Legendary Entertainment Monsterverse, not the Japanese films. I'm aware they don't have the rights to Gamera, but it would be nice.

Shark_Blade
06-24-2017, 06:59 PM
Don't worry, it hates you too.

Splinter the boss
06-24-2017, 07:21 PM
I love cinematic universes, they're so cool. They're frankly beautiful.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 09:49 PM
Maybe not everyone is 100% for them, but like, it's pretty clear you just wanted some kind of fanfare and validation for your opinion; most people can see through it and don't care.

Wrong, I was not seeking validation, I just wondered if anyone shared my opinion. I need no validation for my stance on things, I merely wondered other people stance. I am not coming on here trying to stir up trouble of any kind, though I admit I may have been venting a bit on how interconnected everything is. I don't understand hostility just because I don't like something so insignificant.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 09:54 PM
Okay now I'm legit curious:

What's your stance on sequels or trilogies?
Are you the only one to hate them too?

Does this extend to other forms of media?
Like television: Do you prefer shows that are self-contained "monster of the week" stories?

Or is it just things that are bad at what they're attempting to do that earn your ire?

Sequels I enjoy if done well. If they have a story to tell, it's just fine. A sequel for the sake of a sequel, and the story being secondary? No thanks.

TV series, I prefer if it stays self contained to a certain extent to that series itself. I actually prefer ongoing, connected story arcs, but not ones that intersect with other shows. I don't mind crossovers at all, as long as they are contained to the crossover episode itself.

You hit the nail on the head; the only ones I hate, are the ones that do it poorly.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 09:55 PM
The culture that's sprung from these is just disgusting. Suddenly it's cool to be a "nerd", and you gotta flaunt it by showing off your latest Funko POP and Star Wars shirt. These movies are fashion accessories to a personality carefully crafted through focus groups and corperate executives.


It'll crash though, soon. The western did in the 60s and the cinematic universe will in the near future.

This sums up a large portion of my problem.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 09:56 PM
I don't hate cinematic universes, but I agree that there are disadvantages. Movies having to build up to an event, or certain character is not being utilized, because they are plans for them elsewear. Blanket expectations of how mature the content can get. It's just a trend, and it will pass, some day.

I look at something like Spider-Man, and it bums me out. I've always thought of him as a character who is completely alone, and has no one to turn to for advice or help. But that's mainly a product of the specific Spider-Man content I grew up on. Plenty of other fans are thrilled to see him share a universe wth characters they're used to seeing him fight alongside in the comics.

At the same time, who is Captain Marvel if not an Avenger? I would argue that the modern version of Carol Dangers could not be done justice without a universe like the MCU having been established.

I'm more bothered by these movies being forced into a format. MCU films are mostly the same, in terms of story. They even look the same, visually. Only a couple stand out as great, in my opinion. (They're both Captain America movies.) And people can trash the X-Men movies, but at least they feel different. There's a different vision behind them. And they're free from whatever the next MCU event film is. Their freedom also allows them to make movies like Deadpool and Logan, which would never fly in the MCU. Nobody loved Fantastic Four, but, at least, it was a different angle on superhero movies.

I just think it's cool when different people are allowed to make different types of movies. That's why it bugs me when everyone says that such and such property needs to go back to Marvel Studios. You would just get those characters in the same old bland, 3.5-star movies you've been watching for almost 10 years.

Team ups and crossovers are fun, but I don't thing they're a BETTER way of doing things. Just different. It's got pluses and minuses.

THIS is the core of my argument, right here, thank you for stating it more simply than I could. :)

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 09:59 PM
Okay, all I said was I didn't care for a type of interconnected film presentation, and I've got hostility from 2 or 3 people. Sorry I don't care for the way the big interconnected movie universes are handled by Hollywood. Okay, maybe I should've stated my opinion with a little less frustration, but yeesh.

myconius
06-24-2017, 10:07 PM
i really don't like that this Cinematic universe has become such a huge fad!

i feel that the new Spider-man will suffer creatively from forcing it into the MCU.

at least the creators of Deadpool didn't shoehorn their film in with that mess of X-men films.

Cure
06-24-2017, 10:22 PM
Wrong, I was not seeking validation, I just wondered if anyone shared my opinion. I need no validation for my stance on things, I merely wondered other people stance. I am not coming on here trying to stir up trouble of any kind, though I admit I may have been venting a bit on how interconnected everything is. I don't understand hostility just because I don't like something so insignificant.

"I HATE THING" is different than "I don't really like thing; here's why". The first way is how this thread began before you edited it and that's why you got some hostility, so don't pretend otherwise.

And Jesus Christ, multi-quote, man.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-24-2017, 10:25 PM
"I HATE THING" is different than "I don't really like thing; here's why". The first way is how this thread began before you edited it and that's why you got some hostility, so don't pretend otherwise.

And Jesus Christ, multi-quote, man.

No one's pretending anything. That's why I changed it at your suggestion, I let my frustration seep into my post, so I corrected it.

And sorry about the multi-post quote, I'll try to make this work, oy.

plastroncafe
06-24-2017, 10:46 PM
Wow, in-the-wild hipster opinions.
I didn't think there were people who actually felt that way.

Neat. Also sad, but still neat.

TheSkeletonMan939
06-24-2017, 10:48 PM
I don't mind them per se but garbage like the Monster Movieverse that Universal is trying to do is the epitome of putting the cart before the horse. The Mummy film was marketed largely based on its part of a 'larger universe'. It flopped, big surprise.

Wildcat
06-24-2017, 11:38 PM
No I like the idea universes.

I haven't seen the Marvel movies but I will sorta agree that having multiple superheroes in the same world makes things more convenient for them to win but then there is multiple villains too, right?

But no I like crossovers and team ups. Seeing forces join or fight each other is cool. They've always been around it's just called universes now.

This really does seem more like a rant though.

snake
06-25-2017, 12:01 AM
Wow, in-the-wild hipster opinions.
I didn't think there were people who actually felt that way.

Neat. Also sad, but still neat.

It's sad that I don't drink the cinematic kool-aid?

Good to know where your priorities are. I guess when you're 50+ there's not much else going on, but come on Plastron.

AT-Man
06-25-2017, 04:18 AM
I f*cking love cinematic universes, when they're done right, like Marvel. MCU might be the only one, dunno lol.

NinjaPug
06-25-2017, 08:51 AM
How many cinematic universes do we actually have?

Marvel
DC
Godzilla monsters
Star Wars (I guess...only because they started with the anthology movies)

All of these should be connected universes IMO.

They're planning them for Transformers, Sony Spidey and the Universal Monsters but that doesn't mean they'll actually happen.

Seems like a weird thing to complain about. I guess if you only watch "blockbusters" then it seems like the percentage of franchise movies is too high. That's easily correctable.

ToTheNines
06-25-2017, 09:09 AM
I fail to see the problem with the concept. It just sucks that everyone other than Marvel is so bad at it. But to be fair, DC mastered the shared universe thing in comics and animation before they did.

GoldMutant
06-25-2017, 09:16 AM
There's seemingly going to be another film franchise involving the Hanna-Barbara cartoons. It starts with a reboot of Scooby-Doo next year. So, five film universes together by then.

You could also count James Bond, but I don't. Depends on who you ask.

ZariusTwo
06-25-2017, 10:10 AM
you could also count James Bond, but I don't. Depends on who you ask.

They certainly were aiming for it with that Halle Berry spin-off that mercifully never materialized

Allio
06-25-2017, 10:28 AM
as many has said as long as it is done well it is alright. But if done poorly then it is really a waste.

sdp
06-25-2017, 11:15 AM
I think most people here would agree with Panda Kahn, but apparently he edited his post? Because I don't understand the backlash he's been getting. I love continuity and have since I was a kid and always connected shows or tried to explain inconsistencies for example in the Hanna-Barbera universes and whatnot.

Even in film these shared universes existed and it was awesome when it happened but it wasn't until Marvel successfully pulled off the MCU that it became something all studios wanted and that's what the problem is (http://miscrave.com/articles/cinematic-universe-copycats/), since all these studios are aiming for the universe for the $ without actually caring to build up their movies. People also praise Marvel when they were just as guilty as this, IM2/Cap1 and even Thor all felt like "get the origin out quickly to get to Avengers".

DC could've made it right, you didn't need to build up each movie, people already know Sups and bats and a JL movie could've just introduced everyone else and then they could've had their solo movies but whatever, and DC definitely wanted to make their own shared universe with GL but they played it as "no we won't". Similar Universal always said in interviews for the mosnterverse that they would make "single" movies and only connect were possible but all those were lies and they really shoved down this universe on us.

Fox with the X-Men it works fairly well and you can argue that they wanted to build this shared universe for a long time before Marvel with their "origins" films that were scrapped, so they were doing it before and are still doing it right. I always connected the previous Marvel films as "one" unvierse with Stan Lee as the "connector", it wasn't until more than a decade later that it became a reality.

So yeah, I love shared universes and continuity likely more than the average person here and while it's a dream that "shared universes" are a thing now, sadly most are approaching it in a bad way. This is nothing new, I remember more than a decade ago being in comic forums and most would complain that every comic had to be connected to the "event" and that there wasn't time for "single" stories with the heroes before going to the next big event.

plastroncafe
06-25-2017, 11:15 AM
It's sad that I don't drink the cinematic kool-aid?

Good to know where your priorities are. I guess when you're 50+ there's not much else going on, but come on Plastron.

The culture that's sprung from these is just disgusting. Suddenly it's cool to be a "nerd", and you gotta flaunt it by showing off your latest Funko POP and Star Wars shirt.

I didn't call you a hipster for not liking poorly done cinematic universes. I called you out for being a hipster because of the sentiment in bold.

This is at least hipster rationale, and at worst gatekeeper wankery.
For years the whine from the geek communities was:
Why doesn't anyone like what I like?
I'm so alienated because no one likes the thing that I like!

And now it's:
THEY'RE LIKING IT WRONG!

So yeah, I do find that sad.
I found it sad when I was your age, and I'm sure I'll find it sad when I'm 50+

With regards to your comment about Westerns, however...
I submit the following Youtube Criticism.
Spoilers for Logan:
pT75YHqlD9k

ProactiveMan
06-25-2017, 11:33 PM
I think the shared universe concept is a good fit for comic book movies. The execution may not always work 100%, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. It’s all about intent at the end of the day, and if they’re making movies in a shared universe because it adds something to the audience’s enjoyment of the pictures then good work, have at it. If they’re doing it because the head of production overheard somebody talking about shared universes one evening at the racket club, and they want a piece of that sweet MCU pie, then they are taking their audience for granted and they’ll probably stuff it up. The good thing is that the people who are doing it right will make money and keep doing it, and the ones who are screwing up will go broke and do something else.

I’m a movie fan; I don’t want to see cinema turn into television, but I don’t think that is going to happen. People are still making loads of neat, self-contained movies, they’re just not making them about Batman at the moment.

Spike Spiegel
06-28-2017, 11:31 AM
Not all cinematic universes are created equal. It's a little difficult to reconcile the greatness of Wonder Woman with the fact that it's a DCEU film.

It's not so bad to connect things, but forcing those connections makes it feel less organic in terms of storytelling.

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-28-2017, 12:02 PM
Not all cinematic universes are created equal. It's a little difficult to reconcile the greatness of Wonder Woman with the fact that it's a DCEU film.

It's not so bad to connect things, but forcing those connections makes it feel less organic in terms of storytelling.

Wonder woman is the perfect object lesson in how you connect things; the only reference int the entire movie to the connection is Bruce Wayne's e-mail. The rest of it is Wonder Woman's story, without other heroes popping up.

ToTheNines
06-28-2017, 12:04 PM
That was lame as hell. I'm glad the flashback was all her, but the bookend scenes should have done more tie in work.

chrisdude
06-28-2017, 12:13 PM
These characters should be able to carry their own films. We don't need kids in the future looking back, wondering why we got a bunch of movies that can't be fully appreciated on their own.

ToTheNines
06-28-2017, 12:19 PM
These characters should be able to carry their own films. We don't need kids in the future looking back, wondering why we got a bunch of movies that can't be fully appreciated on their own.

Many people would tell you that the greatest Batman story ever was Miller's TDKR. It heavily features Superman and other Leaguers. Don't recall anyone complaining about that.

plastroncafe
06-28-2017, 12:26 PM
Future kids will then know what it's like to get in on a comic book franchise in the middle of a run.

Why would we want to deny them that?

Panda_Kahn_fan
06-28-2017, 12:28 PM
That was lame as hell. I'm glad the flashback was all her, but the bookend scenes should have done more tie in work.

I guess this is where I disagree with everyone, I perfer when I go to see a movie about a character, it be about that character and their supporting cast. You don't need aquaman popping in to bring back a Kryptonite spear, or cyborg showing up in a TV report, or the flash just popping up, saying something cryptic, and running away. Smallville's first episode did it perfectly, when Lex's dad was reading a newspaper with the headline 'queen industries CEO missing', or Clark looking at an internet headline about a guy running at super speed.

Spike Spiegel
06-28-2017, 12:31 PM
From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Marvel_Cinematic_Universe_films)

The films have been in production since 2007, and in that time Marvel Studios has produced 15 films, with 11 more in various stages of production. The series has collectively grossed over $11.7 billion at the global box office, making it the highest-grossing film franchise of all-time.

Will kids in the future even have the attention span to sit through 26 movies?

ToTheNines
06-28-2017, 01:30 PM
I guess this is where I disagree with everyone, I perfer when I go to see a movie about a character, it be about that character and their supporting cast. You don't need aquaman popping in to bring back a Kryptonite spear, or cyborg showing up in a TV report, or the flash just popping up, saying something cryptic, and running away. Smallville's first episode did it perfectly, when Lex's dad was reading a newspaper with the headline 'queen industries CEO missing', or Clark looking at an internet headline about a guy running at super speed.

Why can't those other heroes act as supporting characters?

ProphetofGanja
06-28-2017, 01:59 PM
Why can't those other heroes act as supporting characters?

Yeah, if these superheroes are meant to be peers, I like to see them acting as such.

I think it all comes down to balance. Of course when you read a comic about Spider-Man you want it to mainly feature Spider-Man (or whoever the star is), but that doesn't mean other characters can't pop in to help out or offer information or even just say hello. One of my favorite books as a kid was a collection of Spider-Man's greatest team-ups over the years, featuring Beast, Dr. Strange, the Fantastic Four, and others

sdp
06-28-2017, 02:08 PM
It's easier than ever to watch old movies now thanks to the internet though. It's also the reason as to why Avengers 4 and 5 are going to act as a "reboot".

I think the most logical thing and what they're going to do is have the movies be less linked, at least when it comes to consequences, and not many more "building up" for big events. Treat Marvel like James Bond, no one is required to watch all of the movies but you know who James Bond is, same with Marevel heroes, no one needs to see the first ____ film to know who _____ is. Well if they're big enough names at least. This also means that when they get a new actor they don't have to, they can just keep that franchise in hiatus for a few years and bring it back with a new actor.


Really, it's what Sony should've done with Spider-Man, just get a new actor and don't reboot it, people know who the character is, tell new stories even if it's an entirely different cast. All superhero movies need to go the James Bond route.

LeotheLateBloomer
06-28-2017, 02:30 PM
Honestly, I have to agree. While it's cool to see your favorite heroes (or villains) team up, it's getting really tiresome. Crossovers in general become less exciting and less unique, the more it happens.

ToTheNines
06-28-2017, 02:45 PM
I don't even consider it a crossover when it's Marvel/Marvel or DC/DC. Those characters have inhabited the same worlds ever since I was a kid, and way before that.

I hope we still get excellent standalone movies (most recently Guardians 2 and Doctor Strange minus the Thor scene), but I never want to go back to the pre-shared universe days. For superheroes, that is.

chrisdude
06-28-2017, 03:02 PM
Yeah, if these superheroes are meant to be peers, I like to see them acting as such.

I think it all comes down to balance. Of course when you read a comic about Spider-Man you want it to mainly feature Spider-Man (or whoever the star is), but that doesn't mean other characters can't pop in to help out or offer information or even just say hello. One of my favorite books as a kid was a collection of Spider-Man's greatest team-ups over the years, featuring Beast, Dr. Strange, the Fantastic Four, and othersThis new Spider-Man movie features Iron Man. I can barely wrap my head around that. When I was watching Spider-Man movies, I couldn't have told you Iron Man's identity. Now he will be woven into the story of the Spider-Man young kids will grow up with. It may not mean anything if the kid is 6. For people who read comics, it's natural. But that's not most people. But maybe it's a shift. Maybe this will continue to be the norm.

Many people would tell you that the greatest Batman story ever was Miller's TDKR. It heavily features Superman and other Leaguers. Don't recall anyone complaining about that.Fair point.

However, personally, I gave up trying to read All-Star Superman. As I recall, the first half was a parade of names that meant nothing to me.

CyberCubed
06-28-2017, 03:33 PM
I vaguely knew who the Avengers were as a kid, even if I never watched any of their cartoons or read the comics.

Then again I grew up in the 80's and 90's, so I had no idea who they were besides whenever they guest starred in Spiderman or X-men cartoons.

Splinter the boss
06-28-2017, 03:56 PM
Iron Man being in Spider-Man is ok if it is for one time, one movie, and done properly. I'm glad they're bringing a little change. But not everyone likes change, some are static, they want the same thing over and over.