Doctor Strange 2 - Page 5

*Autbot_Benz* · 04-28-2022, 06:34 PM

15 second trailer shows Prof X in his animated series yellow hover chair and Wanda fighting Captain Carter

*Coola Yagami* · 04-28-2022, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leo656

Not related to this new movie, but it showed up in my News feed, and... yikes.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/doctor-st...073347020.html

No Leo. It's OK. They're leftists. It's OK when THEY do that. They're the good guys, remember?

It's sex with a teen when it's a leftist, it's raping a minor when it's anyone non-leftist.

*Andrew NDB* · 04-29-2022, 09:54 AM

Apparently Disney is refusing to cut 12 seconds in the movie for Saudi Arabia where America Chavez talks about her 2 moms.

Super vital to the movie, I'm sure.

~~AquaParade~~ · 04-29-2022, 09:56 AM

That’s a good thing. If I have to choose whether something is preached too heavily or something harmless is being censored, I’ll choose the former.

I don’t need to be told lesbians are okay, but over there they do, apparently. Lesser of two evils imo.

~~Leo656~~ · 04-29-2022, 09:58 AM

I mentioned that in the Gay TMNT thread.

On the one hand, I am against any and all censorship as a rule.

On the other hand, this is a case of Disney creating a problem for themselves by choosing to die on these hills. Don't put it in there, you don't have to cut it later. Simple.

...Unless they LIKE the attention and the flag-waving and "Look! We're taking a stand against injustice!" virtue-signaling stuff. But they'd never do that, surely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I don’t need to be told lesbians are okay, but over there they do, apparently.

They sure do have weird rules over there.

Lesbians = Bad.

Polygamy, beating women, and having sex with little girls = Good.

I assume if there were a scene in the movie of someone taking a child bride there'd be no discussion at all of cutting it for being offensive. You can't make this stuff up.

~~AquaParade~~ · 04-29-2022, 10:06 AM

Exactly.

And while I don’t like being preached to in my movies, it actually has me considering the larger world impact of “virtue-signaling”.

If people over there can’t see event films like this, because of a measly same-sex kiss, then idk, maybe it’ll open some eyes or get people thinking, or have an impact on their economy to the point they give in eventually.

These are international products, and maybe some people actually do need some virtue signaling. I’m not saying it’s ideal, but worth considering.

~~Leo656~~ · 04-29-2022, 10:17 AM

The reason I say "Maybe they shouldn't bother putting stuff like that in there in the first place, then" is because by and large, the cultural consensus on movies nowadays - especially stuff like Comic Book Movies - is that if you're not trying to maximize eyeballs (and dollars), then your approach is inherently Wrong.

For example - and this is an entirely different thing, I'm just using it to make a broader point - look at all the stuff Snyder put in his DC movies that was inherently divisive on purpose, which by natural was limiting the amount of money they would ever conceivably make. Nothing that would get them banned in This or That country, but things that he knew well in advance would piss people off. It was a given that children and women, two of the most lucrative "crossover" demographics, were not going to turn up or pay money for his movies. In turn, most people say, "It's stupid he even put This or That in his movies if he knew it would piss people off. His job was to make movies that would make billions of dollars and appeal to all age groups and demographics, and he did the opposite on purpose. What a moron he is."

Well, even though it's different, it kind of isn't, if Disney decides to put stuff in their super-hero movies that they KNOW in advance is going to cause problems in China or the Middle East, and potentially lose them some money. "Well, we feel it's important to our version of the story." Okay, great, but how come that excuse only works SOME of the time, and otherwise you're not doing your job if you're not trying to play it safe?

At the end of the day, what's most important to me is creators getting to tell stories the way they want to. But at the same time, it is admittedly kind of silly to go out of your way to create a ceiling or build a fence around your product.

The reason this one instance seems a bit disingenuous to me is the timing of it all. Disney's embroiled in a big row about LGBTQ rights and representation, and now they get to say "Look! We take a big stand!" after they were very recently accused of punting the football. Just seems... suspicious.

~~AquaParade~~ · 04-29-2022, 10:32 AM

I don’t see the similarities between this and the Snyder situation, personally, but I may agree with the rest.

I mean, frankly, Disney is pretty overboard with this stuff lately. I sort of give them credit for all the crap Brie Larson said, and anything happening within their franchises, so yeah, it’s gotten a wee-bit old.

I’m just trying to consider that maybe this isn’t so much about preaching to us. I mean, when you have a product this in-demand, you can actually maybe help push some change where it is needed, with the power of that product. Some good could potentially come of it. And in terms of superheroes movies, there is something romantic about that.

People just need to know their place over here. Again, Brie Larson….shut up - you are not the one to be preaching and you have no clue what you’re talking about. Context matters.

~~Leo656~~ · 04-29-2022, 10:36 AM

The admittedly-broad point was, the general thinking of most people with regard to blockbuster movies is, "If you put things in there that you know will upset people and cost you money, then you're stupid."

Because the point of blockbusters is maximum penetration and profit. Therefore, why be divisive on purpose? Why include content you KNOW you'll have to cut or apologize for later? It's quite literally creating problems for yourself, and needlessly.

That was the point I was making. While also noting, I don't necessarily agree with that point. I just recognize it's how most people feel.

In the two otherwise-unrelated examples, what was consistent is that a filmmaker made a bold choice that they knew would limit their audience (and profit), and that it begs the question of "Why would you even?"

Hope that clarifies.

~~AquaParade~~ · 04-29-2022, 11:12 AM

I hear you. Makes sense. It's just that the driving force behind each decision is so different. One is creatively-fueled and one is, well, virtue-signaling.

Makes sense though.

*Andrew NDB* · 04-29-2022, 11:27 AM

Well, here's the thing. I feel like in most movies, generally speaking, you might see a line in a movie such as "My parents are waiting for me, I gotta get home!" And you'd never see the parents in the movie, they wouldn't impact the story, nothing. It's just a throwaway line. You could even just make the line "I gotta get home!" and the parents could be implied. But now, with this same movie, that throwaway line is becoming more and more, "My dads are waiting for me, I gotta get back to them!" or something such.

And they aren't shrugging and going, "Eh, it just popped out as I was writing it. It's no big deal and whatever." The contrary. It is highly deliberate. It's super important to them and absolutely vital.

*Coola Yagami* · 04-29-2022, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Well, here's the thing. I feel like in most movies, generally speaking, you might see a line in a movie such as "My parents are waiting for me, I gotta get home!" And you'd never see the parents in the movie, they wouldn't impact the story, nothing. It's just a throwaway line. You could even just make the line "I gotta get home!" and the parents could be implied. But now, with this same movie, that throwaway line is becoming more and more, "My dads are waiting for me, I gotta get back to themn!" or something such.

And they aren't shrugging and going, "Eh, it just popped out as I was writing it. It's no big deal and whatever." The contrary. It is highly deliberate. It's super important to them and absolutely vital.

Yeah these idiots would rather waste time and money all for the sake of 'the message'.

The real problem is the over reliance on China. I don't care if America Chavez has 10 dads. If you're gonna throw that line in there tell China to lick your balls and swallow your shaft and keep the line in there internationally.

~~AquaParade~~ · 04-29-2022, 12:01 PM

Worst thing about pandering to China - besides the blatant racism of doing things like shrinking John Boyega on a Chinese version of an American poster - is the lack of demons, devils and hell in our movies. Super taboo in China, but I need my fix of demonic horror. I want to see Mephisto in a Marvel movie, for instance. I want to see Batman take on the devil - yes, the devil. I like weird ****.

~~Leo656~~ · 04-29-2022, 12:32 PM

I can't even wrap my head around why stuff like that is so taboo over there, or anywhere. It's like saying you can't depict a unicorn. This Stuff Is All Fake, people. It's just movies and make-believe.

Religious beliefs? Also fake. Grow the f*ck up, people. Your god of choice isn't going to be offended if you put a demon or something in a movie because - Spoiler Alert! - your "god of choice" isn't real, either. None of them are.

Not wanting Gay Stuff in places where they still arrest and/or kill people for that stuff... it's backwards, but at least it makes sense in a way. It's tangible. Banning depictions of ghosts and demons and other blatantly not-real stuff is stupid. What's even the point of fiction at all, by that point?

~~AquaParade~~ · 04-29-2022, 12:42 PM

True. It reminds me of the recent craziness around voice actors needing to be the same color/gender/whatever as the characters they are all voicing. At some point, what are we even doing in both these scenarios?

~~Leo656~~ · 04-29-2022, 12:54 PM

Indeed.

My favorite part of the whole "Having white people voice black characters steals opportunities from black voice actors" debate is the fact that every single black cartoon character is voiced by Kevin Michael Richardson. So if anyone is "stealing opportunities" from other black voice actors it's That Guy.

*ZariusTwo* · 05-01-2022, 10:46 AM

Spoilers are making the rounds with footage of

Spoiler:

superstaff · 05-01-2022, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Spoilers are making the rounds with footage of

Spoiler:

Is it a new version of [spoiler] or an actor from one of the previous versions reprising the role?

*Autbot_Benz* · 05-01-2022, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superstaff

Is it a new version of [spoiler] or an actor from one of the previous versions reprising the role?

Spoiler:

*ZariusTwo* · 05-01-2022, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

Spoiler:

04-28-2022, 06:34 PM	#81
Autbot_Benz Hellblazer Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Ventura California Posts: 9,193	15 second trailer shows Prof X in his animated series yellow hover chair and Wanda fighting Captain Carter __________________ I respect what FW cartoon did for the turtles franchise but it is the most overrated and hard to watch of the 3 turtles cartoons.

04-29-2022, 09:54 AM	#83
Andrew NDB Weed Whacker Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Auburn, WA Posts: 34,573	Apparently Disney is refusing to cut 12 seconds in the movie for Saudi Arabia where America Chavez talks about her 2 moms. Super vital to the movie, I'm sure. __________________ [ ODYSSEY \| ORIGIN \| THE IMAGE/VOL. 3 CONCLUSION \| THE SHELLSHOCKED PODCAST \| ON FACEBOOK ]

04-29-2022, 11:27 AM	#91
Andrew NDB Weed Whacker Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Auburn, WA Posts: 34,573	Well, here's the thing. I feel like in most movies, generally speaking, you might see a line in a movie such as "My parents are waiting for me, I gotta get home!" And you'd never see the parents in the movie, they wouldn't impact the story, nothing. It's just a throwaway line. You could even just make the line "I gotta get home!" and the parents could be implied. But now, with this same movie, that throwaway line is becoming more and more, "My dads are waiting for me, I gotta get back to them!" or something such. And they aren't shrugging and going, "Eh, it just popped out as I was writing it. It's no big deal and whatever." The contrary. It is highly deliberate. It's super important to them and absolutely vital. __________________ [ ODYSSEY \| ORIGIN \| THE IMAGE/VOL. 3 CONCLUSION \| THE SHELLSHOCKED PODCAST \| ON FACEBOOK ] Last edited by Andrew NDB; 04-29-2022 at 12:50 PM.

05-01-2022, 10:46 AM	#97
ZariusTwo Overlord Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Britain, DINO THUNDER...POWER UP! Posts: 22,501	Spoilers are making the rounds with footage of Spoiler: Reed Richards and Black Bolt __________________ Spider-Man: The Rescue Spider-Man: The Galloping Cat Spider-Man: Scarlet Mirror Doctor Who: Child of the Daleks

04-29-2022, 09:56 AM	#84
~~AquaParade~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,450	That’s a good thing. If I have to choose whether something is preached too heavily or something harmless is being censored, I’ll choose the former. I don’t need to be told lesbians are okay, but over there they do, apparently. Lesser of two evils imo.

04-29-2022, 10:06 AM	#86
~~AquaParade~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,450	Exactly. And while I don’t like being preached to in my movies, it actually has me considering the larger world impact of “virtue-signaling”. If people over there can’t see event films like this, because of a measly same-sex kiss, then idk, maybe it’ll open some eyes or get people thinking, or have an impact on their economy to the point they give in eventually. These are international products, and maybe some people actually do need some virtue signaling. I’m not saying it’s ideal, but worth considering.

04-29-2022, 10:17 AM	#87
~~Leo656~~ Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: nWo Country Posts: 27,703	The reason I say "Maybe they shouldn't bother putting stuff like that in there in the first place, then" is because by and large, the cultural consensus on movies nowadays - especially stuff like Comic Book Movies - is that if you're not trying to maximize eyeballs (and dollars), then your approach is inherently Wrong. For example - and this is an entirely different thing, I'm just using it to make a broader point - look at all the stuff Snyder put in his DC movies that was inherently divisive on purpose, which by natural was limiting the amount of money they would ever conceivably make. Nothing that would get them banned in This or That country, but things that he knew well in advance would piss people off. It was a given that children and women, two of the most lucrative "crossover" demographics, were not going to turn up or pay money for his movies. In turn, most people say, "It's stupid he even put This or That in his movies if he knew it would piss people off. His job was to make movies that would make billions of dollars and appeal to all age groups and demographics, and he did the opposite on purpose. What a moron he is." Well, even though it's different, it kind of isn't, if Disney decides to put stuff in their super-hero movies that they KNOW in advance is going to cause problems in China or the Middle East, and potentially lose them some money. "Well, we feel it's important to our version of the story." Okay, great, but how come that excuse only works SOME of the time, and otherwise you're not doing your job if you're not trying to play it safe? At the end of the day, what's most important to me is creators getting to tell stories the way they want to. But at the same time, it is admittedly kind of silly to go out of your way to create a ceiling or build a fence around your product. The reason this one instance seems a bit disingenuous to me is the timing of it all. Disney's embroiled in a big row about LGBTQ rights and representation, and now they get to say "Look! We take a big stand!" after they were very recently accused of punting the football. Just seems... suspicious.

04-29-2022, 10:32 AM	#88
~~AquaParade~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,450	I don’t see the similarities between this and the Snyder situation, personally, but I may agree with the rest. I mean, frankly, Disney is pretty overboard with this stuff lately. I sort of give them credit for all the crap Brie Larson said, and anything happening within their franchises, so yeah, it’s gotten a wee-bit old. I’m just trying to consider that maybe this isn’t so much about preaching to us. I mean, when you have a product this in-demand, you can actually maybe help push some change where it is needed, with the power of that product. Some good could potentially come of it. And in terms of superheroes movies, there is something romantic about that. People just need to know their place over here. Again, Brie Larson….shut up - you are not the one to be preaching and you have no clue what you’re talking about. Context matters.

04-29-2022, 10:36 AM	#89
~~Leo656~~ Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: nWo Country Posts: 27,703	The admittedly-broad point was, the general thinking of most people with regard to blockbuster movies is, "If you put things in there that you know will upset people and cost you money, then you're stupid." Because the point of blockbusters is maximum penetration and profit. Therefore, why be divisive on purpose? Why include content you KNOW you'll have to cut or apologize for later? It's quite literally creating problems for yourself, and needlessly. That was the point I was making. While also noting, I don't necessarily agree with that point. I just recognize it's how most people feel. In the two otherwise-unrelated examples, what was consistent is that a filmmaker made a bold choice that they knew would limit their audience (and profit), and that it begs the question of "Why would you even?" Hope that clarifies.

04-29-2022, 11:12 AM	#90
~~AquaParade~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,450	I hear you. Makes sense. It's just that the driving force behind each decision is so different. One is creatively-fueled and one is, well, virtue-signaling. Makes sense though.

04-29-2022, 12:01 PM	#93
~~AquaParade~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,450	Worst thing about pandering to China - besides the blatant racism of doing things like shrinking John Boyega on a Chinese version of an American poster - is the lack of demons, devils and hell in our movies. Super taboo in China, but I need my fix of demonic horror. I want to see Mephisto in a Marvel movie, for instance. I want to see Batman take on the devil - yes, the devil. I like weird ****.

04-29-2022, 12:32 PM	#94
~~Leo656~~ Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: nWo Country Posts: 27,703	I can't even wrap my head around why stuff like that is so taboo over there, or anywhere. It's like saying you can't depict a unicorn. This Stuff Is All Fake, people. It's just movies and make-believe. Religious beliefs? Also fake. Grow the f*ck up, people. Your god of choice isn't going to be offended if you put a demon or something in a movie because - Spoiler Alert! - your "god of choice" isn't real, either. None of them are. Not wanting Gay Stuff in places where they still arrest and/or kill people for that stuff... it's backwards, but at least it makes sense in a way. It's tangible. Banning depictions of ghosts and demons and other blatantly not-real stuff is stupid. What's even the point of fiction at all, by that point?

04-29-2022, 12:42 PM	#95
~~AquaParade~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,450	True. It reminds me of the recent craziness around voice actors needing to be the same color/gender/whatever as the characters they are all voicing. At some point, what are we even doing in both these scenarios?

04-29-2022, 12:54 PM	#96
~~Leo656~~ Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: nWo Country Posts: 27,703	Indeed. My favorite part of the whole "Having white people voice black characters steals opportunities from black voice actors" debate is the fact that every single black cartoon character is voiced by Kevin Michael Richardson. So if anyone is "stealing opportunities" from other black voice actors it's That Guy.