Movie Moan - Marveling At The Future (in INTERUPTO-VISION)
Tue, October 16, 2012 Welcome to my new favorite episode.
Nothing in geek culture right now is as much fun as discussing Marvel movies so this week Movie Moan is proud to present an in-depth two hour plus discussion on the future of the entire Marvel film canon (both those properties under Disney's belt and those still out of their grasp), and equally proud to discuss it with special guests Justin Korthof and Randall Maynard.
But we are supremely honoured to present our first show in INTERUPTO-VISION.
In the same way that the film industry has hooked onto techniques to enhance the theatre going experience like 3D and IMAX, it's about time the podcasting industry did the same. Especially since ours is one of the few to give you good folks a video option.
So we are proud to present tonight's show, our longest ever to my recollection, in the startling new technology of INTERUPTO-VISION. INTERUPTO-VISION is the process by which good manners and respect for Phil's job as moderator completely go out the window for all other members of the podcast and everyone just starts mouthing off like crazy to prove their points until it all becomes noise that Phil can't even edit out.
What's that?..............The show has always been like that? Point taken.
7:20 mins - Should there be a completely unified Marvel film universe with one studio in control of every character?
14:30 mins - How to rebirth 'The Fantastic Four'.
22:00 mins - 'X-Men: Days Of Future Past' and 'The Wolverine'.
48:30 mins - 'The Avengers Part II' and the Thanos conundrum.
62:25 mins - 'Guardians Of The Galaxy' needs Beta Ray Bill.
68:20 mins - 'Namor: The Sub Mariner' (the one nobody talks about).
75:50 mins - 'Thor: The Dark World' and 'Captain America: The Winter Solider'
84:10 mins - 'Iron Man 3' (this is where the podcast starts getting ugly).
95:00 mins - 'The Spectacular Spider-man' (nope, things don't get any rosier here).
112:10 mins - Marvel on television (SHIELD, Hulk, and Daredevil).
Download the audio only MP3 version right here:
Reader Comments (5)
On the matter of "I'm always angry"
Am I to assume that Jamie missed the entire point of Loki's magic staff on the Helicarrier(and how it acted as an inhibitor to the built in apprehension and animosity the characters already had for one another, up and to the point of physical conflict)? So as to the idea that Banner has overcome his inability to control his inner rage monster by way of moderation still works in the context of everything being equal and no magic hate inducing staff being present actually makes perfect sense.
Long story short, the magic staff messed with Banner's ability to not only control when he changes, but whom he changes into. The same magic staff that was continuously framed in the scene and had been shown to do other such magic tricks different occasions.
It's always a pleasure listening to the know it all go on, but this time it's just too obvious not to be pointed out.
The only place to see these characters fully realized with proper characterization and prowess is in the video game cut scenes Period. From Arkham City to Ultimate alliance to DC Online to War for Cybertron. It's the only place to see these character in motion acting and kicking ass as they should.
Also Tim Roth did more for Caps bad ass factor than these new films ever will.
The Amazing Spider-man is better than the Raimi Spider-man movies! Period! :)
Entertaining as always gents and Phil the highest tip of the hat to you for another stellar job of editing and treasure hunting those video clips.
I'm most excited for the next Spidey movie myself - regardless of the problems the first one had, it left the story at an excellent spot to launch into something kickass.
I'm really curious to see how the next round of Marvel standalone movies do in the wake of The Avengers. My feeling is that people will find them all less satisfying.
On Iron man:
Tony stopped being a warmonger/war lord and decided to take responsibility and help people in the first film. That doesn't mean he stopped being an arrogant dick of a hero. Many Greek characters are heroes(see Achilles) but how many are selfless heroes(see Hector). Tony revealing his identity was a play straight out of the Achilles book of “how to score chicks and glory 101.” There's a difference between being selfless and being self centered. Meeting someone like Rogers would be good time to examine the latter. Moreover, by the end of IM1, no one saw Tony sacrificing his life to save the world. He'd rather just save the world by say, "cutting the wire." Again that changed. Perhaps if one wasn't so against the film/fans they'd see it.
On Spiderman:
As for Spiderman, it's tough to see you guys being objective given your violent contempt for the reboot every single step of the way, as well as your supplication of Raimi's very much flawed series. I'll just say this. Peter Parker giving the cold shoulder to Gwen whilst she went though all that crap alone for months after her fathers death wasn't very hero like, Parker is perhaps the last person her father ever saw and fought beside and Pete is perhaps uniquely qualified to console the girl he never actually dumped. But the real magic here, AND I WANT PHILL TO HEAR/READ THIS, When they kill Gwen Stacey(and they will, they’re not going to go and cast MJ for shits and giggles), and Peter Parker realizes it's because he literally didn't follow her fathers dying wish, what will we have on our hands but an exquisite SPIDERMAN moment of character flaw driven story telling.(drop mic)
It took Batman an entire trilogy to complete his so called character arc(Nolans movies still aren't about batman, but rather a less suave more shouty Jame Bond), Peter Parker's arc should be about him becoming the man Ben was. It would be the responsible thing to leave Gwen(and any girl for that matter) alone, but a young Spiderman is just that, a young Spiderman.
On Ben's Death:
And you've gotta be kidding me with the assertion that Pete isn't responsible for Ben's death. Not only was Ben even out there because Pete got angry, yelled and stormed off(Ben would be on the couch watching the Mets game with the remote in hand, had he not chased after the immature kid whom he just belittled). But, AND PHILL NEEDS TO HEAR/READ THIS ONE TOO, if Pete did the right thing and stopped the criminal (act) instead of literally giving him the high five(again out of anger towards someone that did him wrong), then perhaps Ben would still be alive. If Pete acted like a man, perhaps Ben wouldn't have had to. Unlike Pete at that point in time, Ben is a man of character to a fault. If Pete had done it like he should have, the death count would be minus one old man at that point.
I felt the movie could have been better, but...
For someone(Jaime) who belittle “fan boys” so vehemently, you sure can come off as one when you want to.
Here's the problem with Marvel Studios' solo films... WHO CARES? With the exception of Iron Man 1, they've proven that the solo movies aren't worth investing in its own. Can't really blame them since it paid off with The Avengers (a movie I thoroughly enjoyed in theaters but beginning to despise since the awe factor died off already and major problems with the story, plot have come to light once rewatching becomes at hand) but it's at the cost for these essentially "side projects" that Marvel has designated them to.
You get the fanboys splooging over the title of "Winter Soldier" added on to the sequel but the truth is nobody gives a rats ass about Bucky Barnes coming back due to nobody giving a damn when he died. It was literally a throwaway moment in TFA and now they want the audience to care about the return of a character who had no development in the first? Even the supposed friendship between Steve Rogers and Bucky Barnes was barely mentioned over the course of 2 hours.
What about Thor? Any suspense or momentum for the sequel was completely killed because of The Avengers. Loki's fate was answered a just a year after the film and Jane Foster's reunion with Thor is sidetracked with the typical Joss Whedon bullshit Buffy excuse of "We're keeping her in a safe location".
I won't even attempt to get into Iron Man 3 since that joke of a trailer premiered and after the clutterfest called Iron Man 2', why the fuck is it important to invest in Tony Stark all of a sudden when he goes down a darker path?
Even though I was disappointed with TASM, I'm optimistic about where the sequel can go provided they don't fuck up Norman Osborn's entry and purpose for being in the story. Gwen Stacy MUST die in the next one. Not just because it happened in the comics but it's an essential part of the maturation of Peter Parker's character. They have at least 4-5 films they can justifiably build off her death and tie each stage of development with an appropriate adversary.
The only franchise that shows promise of progress is the Matthew Vaughn X-Men series that should, if done right, push the story along with Charles and Erik at the core developing their ideas and teams.