u/Gui_Franco

Based on a take I see relatively recently. I think a good chunk (not to say most) of the people in the general audience has only been exposed to wolverine through Hugh Jackman. Sure there's animation but ultimately live action movies, specially how many he's been in, are the way most casual viewers get to know him. And because of that there's a big wave of "only Hugh Jackman can play wolverine" going around. I don't agree for many reasons, one of them being the idea that only one actor can play a character like it's said about RDJ or Chris Evans or whoever as their specific character is kind of stupid, but also because while his performance is very good, he never really felt like the wolverine I read in the books or see in the cartoons to me, doesn't act the same, doesn't really look the same. I like his performance, he never gave a bad performance as wolverine, but I'm ready to see a new one in the MCU

Obviously change will always make people upset (specially when marvel just refuses to remove the bandaid and move on and delays a possible recast with more and more "one final goodbye" from Hugh as the character) but talks about who could be cast does come up and the height is always mentioned

For those not in the know Wolverine is like 5'3" in the comics. I think it's unreasonable to think the next actor MUST be that size because it's a very restrictive pool to chose from, but he SHOULD be shorter than the other male actors ( and most female actors) on screen. Most comic fans have this opinion. Some people in the general audiences too or are indifferent to it. I actually have a friend who didn't know wolverine was supposed to be short and when I told her about it she just kinda went "eh whatever, I like Hugh Jackman in the role better" and based on that and some other responses online I've seen from people who don't read comics and don't really dip their toes into non live action movie adaptations I think that's kind of what most people think

I don't think it's indifferent. I think it's extremely important for Wolverine to be short and am surprised that wasn't considered for the first time he was in the movies

"Oh but he was short in Deadpool and wolverine and looked stupid", what, the scene where they cast an actor EVEN SHORTER than what comic wolverine is, filmed it from a high angle compared to the average sized Ryan Reynolds to make him look even shorter and CGI'd Hugh Jackman's face to make it look uncanny and disproportional and played it for laughs? That single scene convinced you Wolverine being short is stupid?

It's even weirder when people ARE ok with him being recast but suggest people like Henry Cavill or other actos that are the same size or even bigger

I've seen plenty of people say "the height isn't important, it's more important that he looks cool"

And my question is, do people know what the fuck a wolverine is???

Apparently most people think it's just a made up name and not a real animal the character is based on

If you don't know, a wolverine is a small animal not too different from a badger that is known for being a f ball of fur and rage unafraid of throwing itself against much larger animals and even if not always victorious always giving a good fight. Does this description sound familiar? Yeah, it's fucking Logan.

Logan isn't supposed to be someone who is cool on a first glance, he's kind of pathetic in a way, he's a short angry manlet who smells like a wet dog, has anger issues, simps for another man's wife and needs to be on top of a chair to look the dude he's about to fight in the eye. But then the claws pop out and he stabs the Hulk in the head

That's wolverine. Wolverine is made cool by (despite us inside knowing he has a skeleton of the toughest metal on earth, knives in his knuckles and a killer animal instinct) the visual idea of being an underdog, almost all of his fights have a David Vs Goliath something something going around (although him smoking cigars, being a tough guy with a soft spot for animals and children and occasionally wearing tank tops and cowboys hats does almost compensate for the fact that he's at crotch level to his buddy Colossus).

He's not named Edward Scissor Hands or the fucking Wolf or something. He's the wolverine. "Oh but most people don't know what a wolverine is", most people don't know something until they learn it, not doing something in a movie because people don't know a fact is almost always stupid and people also can't learn if they like something or not if they haven't seen it

His most famous combo move, hell the most famous combo move on Marvel is the one where his tall friend colossus picks him up like it's nothing and throws him against someone. That looks infinitely cooler/funnier if the one being thrown is a smaller guy just fucking up the poor bastard whose face he just hit

His nemesis Sabertooth is like 3 times his size, being extremely tall even compared to normal people with a sadisctic and cruel personality. The contrast between the two doesn't work at all if they're the same height or if god forbid Sabertooth, named after the big ass pre historic predator, is shorter than the guy named after the angry furball on cocaine.

You wouldn't make a Spider-Man movie where he neither has a webshooter or organic webs, you wouldn't make a batman movie where he doesn't have his stupid little ears and long black cape

So yes, I think Wolverine's height is important, I hope Hugh Jackman is recast after Secret Wars and eventually we get a short actor playing wolverine (also hopefully we don't get the Scott, Jean, Logan love triangle)

I've seen this discussion multiple times. People asking how in a future MCU adaptation magneto can be a holocaust survivor and not already be too old (90-100) or even dead, since Ian mckellen was in his 60s in the fox movies and kind of already pushing how old magneto is presented as compared to the comics

I've seen multiple people suggest to ignore the Holocaust connections and make him tied to another atrocity or genocide.

First of all I find it kind of baffling how this even is a thought, "oh he would be too old if he was in the Holocaust, make it so he is a Ruanda survivor" or something else, like tragedies are just interchangeable and the character would be the same, specially when talking about real events that affected real people. Not to mention the change to his ethnicity. If magneto becomes a black man victim of Reagen America, or a survivor of another genocide makes his jewish ethnicity easier to ignore or even forces it to change. Magneto is THE jewish character in comics. They already reduced Moon Knight's religion to basically a blink and you'll miss it moment when his father being a rabi is part of his origin, Kitty Pryde wasn't jewish in the old x-men movies, Ben Grimm entered a sinagogue to try and rizz up a girl and specificly says he's not religious and Marvel already erased the romani background of scarlet witch, quicksiler and very possibly Doctor Doom. Him being a victim of the holocaust, having a consistent number tattooed on his arm across media, his beef with Red Skull and the fact that his turn into villainy and the danger of becoming the monster like the ones who tormented him being a possible comparison with zionist israel is something incredibly specific to him.

Second of all, this is not a problem. There is no need for a solution this convoluted. Make it so one of the members of his brotherhood has that power, or he has a machine that keeps him young or one of his secondary mutations is to age slower, it can even be just one line and never brought up again because I truly isn't that big of a deal

It has been done before

In X-Men evolution, magneto maintained himself in his physical prime / middle age with a machine

In the comics he has been turned into a baby (ok I don't want that to happen in the movies I'm just clarifying it is one thing they did once to tackle this issue) and like every other comic character ever, has died and come back to the point where the age his body is supposed to be doesn't matter anymore

Why are we acting like this is an actual problem and the solution people come up with is changing his backstory completely to another real life tragedy which sometimes leads to stupid debates about if one tragedy or genocide is as bad compared to the Holocaust

This is stupid

EDIT: thanks for the commenter who suggested the slow aging could be a result of the human experiments we know nazis and japanese did in their concentrantion camps

This is about the unconfirmed rumour that DC turned down a pitch for a Catwoman show and a poison ivy show. I've seen many people get very upset at this and more particularly that Jimmy Olsen has a show coming up

These things have nothing to do with one another. We know nothing about each of these projects. Gunn has made a shit ton of critically acclaimed media based on obscure characters and Jimmy Olsen isn't even that obscure, he's literally one of the main characters in the major superhero's supporting cast and I can see how Jimmy as a journalist in a super hero world could facilitate telling a lot of interesting stories, specially knowing Gorilla Grodd os involved somehow

Meanwhile while I would love more Catwoman and Poison Ivy stuff, we genuinely do not know what the pitches were. They could have been complete shit. They could have been bad ideas for stories that had nothing to do with their comics or were just bad. Imagine that god awful Catwoman movie was cancelled and the only news we had was that a Catwoman project was cancelled, the reaction would have been the same and yet we would be spared of one of the most hilariously bad movies in the genre

We are not in the rooms where these discussions happened, it was just a pitch that was rejected. It means literally nothing

in 1st Enoch, Uriel is apparently "over the world and Tartarus" whatever that means (by reading tartarus I assume this is a greek translation, was it originally sheol? Was he over the waiting room of the dead or some idea of hell starting to form in the jewish belief system?). However, his name meaning "God is my light" or "Fire of God" doesn't seem entirely related to it. Nor the fact that nowadays he seems associated with wisdom (I guess he is the one who reveals some stuff to Enoch but Gabriel is also a revealer of holy information in Daniel and doesn't have those ties"). How does this tie together, how did these ideas evolve and change?

Maybe this is already an old phenomenon but recently there's been discourse about 2 movies that I can't fucking stand that always goes back to how much money they make

Obviously the money a movie makes is important in a way, it can guarantee sequels or make actors or directors more known because it means a lot of people went to see it probably more than once

But recently I have seen plenty of discussions about subjective opinions on a movie being ended with "yeah but movie made X amount of money though so you're wrong" and I just don't get it

The two examples I have are polar opposites so I will start with the one who premiered first

Supergirl was a flop. That's a fact, it didn't make a lot of money, in terms of return it was worse than dogshit movies like Morbius. Personally? I like the movie, I think it's fine, solid 6.5-7 out of 10 and that seems to be the general consensus whenever I speak with someone about it irl or online, that it's very flawed but still fun and not bad. But whenever I express this opinion online I am bombarded with "stop coping lmao, it was a flop, it didn't make any money" and most times when I continued this discussion most people who said it eventually admitted them themselves thought the movie was like a 6 or a 7 or didn't respond with their actual opinions at all

The second movie I want to talk about is the odyssey. It is currently a mine field to discuss this movie online and express criticism without being confused for a racist because unfortunately they are a very loud minority in terms of people who have problems with casting decisions. My opinion. The movie is good, Nolan is obviously a good director, but as a fan of the original story i do think some of the changes to the plot and characters he made are less interesting and there's certain Nolan-isms the movie falls into. Basically very good movie, ok adaptation, in my opinion. But once again you can't say fucking anything negative about this movie without some asshole saying "lmao cry about it, it made a shit ton of money"

WHO GIVES A SHIT, GENUINELY WHO GIVES A SINGLE SHIT ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY IT MADE, WHY SHOULD I CARE. In what way is that a counter argument to me saying I'm kind of sad they cut the "Nobody" stuff out of the cyclops encounter or that I think it would have been cool if, since the movie talks so much and without any subtlety about how important the time and place of the story is, Nolan went the extra mile with the costuming and sets in the way Rober Eggers often does in his own period movies about mythology. Ok, the movie made money, that's understandable, nolan is a popular director, he makes good movies for general audiences, most people haven't read the odyssey to have some of the issues I have. What the fuck does that have to do with my opinion

It drives me up the walls, it seems nowadays people are incapable of giving their opinion on a movie without mentioning how much money it made or what other people thought of it, just fucking say if you liked it or didn't, the rest genuinely could not matter less to the discussion

"If movie good/bad then why no money/lots of money"

SHUT THE FUCK UP THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUALITY OF THE MOVIE, BAD MOVIES CAN MAKE MONEY AND GOOD MOVIES CAN BE FLOPS, SPECIALLY IF I SHARE THE SAME OVERALL OPINION ON THE MOVIE AS MOST PEOPLE AND AM JUST POINTING OUT A SPECIFIC THING I DON'T LIKE OR LIKE

How hard is it to just say you agree or don't agree with me on something and why and movie on? Actually engaging in critique of the art?

After recently seeing the odyssey and seeing people claim online they want Nolan to make a divine comedy movie, I've been thinking of other epic poems I'd like to see adapted

Bias as a Portuguese man makes me want the lusiads getting a big budget Portuguese movie or show but I more than anything I realised one of the most foundational books to modern Christianity interpretation of hell, the devil and even genesis to some extent has not yet been adapted

I am of course talking about Paradise Lost

For those unaware, paradise lost is 16th century epic poem by John Milton, retelling the story of the war in heaven and the fall of mankind in the garden from the devil's perspective. While other poems like Divine Comedy have been absolutely crucial to how people think of Hell and has received movie and game adaptations and seems way more present in general audiences minds, the book that pretty much defined how we think of Satan/Lucifer has not. Considering the devil is barely mentioned (and is almost never cohesive in his name, goals and story) in the bible and apocrypha and how the serpent in the garden of eden isn't even the devil in the bible, most things people associate with these characters and stories either come from this book or were cimented by it

It's also a very action heavy story with a pacing that works well on movie format with a complex sympathetic (depending on your reading i guess) but ultimately evil protagonist (the literal devil) and plenty cameos from angels and demons, in settings with very visual descriptions for a non visual medium and also cool ideas that are almost never adapted into anything, like satan having his own infernal trinity with his daughter Sin (that sprang from him mind after the first thought of rebellion) and son/grandson death (because the birth of sin led to the possibility of death to humanity) the latter two guardian the nine gates of hell.

A movie was apparently cast and planned but never got off the ground in the 2000s

I think one reason may be that the settings seem almost impossible to do completely in live action (the entire story taking place in heaven, hell, eden and the chaos of uncreated things) but in the world of galactic marvel movies that seems silly

It also certainly isn't because of religious concerns, John Milton was a Christian himself and wrote it under a Christian POV and we literally had a multiple season long popular show about a sympathetic Lucifer with evil angels so that's not it either

I would really love to see it adapted some day but it almost feels like an impossibility. My choice for director I think would be Del Toro for a movie like non one has ever seen before

I am a firm believer that Wonder Woman not being as iconic to general audiences as Batman and Superman is genuinely just a lack of adaptations and not anything inherit to her character. I remember when like 3 years ago everyone and their mom agreed Superman was boring as if it was a fact

And one of the reasons given is her villains. "If wonder woman is so great why can't I list some of her villains", because you're mot familiar with her character because they haven't made a cartoon about her and she only had two movies with one of them being dog shit, that's literally just it

I have never read a wonder woman comic before absolute wonder woman and I am just starting the George Perez era. But even before i touched any of those books I could tell you: Ares, Circe, Giganta, Cheetah, Dr Psycho.

I couldn't name you as many flash villains despite the long popular show he just had because I didn't watch the show. Besides Reverse Flash, Gorilla Grodd and Captain Cold i would have to search online to tell you more. Does this mean the flash is not iconic? Of course not, some people argue he should be the third member of the trinity instead of Wonder Woman

"Oh Iron Man is iconic? Name 5 Iron Man villains" most people probably wouldn't be able to do this because the movies only had 3 of his villains (in his own movies) and i doubt most people know the name of the dude who was the real mandarin in iron man 3.

I could do the same for Captain America. Or Wolverine, would wolverine dick riders who grew up watching all of the fox X-Men movies be able to name 5 iconic Wolverine villains? Or any at all besides Sabertooth (and even then I imagine most would assume he's his brother in all continuities)

People argue Hulk was a member of marvels trinity or that he still is and some people suggest he or Spider-Man should be on the mount Rushmore. Name me 5 hulk villains. Go and ask MCU fans to name 3 hulk villains. Most of them may not remember the Edward Norton movie or know Leader is a hulk villain because he was in captain America. So best case scenario you get Red Hulk and Abomination. I guarantee absolutely no one would mention the biggest evil in his life which i'd argue is his fucking dad

This means Jack. Shit.

The whole argument is extremely stupid. There's nothing inherit to Wonder Woman to justify her mythos not being as ingrained as Batman in audience's minds, it's literally just a lack of adaptations. People who watched JLU would probably be able to name 3 or 4 of the villains I did.

Edit: no, her origins and cast aren't the reason either. The warriors 3 and Lady Sif appeared in 3 Thor movies, go and ask your friend who watched and liked all thor movies what their deal is. Ask them who Donald blake is. Or what Captain America's job is in his civilian life. Batman was a world wide phenomenon after the animated series and the Tim Burton movies, ask anyone pre Nolan movies who Lucius Fox is

Look at me in the eye and tell me about Hulk's supporting cast.

Edit 2: maybe I misspoke but I don't think some of you are getting my argument. My argument is that, unlike a lot of people argue, there's no reason inherit to her character for her not being as popular as the other members of the trinity. Anyone who tells you that it's because her villains and origin are lamer is fucking lying. Really, is Circe or Ares any less interesting than Iron Monger or Whiplash or that dude who was the real mandarin in Iron Man 3? And I maintain her being iconic because despite this lack of adaptations in cartoons, movies and games she is still so recognisable and some things about her have escaped into the knowledge of general audiences despite all these massive handicaps. Green Arrow got god knows how many seasons in his show and he's still relatively unpopular and people don't know much about him, there's not artificial inflation of Wonder Woman's popularity. I am just arguing that the reason that she isn't as popular as the other 2 is literally just lack of exposure

A multiversal team of villains that joined together to kill other Earths in an attempt to stop incoming incursions. Composed of Thanos and Terrax from the main Tokkon Universe, the Maker from some version of the ultimate universe and the dark phoenix Jean grey from a universe where the phoenix consumed her and is the only survivor of an incursion

I have come across the name Satanael once or twice and I imagine it's a form of proto-Satan / Devil the same way Shamiaza and Azazel are in First Enoch with Azazel sometimes being the snake that tempted humanity, or Samael that was either the dark angel or the accuser in service of God

But whenever I search for Satanael I only find pages about games and other media where the figure is, stating that in judaico-christian mythology he was the leader of the watchers according to Second Enoch, but I never find any actual source, not even a wikipedia page. He is just a footnote on the Satan wikipedia page

Can someone tell me a little bit about him?

I am not opposed to Deadpool being in tokkon. I would prefer gwenpool for various reasons (one more female rep, is lesser known, fits more the anime aesthetic and does the 4th gimmick better than him in the comics) but Deadpool is very popular and has proved to be a cool character for fighting games

But I am not sure why he is in the base roster. Hell, why he is in this team. If he really had to be in a team in the base roster, Spider-Man's theme feels more appropriate as the "random characters not really associated with anyone else in this roster" team.

Ghost Rider's team was speculated to be the midnight sons. I wasn't sure, I would love it but he could also lead a team of legacy heroes or something. And I'm kind of pissed off that the end result could almost feel like a midnight sons team? Sure, Robbie and Loki were never in that team but with a ghost rider, blade the day walking vampire hunter and the morally neutral Norse god of chaos and mischief makes the team have a big emphasis on magic, supernatural and mysticism

And then there's Deadpool. And because of Deadpool, the team is now called something really weird and random

I dislike the painting and the final twist is stupid as hell but I think people online genuinely have the wrong perception of the guy

People say urbanspook is an edgelord that tries to hard and tweaks over the mildest criticism, and there is some truth but there's things I think most people don't get

Yes the show cosntantly aims at shock value with an episode where a baby is hung, followed by whatever the hell fucktoy Cory was and the magestic "big pussy boom" line in the final episode. People sat he is trying too hard and that was my interpretation too

But the guy is surprisingly acessible and talkative online and most of these seem to be because he sees the painter's genre as dark comedy almost as much as he thinks it's horror. He has said multiple times he finds himself laughing with how utterly fucked up some of this stuff is and I think that explains why most of the death are so over the top and almost cartoony

I still don't like it but every person I see comentating on it thinks and says that this is urbanspook trying too hard to be scary and flopping whemn he has made very clear that he tries to do the most ridiculous absurd horror concepts to the point it can loop back around to have some morbid humour

In that light, I like "big pussy boom", it's not supposed to be "oh this killer is so scary didn't sshe do something so fucked up?", it's just such a ridiculous idea thay you can't help but laugh that the killer tried to sneak a grenade in her pussy to the courtroom

The only creator I've seen commenting on the, in retrospect, clear comedic elements, was meat cannyon, I genuinely never see anyone talk about the painter from this perspective

I in no way think it excuses how fucked up Fucktoy Cory was because of how sensitive a topic it is but I do think people are criticising it from the wrong angle, when the correct criticism should be "that's not funny"

The angle of him being overly sensitive is another I think is true but misinterpreted. He mostly ignores criticism because, as he has said, he is not trying to create a story. He did a video he thought was a cool concept, people liked it so he tried to do more similar videos and making the story was very very secondary and just an excuse to have the videos linked somehow. The story is bad because he's not really focused on the story so of course he's not going to listen to criticism on it

People were surprised by how good episode 7 was and Urbanspook doesn't understand why, he said he didn't take any criticism to heart when making it and feels it's very similar to other episodes he doesn't like. But I think the difference is that he had a clear story in mind for episodes 6 and 7 so there was a clear build up and continuation of themes, there was no repetitiveness of previous episodes.

The one twitter meltdown people usually refer to does have him acting very poorly but the other person he was talking with wasn't exactly being nice either, implying people shouldn't even talk about the good things in the painter to not incentivise other creators to do similar things and that this kind of project shouldn't exist from an objective lense. That is a hurtful thing to say about someone's project and not just "creator can't take criticism" when most times he ignores the criticism because he knows most people expect something (something good) when that's not what he's interested in doing (although what he wants to do is bad in my opinion)

Apparently the man doesn't even like analogue horror and thinks he would't like his show if he wasn't making it. He did something dumb he found fun and ignored criticsim to not alter his vision and that's kind of repectable but there's also something so infuriating about someone so talented not really wanting to do something with intent or good.

Urbanspook is a an insanely talented person who doesn't really want to do something actually good or interesting and that's extremely frustrating but I think we can only be mad about it to a certain extent, people took it more seriously it was supposed to and while there is plenty to hate about it, I think people are hating it wrong

Giant title so I won't repeat it in the introduction

Mystique was in every, or almost every, X-Men movie by Fox. She's in them just as much as Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine (not counting solo movies, just X-Men movies)

And even if you talk to someone who only saw these movies, no knowledge of games, any cartoons, never touched a single comic book in their lives, they will probably like Charles and Magneto. They will know what their characters are about. But most will not have strong feelings about Mystique. And who cann blame them?

Anytime people talk about X-men in the MCU villains enter the discussion and I think "oh I would love Mystique, they haven't done Mystique ye- wait no, she was in literally every movie"

So let's review Mystique in the X-Men movies. First 3, femme fatale, barely any lines. Cool fight scenes, but doesn't have a personality and plays second fiddle to Magneto. Second generation, she does have a personality, she is Charles' adoptive sister, has a love triangle with Beast and Magneto, has some complexes about her mutation and then she dies. Her break out moment is Days of Future Past where the murder of senator kelly by her creates a bad future.

Now let's look at Mystique in the comics and all the things they could have adapted with so much time because she was IN EVERY MOVIE and decided not to

• Mystique is almost never working directly with Magneto, she has worked with the government more than Magneto, she is a selfish free agent that will work with anyone and backstab anyone to make sure she has the life she wants
• She led her own Brotherhood of Evil Mutants after Magneto
• Close relatioship with a mutant called Destiny that only very recently was canonised as a lesbian relationship but they were a couple in literal every way that was not looking at the reader and saying "we're gay" including raising children together, Destiny was there in her first appearence
• Said wife/galpal Destiny can see the future and most of Mystique's plots involve trying to prevent a bad future
• Has been alive for centuries, lived multiple different lives even as different genders
• Met Wolverine in the Old West and has a rivalry with him after meeting when they were going to be executed, going on a mission together and Mystique betraying him
• Slept with Sabertooth and had a human child she abandoned who became a founding member of a mutant hate group
• She murdered said child
• She is the mother of Nightcrawler, who she abandoned as a baby so she could continue her life as a nobleman's wife and her mother-son relationship with the catholic, loving and forgiving son is a big part of her character
• Was a surrogate mother to Rogue, raising her from childhood and she was a part of her Brotherhood
• She left Rogue with the X-Men after an encounter with Carol Danvers left Rogue permanently super powered and mental and moral issues (they didn't have the Ms Marvel rights but they could have done it some other way, maybe Rogue absorbed some other strong mutant powers that let her fly and be super strong)
• She is a master spy

And this is just stuff that they had available when making the movies. Now with the MCU? She was part of the quiet counsil of Krakoa, the mutant ethnostate on a living mutant island where no one dies. It was revealed Nightcrawler's dad isn't Azazel but Mystique and his mom Destiny, making him the biological child of both. IT WAS REVEALED SHE WAS FUCKING SHERLOCK HOME AND DESTINY'S REAL NAME IS IRENE ADLER, THESE ARE THING MCU MOVIES CAN DO WITH MYSTIQUE

So many movies and none of this could have been adapted? Not even in the movie saga where she was one of the main characters with a shit ton of screen time? Just a love triangle with Beast and Magneto because she is insecure about being a mutant? So many mutants to do this with and you chose Mystique? And she becomes and X-Man and dies to motivate Beast adn Erik? And in the first trilogy where her spy part was a bit more explored she was just Magneto's second in command that he abandons the second she loses her powers and she has almost no lines?

Two movies where she can interact with Rogue and Nightcrawler and one of the most important character to their history is unrelated and as an indirect consequence, ROgue and Nightcrawler's relationship also goes to shit?

God I hope the MCU makes Mystique cool, she needs the cyclops treatment so bad

Edit: Yeah that one comment is right, she has such a cool costume and easy to adapt to the screen with colours that contrast her skin and hair so well, WHY WAS SHE ALWAYS NAKED???