Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Sajan

ShinHakkaider's page

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 1,396 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,396 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

It's not like this hasn't been done before...

Or even EARLIER by Jack Kirby HIMSELF HERE

Interesting point. I wonder if those writers gave interviews stating this was the real Cap. Not brainwashing, or a clone, or a shapeshifter, etc.

Reminds me of the Aunt May/Galactus story they did back in the 80s. Splashed across the cover was "Not a Hoax! Not a What If? Not an imaginary story!"

It was of course a dream. But the cover copy was technically correct.

I don't know exactly what's been said in interviews. I don't know what wiggle room they've left themselves. I do trust they're not really intending to have him have been a Hydra agent all along, whatever it looks like and whatever they want to make you think.
Not mind you, that they are but they'll retcon it away when it isn't popular, but the intent all along is for it to not be the real truth.

Whether it'll work or not, I don't know. Whether it'll be a good story or not, I don't know. I do know they're not that mind-bogglingly stupid or out of touch. And that's despite some bone-head moves of late, IMO.

Part of my exasperation with the response to this is that I read the issue unaware of the twist at the end but aware that while reading what came before the twist that something wasn't quite right. There are a few scenes that are "flashbacks" to when Steve was a boy and an encounter with his mom and dad and a strange woman. Now most of the flashback is in muted colors almost sepia toned, except for certain items of clothing on this strange woman and other isolated things in the scene that are red and stand out.

I dont want to spoiler anymore but knowing what I know about what the Red Skull is capable of I think this points to a very high level of manipulation and brainwashing on his part. I'm willing to wait and see what happens and how it plays out.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Eh, I'm probably done with Marvel and DC for a while. I'm almost completely done with comics anyways, except for Rat Queens.

I'm still getting a few regular titles from the two big boys, but it's mostly just short runs or stuff that probably won't last long: Doctor Fate, Swamp Thing, Legends of Tomorrow, Justice League 3001, Omega Men (sadly almost done),Dark Knight III, Future Quest (just added), Moon Knight, Agents of Shield, Daredevil. I find a lot of titles like this aren't heavily affected by the other crap they pull on the main books.

I also get pretty much any Conan (or REH-based) series from Darkhorse, plus sometimes their Predator or Alien books.

And, of course, I get the Pathfinder comics.

Recently, however, I added the new Micronauts series from IDW, and I've got their new Rom: Space Knight series on my list.

ROM IS BACK?!

I'm excited!

You and me both. I cant wait to see if they start doing toys again because I want me a Rom figure post haste...


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aberzombie wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:


The funny thing is the lack of accessibility to the writers back then kinda forced people to just let the actual story stand on it's own.
Indeed, now I want to go back and see those complete issues of the comics from those panels. The entire stories would give some context.

I actually think I have that first Cap issue somewhere but I'm not at home and even I were I couldnt get at my longboxes containing that issue anyway. I'm pretty sure it's in the mid to late 200's

The Kirby is one of the two stories in Tales of Suspense #67.

EDIT: Did some quick research here, that first one if Captain America #234 (1979)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aberzombie wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
From what I've been reading, that Captain America #1 image wasn't just a gimmick, but a big time political statement. We weren't even at war yet. Wikipedia even points out that Kirby and Simon received death threats. Granted, it's Wikipedia, but I can believe it.
I think in this case the line between gimmick and political statement was a very thin one though. If it were ONLY a political statement then it was one they could have made on the inside of the book. Putting it on the cover was something that they knew would draw eyes and attention to the book. So while yes it may have well been a political statement we shouldn't fully discount the fact that it was also a gimmick as well.
I'd love to have been a fly on the wall back then. Would have been interesting to see the conversation that lead to the cover art decision.

There has got to be a book out there somewhere with the oral history of a lot of this stuff. I think Sean Howe has one out there but I dont know how far back it goes. Meaning I dont know if it covers pre-Marvel Marvel, back when Marvel was Timely Comics.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aberzombie wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

It's not like this hasn't been done before...

Or even EARLIER by Jack Kirby HIMSELF HERE

Interesting point. I wonder if those writers gave interviews stating this was the real Cap. Not brainwashing, or a clone, or a shapeshifter, etc.

The funny thing is the lack of accessibility to the writers back then kinda forced people to just let the actual story stand on it's own.

Personally I think that Brevoort and Spencer are full of it. I think that they are probably more than willing to lie to protect the story and let it unfold on it's own. Now your milage may vary on how you feel about that. Personally I'm fine with them doing what they have to do to keep their story under wraps. But other people may feel differently.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's not like this hasn't been done before...

Or even EARLIER by Jack Kirby HIMSELF HERE

Superhero comics have kinda ALWAYS been gimmicky. Captain America (a fictional character) punching Adolf HItler (a REAL person) in the head on the cover of Captain America Comics #1 was a GIMMICK. It was just a gimmick that most people LIKED.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Charles Scholz wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
I think the only one that knew about the past DC Multiverse is The Presence. But I think he's not talking about it.

Actually, the original Psycho-Pirate remembers.

Or REMEMBERED

INFINITE CRISIS SPOILER:
] Right before Black Adam pushed his hand directly through his face murdering him in cold blood.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sundakan wrote:
I'll keep in mind for the future to not fit any of your posts into the context of the rest of the thread. This is clearly where you go to complain about things on Twitter, I don't know why I assumed otherwise. It's only logical that it is here you would voice those complaints.

How about we take this off this thread and let people continue their discussion. hmmm?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sundakan wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Sundakan wrote:

Man, people sure are vile f&~*ing garbage for going "This idea is kinda stupid and I don't feel like reading it".

When did I say this?

Quote me.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

ShinHakkaider wrote:

Guys, Captain America is going to be OKAY.

The thing that I just find amazing is that a lot of the people hating the book aren't or haven't even been reading Cap for the past few years or so. Reading Newsarama or other comic books sites or reading Wikpedia doesnt count. I admit that i've been reading Nick Spencer's run off and on mostly because i'm not that big of a fan as Sam as Cap. (I know SACRILEGE.) But prior to that I was reading Rick Remender's run on Cap every month.

The fact that a cosmic cube was involved in Steve's recovery (during the end of the STANDOFF event) and the penchant that thing has with messing with people's memories and REALITY ITSELF is enough for me to trust where this story is going without devolving into the sometimes violent knee jerk reaction that's been happening for the past day or so.

I'm often reminded that there's a reason I despise comic fandom. During the 90's it was the HEAT fiasco when rabid fans threatened the life of writer Ron Marz and his then toddler daughter over what he was doing in the pages of Green Lantern.

Most recently it was the bile thrown at Marvel for the introduction of Miles Morales and then the introduction of Thor as a woman (I'm not sure if her identity has been spoiled to the masses at large so I'm not going to spoil it here). Now this thing with Captain America. I love my hobbies but the fandom is made up of garbage human beings. Not all of them obviously but enough to not want to generally be associated with my fellow fan. Even though I might be one of the biggest comic book nerds I know.

When I saw on Twitter that people were reacting so

...

I'm still waiting for that exact quote.

I also love you you bolded the one sentence and completely ignored the sentence after that which states:

Not all of them obviously but enough to not want to generally be associated with my fellow fan.

You seem to be the ONLY ONE who's deliberately misunderstanding what I was saying as two other people pretty much READ and UNDERSTOOD my post and did me the honor (Thanks Gentlemen/Ladies) of breaking down almost point by point what I was saying.

It's not my fault that your ability to comprehend pretty clearly written english is shaky.

This is the second time you've come after me fairly aggressively on these boards. Stop. I'm not the passive aggressive type. If I have something to say to YOU? I'll say it DIRECTLY TO YOU.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sundakan wrote:

Man, people sure are vile f&~*ing garbage for going "This idea is kinda stupid and I don't feel like reading it".

When did I say this?

Quote me.

Go ahead, I'll wait.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Wait, didn't the Red Skull use a chunk of Xavier's brain or something to turn a bunch of the heroes evil a little while back? They all got better, I think, except Stark, who wasn't left evil so much as super arrogant douche-y (which I guess got erased in the recent Secret Wars).

It's a little more complex than that of course but yeah close enough and I think that the Red Skull still has access to some of his telepathic abilities so along with the Cosmic Cube influence that might be in play as well...


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Sundakan wrote:

Man, people sure are vile f~!!ing garbage for going "This idea is kinda stupid and I don't feel like reading it".

What horrifyingly terrible human beings.

Truly the worst humanity has to offer.

if HEAT never happened, you would have a stronger point.

There's also the fact that people were threatening physical violence towards the writer Nick Spencer on Social Media most notably Twitter yesterday after the release of the book.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Guys, Captain America is going to be OKAY.

The thing that I just find amazing is that a lot of the people hating the book aren't or haven't even been reading Cap for the past few years or so. Reading Newsarama or other comic books sites or reading Wikpedia doesnt count. I admit that i've been reading Nick Spencer's run off and on mostly because i'm not that big of a fan as Sam as Cap. (I know SACRILEGE.) But prior to that I was reading Rick Remender's run on Cap every month.

The fact that a cosmic cube was involved in Steve's recovery (during the end of the STANDOFF event) and the penchant that thing has with messing with people's memories and REALITY ITSELF is enough for me to trust where this story is going without devolving into the sometimes violent knee jerk reaction that's been happening for the past day or so.

I'm often reminded that there's a reason I despise comic fandom. During the 90's it was the HEAT fiasco when rabid fans threatened the life of writer Ron Marz and his then toddler daughter over what he was doing in the pages of Green Lantern.

Most recently it was the bile thrown at Marvel for the introduction of Miles Morales and then the introduction of Thor as a woman (I'm not sure if her identity has been spoiled to the masses at large so I'm not going to spoil it here). Now this thing with Captain America. I love my hobbies but the fandom is made up of garbage human beings. Not all of them obviously but enough to not want to generally be associated with my fellow fan. Even though I might be one of the biggest comic book nerds I know.

When I saw on Twitter that people were reacting so violently to this Captain America issue? I walked over to my comic store and bought three more copies of the book. I'll probably give a few away to co workers and friends but that was the best counter reaction that I could give to this ridiculousness.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Rosgakori wrote:
Yeah, that might be true, but it does not take away it's stupid. Maybe they change it back (they most definitely will, since EVERYONE hates this) but this still is horrid and even insulting thing to do.

It's at least theoretically possible there's some clever story arc behind this. I'd be surprised if the actual intent is to really have Cap be and have been all along a Hydra agent.

How well they can pull it off is another question entirely.

Edit: What else has this Nick Spencer guy done? The name isn't familiar.

I have faith in Nick Spenser.

He's responsible for SUPERIOR FOES OF SPIDER-MAN (which was pretty hilarious at times) MORNING GLORIES (which his creator owned work over at image) and more recently THE FIX (another creator owned book at Image about two of the most hilariously corrupt cops youre ever going to meet.) I think that he also writes ANT MAN for Marvel but I dont know much about that.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm watching people have meltdowns on Twitter and threaten Nick Spencer with violence.

I have no patience for fanboys who have been reading comics FOR DECADES and yet apparently have no idea how this particular brand of serialized fiction works.

Was this a surprise and shock when I read this this morning? Yes. Have I gone all "GAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH HAAAAAAAAAAAATE!!!!" Nope. Because now I'm curious to see where this story is taking us and I'm a Captain America fan. Something isnt RIGHT and now I want to know what it is. Is this the ramification of how he got rejuvinated via Kobik aka The Cosmic Cube? PROBABLY.

But the question I ask is how is this going to play out. It's literally the first chapter of a multipart story. Is it fair to drop a book after reading the first chapter? Sure, but youre not even close to being actually informed about the whole story.

People reacted the SAME EXACT WAY when Brubaker brought back Bucky as Winter Soldier or when Bendis killed of Peter Parker and gave us Miles Morales or when Dan Slott had Otto Octavius take possession of Peter Parker's body, or when Cap became NOMAD or CAP WOLF or...

I mean really, have people declaring this THE WORST THING EVER!!!! about this actually READ A SUPERHERO COMIC?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
GreyWolfLord wrote:

to tell the truth, the best D&D show (that was actually based on a D&D campaign, though the world was translated into a Japanese RPG called Sword World) was Lodoss War.

For the US, I actually loved the D&D cartoon.

It's a little to 80s for now, and probably too focused on what kids would like, but keeping the sense of that in mind, that you need to cater to an audience BEYOND the niche group of Roleplayers, is probably a good idea in regards to the movie.

I have to admit my favorite thing about the D&D cartoon was probably the Jerry Goldsmith score. I tried watching it recently and while there are parts of it that hold up and a few episodes that are very good overall it's pretty mediocre. I loved it too when I was 12 - 13 years old though. I'd like to see what a decent production company would be able to do now with something along the quality of JLU or YOUNG JUSTICE except Fantasy based.

I'm someone who hates the Realms as a setting so Im not the target audience but if it's done well enough I'll be up to watch almost anything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Sissyl wrote:

The whole rights situation seems to me to be the perfect explanation to why intellectual property is a bad idea. Seriously, the fact that both interests own parts of the whole means no decent movie gets done? Where there could have been several, with budgets and with a hope of success?

Good thing we have intellectual property laws.

If intellectual property laws didn't exist, it's doubtful that any movie would be made at all, decent or otherwise.

Yeah absolutely Scott.

I kind of find her mode of thought here puzzling.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:
I heard in the next Iron Man movie, he sues Falcon over his drone technology.

I know that youre joking but since Falcon's inital pair of wings was destroyed during the climax of Winter Soldier I thought that maybe this upgrade that he has in Civil War (The Redwing drone, the bulletproofing from small arms fire, the targeted rocket strikes) was probably designed and built by Stark? The man was in a previous life a weapons manufacturer. I'm not the only one who thought that right?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sundakan wrote:
Right, but you said it was brave of THE SHOW to tease that relationship. It's not like the actors or crew were in any danger.

You're either being very disingenuous or very naive. I'm not sure which. So I'm gonna choose to bow out of any further conversation with you here.

Sorry to have addressed you at all. Good Day.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:


ShinHakkaider wrote:

I liked that Peggy's world was reflective of the real America / world at the time and that world wasn't as accessable for a woman or a person of color.

I will miss this show and I'll put this out there: I thought that AGENT CARTER was hella brave for even TEASING the idea of an interracial relationship with a black guy. Didnt think it was very realistic but it sure as hell was brave.

Wait, which is it? Do you like that it accurately portrayed period attitudes with regards to sexism, or do you like that it ignored period attitudes with regards to racism?

I liked that it accurately portrayed period attitudes with regards to sexism.

I don't think that it ignored period attitudes with regards to racism so I liked that too.
The relationship between Peggy Carter and Jason Wilkes was never fully realised which is why I said "hella brave for even TEASING the idea of an interracial relationship with a black guy". DId they address the racism of the time in other ways? Absolutely. The fact that even though Jason was a brilliant scientist no other company would hire him because of his skin color except for Isodyne. Even small things that weren't put in your face like when Jason needed to meet Peggy in a public place he chose a black club for them to meet in as they probably could not have meet in a white club without a tremendous amount of scrutiny and attention.

Nice try though.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sundakan wrote:

ShinHakkaider wrote:

I will miss this show and I'll put this out there: I thought that AGENT CARTER was hella brave for even TEASING the idea of an interracial relationship with a black guy. Didnt think it was very realistic but it sure as hell was brave.

It was? It's not like they're rare on TV any more. Even looking at other comic book based shows we have Supergirl x James Olsen, Diggle x Lyla (Arrow) and Iris x Eddie (Flash).

There's big difference between being in an interracial relationship with a black guy in present day (and there are STILL problems) and being in an interracial relationship with a black guy in the 1940's. They LITERALLY were still KILLING black men and boys for looking at white women sideways in parts of this country.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm kinda amazed at how many people in this thread really look at this show and think that how men treated Peggy in terms of the sexism that she faced was too much or over the top or was done just to setup a girl power angle to show how great Peggy was.

It's as if people here really thought that white guys in the 20's 30's and 40's were more magnanimous than they really were? As if they, for the most part wouldn't have treated Peggy and every other woman or non white person like that. And it's not that I'm saying that white d00ds were all evil but that's just how it was back then. Women had JUST gotten the right to vote a little more than 20 years prior to this story. Sexism and attitudes wouldn't have magically changed or disappeared during that time. Hell it's 70 years later and some of those attitudes STILL havent changed.

I love Captain America: The First Avenger but the inclusion of Gabe Jones as part of the unit stuck in my craw. The army wasn't integrated until after WWII in 1948. I know that he was part of the Howling Commandos in the comics but that bothered me a little bit too.

I liked that Peggy's world was reflective of the real America / world at the time and that world wasn't as accessable for a woman or a person of color.

I will miss this show and I'll put this out there: I thought that AGENT CARTER was hella brave for even TEASING the idea of an interracial relationship with a black guy. Didnt think it was very realistic but it sure as hell was brave.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
I sighed with relief that the Final Blade had finally dropped. I was pretty much expecting Agent Carter to fail with a male audience. If Lynda Carter hadn't been showing so much skin, Wonder Woman would have met the same fate decades ago.

So no one is going to address this?

Really?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cole Deschain wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Bucky is a good person. And despite knowing he did all those things, during mind control he couldn't break, he still had to doubt whether he had done everything he could so as to end the hold they had over him. All the time. He knows he did those things, and he assumes responsibility for them, despite not really being able to affect it. I found it impressive.
My hands-down favorite line of the entire film was Sebastian Stan saying "I remember all of them." Gets you right in the gut.

Yup. That and the exchange between Bucky and Steve in the Quinjet just before the get to the Siberia base.

Bucky: I don't know if I'm worth all this Steve.

Steve: What you did all those years...It wasn't you. You didn't have a choice.

Bucky: I know. But I DID It.

I was like, wow. He's really kinda living with the guilt isnt he?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ninja in the Rye wrote:


** spoiler omitted **

So, yeah, that's not good, but at least the motivation makes sense.

** spoiler omitted **

."

I also find your assessment of Tony's actions to be the opposite of what the film was trying to get across. It's supposed to be emotional and complex. It's not supposed to be a easy answer FOR ANY OF THEM.

CIVIL WAR Spoiler:
Bucky is NOT innocent. He DID commit those crimes. He knows this and is guilt ridden about it. But he wont tell you that even under mind control that he WASN'T responsible.

Tony saw his parents murdered right in front of him. He never processed their deaths when he thought it was accidental. But now he's seen them killed and the guy that did it is right in front of him and on top of that his friend (Cap) knew the entire time? That coupled with everything that's been going on with Tony over the past 3 or 4 movies? He reached his breaking point and tried to kill this man who killed his parents. We can say till we're blue in the face what we'd do or what Tony should have done in that situation. But we weren't in that situation. Tony was.

Part of T'challa's arc is the only one that ends in clarity and level headedness. He sees the cycle of revenge and death that Zemo started, can relate but chooses a different path. But he's more than just a warrior, he embraces the legacy of his father and becomes something greater. In that moment he becomes KING. A JUST Ruler.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Misroi wrote:

Actually, I thought they did a better job of making Tony's decisions much truer to the character in the film. Tony's character is "I'm the smartest guy in the room, so all of my beliefs are right." That's still on display here, but he gets a much worse portrayal in the comics than in the film.

** spoiler omitted **

So, yeah, that's not good, but at least the motivation makes sense.

** spoiler omitted **

Tony has a motivation in the comics that makes some sense, he's the former secretary of State (or War) and he knows exactly what the government response will be in the superhero situation isn't brought under control. He's desperate to prevent an extreme and brutal response that will result in many deaths, and makes some bad decisions along the way, things that really damaged the character for a long time, but at least he didn't cross that line.

Also, it's funny that you describe Tony's position as, "I'm the smartest guy in the room, so all of my beliefs are right." Because it's kind of the exact opposite.

Steve's position is literally stated to be, "When you believe you're right never compromise, never listen to anyone who tries to tell you you're wrong, you dig in and refuse to move!" It's directly stated by Steve in the comics and then here in the movie by Sharron. Meanwhile Tony's position is, "These people who aren't me and are scared might actually have a point, maybe we should listen to them."

If you just read the main CIVIL WAR series, Tony's motivation absolutely does not jibe with the Tony that we all know. There is NO reason for him to act the way that he does and in such a callous and borderline psychotic manner. He literally turns on his longtime friends and allies on the drop of a DIME. He's responsible for the death of Bill Foster and for unleashing homicidal villains on his former allies. Tony Stark as depicted by Mark Millar in CIVIL WAR was LOATHSOME and VILE.

Tony's motivation was only explained in detail in Christos Gage' CIVIL WAR one shot :CASUALTIES OF WAR. When Cap and Tony met to try and talk things out. Cap explained where he was coming from where his main concern was the inexorable tip toward fascism and the regulation of PEOPLE. Where Tony for the first and only time gets his desperation across as he reveals to Cap that the government is ready to put Project: WIdeawake into FULL EFFECT not only for mutants this time but for EVERYONE. It's only when Tony drops that shocker that I as a reader was like "OH. SH*T" that explains his desperation.

Again I'm not sure if we saw the same movie. The quote from the movie:

Sharon: I asked her one time how she managed to master diplomacy and espionage in a time when no one wanted to see a woman succeed a either.

She said COMPROMISE where you CAN.
When you can't? DON'T.

Even if everyone is telling you that something wrong is something right.
Even if the whole world is telling you to move.
It is your duty to plant yourself like a tree, look them in the eye and say:
"NO. YOU MOVE."

After stopping Panther from killing Bucky the first time when they get back to the German base when he's talking to Tony, Cap is about to COMPROMISE and sign up when Tony tells him that he has Wanda under house arrest. And that's the sticking point for Cap. It's ALWAYS been. Going back to Winter Soldier. HE had issues with Fury's methods. HE fought in WWII and saw fascism close up in a way that none of the other Avengers have. So your claim of Cap's position being inflexible? Is wrong.

Tony's attitude about being the smartest guy in the room so all of my belief are right? Just recently changed with THIS movie.

Aside from that? that attitude has proved dangerous and has COST HIM.

It's that attitude that prompts him to openly challenge the Mandarin and give him his HOME ADDRESS which nearly gets him and Pepper KILLED.

It's what prompted him to tinker with the gem in Loki's spear which in turn gave birth to the Ultron AI. Which in turn caused the destruction of Serkovia.

It's only when all of the guilt finally catches up with him does he have a change of tune.

The characters aren't as simple as you make them to be here. The situation under which these characters are forced to operate in these movies are considerably more complex.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Callous Jack wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

They ruined Iron Man even harder in the movie than they ever did the comics.

The Civil War comics ruined Stark for me too. It's been years since I read any of it, but his actions and dialogue were so off from what I loved as a kid that I've never picked up an IM comic since.

That's unfortunate because Matt Fraction and Salvador Larroca's run on Iron Man was one of the best in a very long time and it hasn't been as good since they left the title years ago.

I agree though, Millar's Iron Man in Civil War was NOT Tony Stark. He was a fascist dickbag in a Tony Stark suit.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Misroi wrote:

Actually, I thought they did a better job of making Tony's decisions much truer to the character in the film. Tony's character is "I'm the smartest guy in the room, so all of my beliefs are right." That's still on display here, but he gets a much worse portrayal in the comics than in the film.

** spoiler omitted **

So, yeah, that's not good, but at least the motivation makes sense. Let's look at how the comic portrays...

It's Maria Stark...


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ninja in the Rye wrote:


Also, he's not supposed to create Ultron or snap under pressure all the time. At this point I'm surprised that the MCU didn't have him hit Pepper too, just to drive home the fact that they've basically turned the character from Tony Stark to Hank Pym.

I was going to ignore this because in reading what you've wrote it just seems that you have a huge issue with the movie version of the Marvel Universe which is more than fair.

But Tony Stark does not "snap under pressure all the time".

This breaking point for him has been accumulating for literally NINE YEARS.

Starting from being taken hostage by the Nine Rings in the first movie. being almost mortally wounded and needing the mini arc reactor in his chest to keep him alive. The loss of Ho Yinsen, the betrayal by Obidiah Stane. Almost being poisoned by the arc reactor in his chest the thing that's keeping him alive.

Meeting the man (Steve Rogers) that his father IDOLIZED and having not worked through his issues with his parents loss, particularly his father, has a little bit of contempt for Steve. The loss of Coulson. Then the donnybrook in NYC. But again that's not what gave him PTSD, it was driving that nuke through the wormhole and seeing what was on the other side on it's way to Earth.

Keep in mind that he was THE ONLY one of the Avengers to see this. And for all his bluster and intelligence?

Tony Stark is just a MAN.

Until that? SuperSoldier? No Problem.
Rampaging beast? Okay. Still not too bad. It was made through science. Something that he understands.
Asgardian Alien? Okay. Still feels it could be explained by tech. Magic is just another technology.

But the overwhelming Alien force that he saw in that wormhole when he thought that he was about to DIE? Yeah. it effected him. Even still here I don't see where he's snapped.

At the beginning of IM3 he's CLEARLY suffering from PTSD but he hasn't snapped. He's dealing with it by overcompensating. By working relentlessly. Tirelessly. By the end of that movie he's resolved some of his issues or at least has a plan to.

By Age of Ultron, he's trying to implement a solution to help protect the earth from what HE KNOWS is coming. Granted Scarlet Witch's mind mix makes it a little worse but still. Does it impair his judgement in what he does. Absolutely.

But snap. At no point has he snapped.

CIVIL WAR Spoilers:
It's not until everything comes to a head in CIVIL WAR does he ACTUALLY SNAP and when he does it's for a good reason. He's still suffering from PTSD, combined with the tremendous guilt he feels for catastrophes that he feels are HIS FAULT, he's lost Pepper one of if not his ONLY healthy stabilizing influences and now not only has he discovered that his parents DIDNT die in a car accident as he originally thought. They were in fact MURDERED by the guy that Steve Rogers is protecting and has been for the entire movie. And while Steve didn't know Bucky was directly responsible, he KNEW they were murdered by Hydra because Zola told both him and Natasha that In Winter Soldier.

And Tony wasn't just TOLD.

HE SAW.

HE SAW Bucky choke the life out of his mother.

So yeah, THEN he snapped.

But snap all the time? I think you're watching different movies than I am. And also have very different expectations of a very human (probably the most human character) in the MCU.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
Callous Jack wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

I also liked that, and ** spoiler omitted **

Civil War Spoiler:
That and the bit with them in the car after Steve kissed Sharon and they cut back to Bucky and Sam in the car smiling like "It's about damn time."

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:

I really enjoyed it the movie and was extremely glad that time was spent building up each characters reaction to events to avoid making it feel forced. Sure there's a lot of moments where the arguments felt really really weak to logic, but most of those were emotional arguments which by and large tend to be.

** spoiler omitted **

And I had one minor complaint regarding the sheer improbability of:

** spoiler omitted **

Civil War Spoiler:
CCTV's have been in existence since the 50's and 60's. Mostly as a luxury for those that can afford them, which in this case would have been the Starks or their neighbors. It's entirely possible that that was a private road on the Stark property. "Wait...I know that road" were Tony's words as he started watching that tape so yeah it could have been a private road. Either way CCTV (closed Circut TV) feeds would feed the camera input to a tape in another location so it's, again, entirely possible that Bucky shot the CAMERA but not the actual TAPE.

Also is it really unlikely that an espionage agency like SHIELD/HYDRA would NOT have been able to get their mitts on a tape of the death of one of their agency's CO-FOUNDERS?

At this point one of the questions we should be asking is not how they got the tape but WHO ELSE KNEW? Peggy Carter? Nick Fury? Pretty sure Alexander Pierce knew.
I mean this is not new information. Arnim Zola all but says this in his bit of exposition to Steve and Natasha during THE WINTER SOLDIER. Which is probably the confrontation that prompted Natasha do the data dump that she does at the end of that movie. And the movie makes it pretty clear that Zemo got it from that data dump. He even says that the files were encrypted but he has experience with that sort of thing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I actually hated the Civil War comic. It's a prime example of a writer writing all of the characters in "his" voice instead of the voices of the characters.

Maria Hill, as brash, no nonsense and insubordinate as she is would never disrespect Cap like the way she does in Civil War. She would have done what she needed to do without question but the way she responds to Cap verbally? nah.

Millar's writing was at his absolute worst in that book. It's the only Marvel event that I dont have in trade form, which is how much I loathe it. Oddly enough the other stories AROUND the main conflict are pretty decent especially what was going on in New Avengers at the time. Also Christos Gage's Casualties of War, his Civil War one-shot has a conversation between Cap and Tony that should have been IN THE MAIN STORY. It effectively explains WHY Tony was acting with such urgency to get everyone on board with registration. Tony's dickish behavior on the other had was entirely Millar's doing because that's just how he writes almost all of his characters. UGH.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Who proceeds to alienate half of them right out of the gate, do all he can to make sure no one wants to change their mind in favor of oversight and tries to drive those on his side away.

I'm not sure of what movie you were watching but Cap, Wanda and Falcon weren't alienated by Ross, they were alienated by THE IDEA he presented. He wasn't there to convince them, he was there to tell them that this thing was happening with or without their approval. The film was very clear on that point.

With certain things there's no amount of sugar coating or diplomacy that's going to make people that strong willed go against what they feel is their own interest.

Ross drove no one away from his side because they agreed with, again, THE IDEA.

Ross is very direct in his delivery. But he wasnt wrong. He had a mandate and he was simply giving them notice.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

@Bjorn: That guy is Thunderbolt Ross. "Needlessly vindictive" is kind of is defining character trait.

I recognized the name, I just thought that whoever put him in charge really didn't do their homework. If you want the Avengers to go along with some international oversight, perhaps it would be best to have someone a bit more sympathetic and not have it in for one of your most volatile and dangerous members be in charge.

No they DID their homework. The overall point is that The Avengers needed to be reined IN. You don't send some one is perceived as sympathetic to them to do that. You send someone in who gives ZERO F**KS about how they feel about it and someone that the Avengers knows will hunt them down to the last man to keep them in line.

Your not looking at cat wrangling. Youre looking at hundreds of thousands of human lives and BILLIONS in property damage. Youre looking at an ENTIRE COUNTRY that doesnt exist anymore because of Tony Stark's obsession with trying to proactively protect everyone.

So yeah...you send in someone EXACTLY like Thunderbolt Ross.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:


I personally don't feel that the final showdown felt forced. Tony has been shown to have issues with his parents death for some time now. Seeing their death of the hand of the guy who did it (even though he was mindcontrolled), together with the recent stress of seeing his best friend get paralyzed and all the other crap going down... I can see how he snapped. Stress accumulates, after all and this was a film about human reactions to bad s++! happening.

THIS. EXACTLY.

Seriously. I dont know how people can watch these movies and not pick up on these things about the characters. Tony Stark's ENTIRE ARC in the first movie is driven by guilt and the need to make recompense for things that he's done. Ho Yinsen dies to buy Tony time to boot up the mark I armor. That affects him GREATLY. He's never had to process those feelings before because I dont think that he's ever processed losing his parents.

Which is why when we meet him at the beginning of IRON MAN he's pretty much a drunken playboy who takes almost nothing but engineering seriously.

When he sees his tech being used by terrorists IN THE FIRST MOVIE and how it affects people who cant defend themselves against it that drives him to keep his tech out the wrong hands (i.e. all hands but his own).

By the start of IRON MAN 3 he's pretty clearly suffering from PTSD not from the ground battle in the battle of NY itself but from what he saw when he flew through that wormhole (and almost dying). Almost every action he's taken since then has been in preparation to protect the things that matter the most to him, Pepper, his friends and oh yeah...THE EARTH. He LITERALLY talks about creating a suit of armor around the earth at some point in AGE OF ULTRON.

Tony is a logical man but if anyone who has been watching these damn movies for the past NINE YEARS, he's clearly driven by both OBSESSION and EMOTION.

CIVIL WAR Spoiler:
So yes he knows that Winter Soldier was following his programming. But it still doesn't change that this guy MURDERED HIS PARENTS. And it doesn't make it easier that he's WATCHING THE VIDEO OF HIM DOING IT. HE never processed that loss. This movie has one of the most earned climaxes of any of the Marvel films out there. It's less a bombastic epic climax than an emotional one where everyone has an understandable reason for acting the way that they do. If everything was solved by logical decision making you wouldn't have a story. Well not a story and characters that I'd be invested in. Geez.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bellona wrote:
In CA: Winter Soldier the Black Widow dumped all the SHIELD/Hydra files on-line by the end of the movie, so as to reveal Hydra's presence to the entire world. Anyone, including the villain behind CA: Civil War, could have snapped them up. He did admit that de-crypting them was extremely difficult, but that's how he got the info that he needed for the events of CA: Civil War.

Yeah that was pretty clearly explained in the movie. I dont know how people missed that. The fact that he was looking for something ANYTHING he could use against the AVENGERS was crucial. Obsession married with desire for revenge is a powerful motivator.

The central motivation and emotional center for more than a few in the characters in this movie are GUILT & REVENGE.

CIVIL WAR SPOILER:
When Zemo is talking to T'challa at the end telling him why he did what he did you know he's CLEARLY motivated by revenge but there's something in his delivery that makes it seem that he feels guilty for not having been there and not having died along with them. It's important at this point that he's telling this to T'challa because he knows that he can more than relate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aaron Bitman wrote:
Hrothdane wrote:
Am I the only person that remembers the Iron Man cartoon from the 90's?
I remember seeing a few episodes. It didn't look all that great. On the other hand, the Iron Man movies DID, in my opinion. The Iron Man cartoon wasn't nearly as successful - nor, in my opinion, nearly as good - as the Hulk and X-Men cartoons of the time. I didn't see much of the Spider-Man cartoon, but I understand that was successful as well.

I might be the only person I know who was not a fan of either the 90's X-Men or Spider-Man cartoons. That animation for both of those shows were pretty much unwatchable to me. To add insult to injury the Japanese opening to the X-men cartoon was AMAZING and then promptly shifted back to the crap animation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Iron Man and Captain America were the only two Marvel comics I read as a kid. So I'm not sure that's correct. :-)

not talking about comics, but rather how many people who don't read comics actually know anything about those characters/

I mean I am nerdy, but was never into comics. I recognized Iron Man by name, but mostly from that AC/DC song, and assumed he was a robot.I vaguely knew what Cap looked like, but mostly from that really bad 90's movie with the geriatric Red Skull.

There's an old podcast interview with Matt Fraction who was the Iron Man writer right around the time of the first movie where he says he told his mom that he was writing Iron Man and he says that before the movie she thought Iron Man was a robot.

Iron Man was not as well known before the movies. Maybe in comic book circles but to the masses? No. Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are all better known because of their previous exposure in media. Batman had a popular 60's TV series, Superman has had a wonderful animated series (the Fleischer series) and a live action series. Wonder Woman had a fairly popular TV series in the 70's. And all three of them appeared in the Super-Friends series on saturday morning. Superman also had a successful movie in the late 70's and early 80's. Batman had a successful movie in the late 80's.

So it's entirely fair that more people know the DC characters than the Marvel ones. The only Marvel character to have a successful anything was The Hulk TV series in the 70's. I mean I remember Reb Brown as Captain America but that's like me and three other people. And I'm still trying to forget that awful Spider-Man show with Nicholas Hammond.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Might have been just my impression... Although the pacing didn't feel "natural", either.

FINALLY!

EVERYONE said I was crazy that the pacing for the movie was off, but I KNEW it wasn't right. It was as if he made the movie on a tight timeline and was rushing he way through.

WATCHMEN needed a TV Mini-series treatment 10 Episodes on HBO or something like that. There's just WAAAAAAAAAAAY too much content to fit into the confines of a 3+ hour movie to do the story it's full justice.

I like WATCHMEN up until the very ending (and it's not that they changed the squid out, I'm actually fine with that change) where it seems that the change that was made pretty much negates the entire point of the movie.

He definitely gets the visuals but anything else? Shaky.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Snyder's first feature film was the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake written by James Gunn (Guardians of the Galaxy). I thought that it was pretty damn good.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hama wrote:

If I wanted to know about a movie's artistic value, I'd ask a critic. If I wanted to know about a movie's fun value, I most certainly wouldn't ask a movie critic.

ShinHakkaider wrote:
Those reviews were in the 90's at first. Lets see what that Audience score is after two weeks in wide release. I think the more people see the movie the lower that audience score is going to get. And I honestly dont see that critic score getting above 60%.
Slippery slope fallacy

Maybe.

But here were are two weeks later and I wasnt wrong.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Grey Lensman wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:
I agree I can't think of of any, but I also can't think of too many in general who would work out as other ethnicity it tends to be a part of the character to me. I wouldn't want a white Falcon or Luke Cage anymore than an Asian Superman or Hispanic Punisher.

Note that ShinHakkaider's request wasn't for non-white characters you think could race swap, but just prominent non-white characters from existing works that have been made into movies who could even be candidates.

Leaving superheroes aside for the moment, how many black leading roles in fantasy/sf movies developed from books or other works can you name?

IIRC, Briareos Hecatonchires from Appleseed is African. But since he is a full blown cyborg with no visible fleshy bits - he could easily be played by anyone if a film was ever made. Bonus relevance - Same author as Ghost in the Shell

Yes but as you stated there's NOTHING visually that identifies him as such so he's a really bad example to use. Not to mention that the times we've seen him in flashbacks in movies or animation he STILL looks like a slightly tanned white d00d...


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Talonhawke wrote:
So just gonna ask then since its not an issue for certain characters to be race swapped, can anyone name a non-white character they think could be swapped without it affecting the characters identity?

How about you give us a list of prominent non-white characters and we'll go through it?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:


The fact that Scarlett Johanson is playing a character named Mokoto Kusangi in a movie where the bodies can be made to order with whatever enhancements and features you can afford or desire makes me a little more understanding of the whitewashing that's being done here. As long as it's something that tangentially addressed in the movie itself at some point. Especially when in the real world asians eschewing their natural facial features in favor of more European looking ones is a real thing that happens in OUR actual world.

Save that if you look real honestly into it, with the context of all the other whitewashing that's been going on, from the history of Bruce Lee's Kung Fu TV series, to the replacement of the Ancient One with a white woman, you'll see that such theorising had nothing to do with the actress selection for the film.

And to toss the concept right back at you... with all that possibility, why did the anime character not flip into various bodies of gender, race, and nationality? Most likely because her identity is so riddled with instability, her self image as a japanese female is that much more important. Just as gender identity is a big issue to most of us, whether cis or trans.

Of course, I know why she was cast. She was cast because white people pretty much will go see other white people in movies and casting an asian actress as the lead of what's obviously going to be a big budget movie was a non-starter. They probably wasn't going to get this movie made at all WITHOUT the involvement of a white actress in the lead. That's obviously the reality.

Was I rationalizing because I thought that it was right? No. Maybe me saying "understanding of the white washing that's being done here" was not the best way to say it. It was more me seeing how they could play it to a less informed audience who may go see this movie and ask themselves "Why is Scarlett Johansen playing the part of a woman named Makoto Kusanagi?"

I know about the History of whitewashing in hollywood, pretty well. At this point it's 2016 and people are STILL doing it because the same attitudes remain. White actors are okay to play ANYTHING and for the most part other white people are okay with it (which is all that matters. Anything else is seen as SJW whining). Any other race CANT play anything either because it's unbelievable (See Idris Elba as James Bond) or white people start complaining about actors of color taking parts away from white actors (YES an actual complaint I've had someone say to me). At this point I'm kind of picky about what I support and what I don't and unless this movie looks and IS amazing? I'm going to just pass and re-watch my copies of GITS: SAC and GITS: SAC 2nd GIG instead.

Sorry for the miscommunication on my part.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
archmagi1 wrote:

I'm pretty sure Craig would rather *be* Bond than *play* Bond. His post production - pre marketing interviews for both Skyfall and Spectre paint his experience as one of the most arduous and unenjoyable things he has ever done. I know he is under contract to be Bond for a fifth film, but I really doubt that he'll still have it in him to do the worst thing in life for a fifth time.

Its been 9 years of Bond for Craig, 2 more than Bronson's 7, 5 more than Dalton's 2. Sure he's still 3 years short of Moore's 12, but he's right on par with Connery's 9 EON years. Yes he's had a number fewer films than the two most Iconic Bonds, but a 70's or 80's mid-low budget action movie that the Connery and Moore era films were took a whole lot less out of the actor than today's extravaganzas.

Also, lets not forget Connery was wanting out of the Bond Business before his last 2 EON films, which the producers basically had to bribe him to be in. (Note: I'm excluding Never Say Never Again)

So yeah, new Bond seems about time. And there are plenty of young British actors to choose from. I just hope they don't get the kid from Kingsmen to do it. Our new Spiderman *is* a Brit...

As is our Doctor Strange and Superman...


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hitdice wrote:

Holy bejesus, I just realized I typed "Major Kira" earlier when I meant "Major Kusanagi"; that's a nerd f**k-up of the highest order!

. . .

Seriously, this is worse than the time the president talked about a Jedi mind meld.

No it's not.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
NenkotaMoon wrote:
Well, there was Joey Louis during WWII. Heavy weight champion boxer.

JOE Louis.

Yes and there still was a large number of the white population who still saw him as less than human because of the color of his skin.

Your point?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hitdice wrote:


Johansson would make a pretty good Duenan, though.

D00D YES.

Or Saoirse Ronan!!


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm of two minds about this. First I'm not a huge fan of either of the GITS movies, they're okay but not good enough to be deified in the anime circles as much as they are. The two SAC series however I feel are really, REALLY well done and get across the ideas of identity and transhumanism better than what was attempted in both movies.

Which brings me to my next issue, one of the BIGGEST themes of GITS is identity and transhumanism. Is your body who you really are or is it your consciousness or ghost? There was a long time during my first viewing of the series where I thought that Mokoto may have actually been a man in a woman's cyborg body. I mean I was wrong about that but my whole point is that the bodies as souped up and cyber as they are are just shells. Hence the title of the show, GHOST IN THE SHELL.

The fact that Scarlett Johanson is playing a character named Mokoto Kusangi in a movie where the bodies can be made to order with whatever enhancements and features you can afford or desire makes me a little more understanding of the whitewashing that's being done here. As long as it's something that tangentially addressed in the movie itself at some point. Especially when in the real world asians eschewing their natural facial features in favor of more European looking ones is a real thing that happens in OUR actual world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I seldom come out hard against movies that I dont like. I just usually dont talk about them and try to ignore them but SPECTRE was not only a bad Bond movie but a bad movie all around.

Three espionage/spy movies (maybe even four...) came out that year and they were ALL better than SPECTRE, including the comedy one with Melissa McCarthy, SPY.

KINGSMAN, MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: ROGUE NATION, BRIDGE OF SPIES and SPY were all better movies than SPECTRE. I'll go on record that while far from perfect even THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. was better than SPECTRE.

And I like Daniel Craig as Bond but by the time they make it to *name redacted* secret base I could honestly given a crap as to what would happen next. Best part of the movie was the opening (false hope that the rest of it was going to as good. NOPE.) and then the fight on the train. I rate it just below QUANTUM OF SOLACE I dislike it that much.

1 to 50 of 1,396 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.