GBrutality's forum posts

#1 Posted by GBrutality (192 posts) - - Show Bio

so, they're just going to stop making anymore animated marvel films just because Disney owns them? I don't see why that would halt everything.
However, should they continue they reeeeeally need to step up their game. The Avengers ones were pretty good, but they need a page out of DCs book in terms of animated features. in the past few years they've put out Under The Red Hood, Superman Doomsday, All-Star Superman, and Justice League The New Frontier. Those were all great. It's one of those there's no reason to give up, but only if you promise to start actually trying.

#2 Posted by GBrutality (192 posts) - - Show Bio

I definitely see where some of the story telling elements would come in handy, but he needed to die. Also he needed to melt away so it could prove Peter was really the original. Had he not it would've been this lingering thing that would've been way too annoying.
Also, since they did the whole no-one-knows-he-is-spider-man-again, I doubt Osborn would have him anywhere. We all hate when characters get killed off, but I think we hate it more when they get brought back like it was nothing. Ben Reilly has probably been one of the only characters people have liked that died and stayed that way. And sometimes that is really for the best. It's kind of like reading FF now. Sure, it's a cool book. Sure, interesting ideas. Johnny Storm is not dead though. He'll be back in, oh, I say three years tops. Then the four will be complete and more than likely they'll re-brand the series and cue fanfare, Fantastic Four again, with an edgier Johnny. Making the reasoning for starting FF and reading it, semi-pointless since they did it out of the respect for someone they thought dead.
I read somewhere sometime in X-Men soon they'll have an event where some characters come back. Enter Nightcrawler and/or Phoenix, since no one really misses Cable at all. Yet again making death, thus the fear of a hero failing, inconsequential. To bring my point full circle, Reilly needs to stay dead because Spider-Man is a hero that has lost a lot. That's why he started in the first place. He's Marvel's answer to Batman, except he deals with more real life problems than him. Uncle Ben, Gwen Stacy, Ben Reilly, these are deaths that meant something and taught him to be a better hero. By the way, whatever happened to Mary Jane and Peter's baby?

#3 Posted by GBrutality (192 posts) - - Show Bio

i remember the open-world spider-man games being kind of lame. shattered dimensions was no arkham asylum indeed, but it was way better than i originally thought it was going to be. they should give this more time. i see the whole if you do one thing there's repercussions stuff but i predict that will somehow do more harm than good. what sucks is making a great spider-man game is a little hard. games are extremely story driven in this day and age. i'm more of a marvel fan than a dc fan by far but batman has enemies and story elements that you can build something almost out of anything with. other than the joker (why was the ball dropped there?!) the game was terrific. spider-man has a great group of rogues, supporting characters and more. but why that batman game worked so well and why others may not was because it was so self-contained. arkham asylum was essentially another character in itself. if they're going to do a game do one that really sets the bar. not just swing around sluggishly through the city, doing heroic errands so to speak, until you remember there is a main point you forgot. and no, no peter parker stuff. sorry, but who wants to take pictures of yourself and meet with JJJ to get yelled at? make convincing lies to tell aunt may? comfort mary jane on your responsibilities? no, that sounds god-awful. that being said, it could be done! but they need to just work it better. what sucks is that every time a spider-man game gets made it either has his villains acting like they should, like in those late 90s early 00s ones, but they end up getting really stupid with the forced humor implemented. or he's some threat that if he usually did he'd need the fantastic four or avengers by him. if mysterio was messing with time that screws with everybody and so many people would be on that. and a symbiote invasion?! 

#4 Posted by GBrutality (192 posts) - - Show Bio

i don't read comics as much as when i was a kid, but i still read some on occasion just to peek at what's going on/has changed/if something catches my eye. the thing that's shitty, but true, is that the industry puts out so damn many now. i'm talking an amount that's almost like, "alright, if that much crap was happening in a city i lived in, i'd move to the furthest place possible."  another annoying thing is why, i mean, why does one character get five or so books? at least there is two batmen now, but with others it's gotten to that stage where you want to go "ok, when did he get a clone, because there's no possible way this is all happening to the guy right now." the reason i bring all of this up is because, yes there are loyal fan bases to certain characters but more often than not those characters don't need their own books. what those writers and artists, some who are very talented but given people that are sort of difficult to write for month to month, should do is maybe take on these issues that seem to get delayed so majorly. i'm sure there are creator conflicts and whatnot, and like you said if there is a MAJOR thing going on then by all means take your time. but come back reasonably soon. things are easily forgotten in this day and age and i'll tell ya, it's hard to remember sometimes what happened in a book from the previous month. take Ultimate Comics X. the premise i think is dumb, but i want to give it a chance because i dug ultimate x-men when it first came out. now, it is damn impossible to remember any of the characters or what's going on because issue 3 came out june of 2010, and issue 5 is slated (for now) to be out june of this year. that is a goddamn long time. comics have always been a fun thing but the shops are getting harder and harder to find which is evidence that the industry isn't what it's used to be. yes, the writing is better, and though whenever i try to catch up it seems to world has burnt down and been rebuilt five times since i last checked, it's more interesting than it was at a point. it took me forever to get here but my point is, if your job is in a field that is doing pretty good at best, don't be a dick and vanish because you got a huge caseload. don't do as much then. money is nice. keeping the job to make more is nicer.

#5 Posted by GBrutality (192 posts) - - Show Bio

really liked this.
honestly; yes, evil should win sometimes. a hero has to win a lot or else he's just a bad hero. not like an anti-hero, just overall bad at his job. same goes for a villain. being a hero is hard, sure. being a legitimate threat to super detectives, teams of super powered beings or a single person that get power from the damn sun is a little intimidating. being a menace is not simple. 
when villains do win though, it should be for something that is important. it should stick. death is a joke in comics. not every villain should have this capability. the shocker shouldn't win. ever. but, calculating ones or unbelievably powerful ones or threats that are at a level that can ravage just about anything should. want to know why the joker is everyones favorite villain? and you can't deny he isn't. i'm way more a marvel guy than dc by miles, but the joker is a better villain than just about every single marvel one. because when that guy gets out of arkham, IT! SUCKS! jason todd? murdered (they may have brought him back, but he sort of created a new villain). gordon? tortured to the point of almost no return. barbara gordon? crippled. when he's around  shit goes wrong. not for 12 issues. for good. he could be out for five minutes. some villains break out, start a club of villains, right away start making a scene. batman is order, joker is chaos. you can predict batman's methods; but he's the best tactician so beating him is still difficult. joker's only method is utter calamity by any means necessary. i know, tangent about one person. but that's kind of the point. magneto, luthor, green goblin, doomsday, their things don't stay forever. gwen stacy may still be gone, but the whole point at the end of that arc was that spider-man kind of killed the green goblin. he didn't pull the trigger, but he loaded that gun sort of spiel. they should be allowed to win and not retconned as soon as possible for BS reasons. there are those that heroes will say, "hey remember when thanos had that infinity gauntlet? that was a bitch!" but that was a situation that in the end was handled. it's a memory of a rough time. every time you see oracle in that wheelchair, and not in a batgirl costume you can't help but think would anyone REALLY blame batman and start wanting his head for killing the one guy that might as well be wearing a neon-lit necklace in the shape of a noose that reads "come on, i dare you"? not saying i want him to die, but whenever it's brought up you got people nagging batman, "no way batman, you'll never be the same again". the same ain't getting results. he never has to do it again! because bane, croc, whoever doesn't go around doing random spurts of genocide. huge digression i know, i guess that's the point though. i went on a gigantic tangent because that's a bad guy who did things that took and everyone can still talk about it. it affects all of those characters. the guys that ultimately lose somehow, someway everything, they're never that interesting because well, what are they gonna do that's not gonna be fixed by alternate timelines, time travel, or leaving the country and biding your time?