The X-Men: Better Off As A Stand Alone Universe

It's been awhile since I've posted a thought topic here but I've came across something that inspired me to post a topic. I'm a poster on a comicbook website called Comic Book Resources, Legato to the curious. On said website I'd sometimes read and even get involved in topics relating to comic movies and this one actually caught my eye. Someone commented on why X-Men and Fantastic Four should be a shared universe.

Honestly it's the age old debate. People have been demanding that the X-Men should cross over to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And we are kinda getting that with the appearance of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch. This kind of topic has been going on ever since Iron Man made the MCU a household name. You know what my answer to this is? The X-Men shouldn't be shared with the rest of the Marvel Universe.

Now I'm not talking about the X-Films here I'm talking about the X-Verse in general. I know that some of the X-Characters have a history with some of the Marvel heroes. Like Spider-Man and Captain America to name a few but think about this. The general public can accept guys like Spider-Man, regardless what JJJ says, the Fantastic Four, Thor, or any non mutant born superpowered hero yet a mutant couldn't walk a few blocks without running into Sentinels or Anti-Mutant Groups that want mutants dead. Between you and me that sounds a little silly.

You have guys like Thor who is a God and has the technology to wipe out the whole world yet the general public is like"OH THOR IS AWESOME!!!" Then you have mutants like say Jean Grey and the general public is like "KILL THE MUTIE!!!"

Also I've always ask myself when the X-Men are dealing with mutant related issue then where are heroes like The Avengers or the Fantastic Four? Don't any of them care about the mutant crisis? And if they do then why aren't they helping the X-Men?

Personally when the story arcs are focused on just the X-Men some of them can be pretty entertaining. Also I feel that the X-Men has such a large variety of characters and a rich history that I believe they're capable of standing on it's own away from the other Marvel heroes. Plus it would make the story of them finding human acceptance much more believable.

Marvel Cinematic Universe: Something I've Noticed

Having followed every single one of the Marvel Cinematic Universe films I have noticed something when it comes to the universe's villains as of late. They're villains, who isn't Loki, really aren't all that.

I'm not saying they suck as there have been some decent villains, Kurse comes to mind, but they lack the same memorability that Loki managed to achieve. The only villain that I find remotely memorable was Kurse from Dark World and he was just a mute muscle that was MCU's equivalent to Doomsday.

Yeah you had the fake Mandarin but the guy became memorable for a completely different reason. The rest had some nice moments but usually ends up being forgettable later on. Meanwhile Loki has gained enough popularity that people have been begging Marvel to make a movie featuring him.

It helps that Loki, unlike the other villains, wasn't some one dimensional villain but actually had some layers and a clear goal. Also, unlike the others, he actually achieved his goal. Now there is nothing wrong with having a one dimensional villain but you at least have to make said villain memorable. The closest villain in Marvel, off the top of my head, I can think of that has the same sense of memorability as Loki is Sebastian Shaw from First Class and that was a Fox Marvel film.

Maybe there is hope with Winter Soldier, Avengers 2, and whatever they're doing with Thanos but until then my quest in finding a good MCU villain other than Loki continues.

Designated Love Interest

Just to get things out of the way before I do this, before I did this topic my opinion relating to the topic was rather...meh. I didn't love it or hate it but had a more indifferent opinion concerning the concept. But as of late, I believe ever since Thor: Dark World, I'm starting to dislike the concept. Especially since it brings about the main concept that I completely despise. The Damsel In Distress.

Now for the record this isn't a Dark World rant since I've said what needed to be said about the movie but I just want to point out something. What is Jane beyond some human chick swooning over Thor? Ok she's supposed to be really smart and all that but I haven't seen anything of her beyond this hot chick that constantly gets in harms way. And gets all angsty because Thor is off saving the freaking world. There is a reason even Natalie Portman hated the character. In two Thor films I saw nothing that signifies character development from Jane, she still is the same character that she was from the first movie but probably have gotten progressively worse in the second. There were moments I thought to myself "What the hell did Thor see in this woman?!"

To add another example, Lana Lang from Smallville. When first introduced she wasn't that bad but once the show progresses she couldn't walk a few feet without having some super powered psycho coming after her and Clark coming to the rescue.  Granted she did have character development but some debated on if said character development was handled well.

The Designated Love Interest concept usually have these pitfalls.

1. The character has to get saved to make the person that is attracted to DLI instead of making some attempt to save themselves.

2. The character has nothing of interest other than being the object of the main character's affection. What does the character do? What is the character's goals? Etc

The other drawback that a DLI usually have is that if there is another character that is interested or interacts with said DLI then that character usually has better chemistry with the DLI then the main character does. Especially if the character interacting with DLI is the villain. For instance I thought Lex and Lana had better chemistry than Clark and Lana while I thought Janes moments with Loki actually made the Jane character more interesting. Meanwhile Clark had better chemistry with Chloe, Lex, and Lois than she ever did with Lana while Thor had better chemistry with Lady Sif. In Twilight I thought Bella had better chemistry with Alice and Jacob than with Edward. With Jacob she actually felt like a normal person while with Alice....GOG is hot.

I thought Pepper Pots was the best developed love interest in Iron Man because they actually took time to develop Pepper and Tony's relationship and they bothered to develop Pepper into someone thats more than just a DLI. Bonus points in having Pepper being someone thats capable of taking care of herself. By IM3 she ended up taking several levels of badass. She's an example of a love interest done right.

If one is going to hook two characters up then at least do some proper build up by having the audience get to know the characters and maybe show what makes the characters connect well and most importantly convince the audience that hey maybe they do belong together. There will still be shippers but if you can make even the hardened shippers see that the characters that you are pairing up belong together then you've done your job. I would also recommend not having your love interest character, male or female, hold on to the damsel in distress ball. Yeah there are moments when a character is in a jam but try not to make it a running gag. Also subvert it in having said love interest get out of a jam themselves once in awhile.

Horror Characters/Concepts That Needs Its Mojo Back

Curse of Chucky was one of those films that surprised me, I never expect it to be good but man was that movie good. They managed to do what many horror franchises fail to do with other characters by taking out what was wrong and putting in what made them good and improve on it. They brought a back to basics approach with the character. None of that comedy crap from the previous two Child's Play films they gave it a straight up horror approach. I still say Chucky isn't scary but I commend the effort in the filmmakers in the effort they put in this film and show other filmmakers that just because a movie is a direct to dvd doesn't mean you have to half ass it.

If Chucky can get his mojo back then there are other horror characters/concepts I feel that is in desperate need to get it's concept back. Here's a few...

Jeff The Killer 

I've pointed this out in my other blog but I also wanted to add. While I never found Jeff scary I admit there was some ray of potential with the concept. I thought his debut story was interesting as it reminded me something of a Stephen King story but they managed to drop the ball with a few things.

1. They made him a kid, well a teenager. Don't really find that all that scary tbh, tragic yes but not scary.

2. The dude's a butterface. Yeah they had his face messed up but the rest would make him come off as a bishi type of character. There is a reason why the guy has fan girls

3. They turn him into a Slenderman wannabe with the whole mention him and he knows where you live approach. It's bad enough that he's no different than your usual horror slasher but they had to make him similar to Slenderman?

What I would have done with him is make him a little older, like in his late twenties or early thirties, and make him as unappealing as possible. Not just in facial features but below that also. I'd also make him a little more different. His early incarnations made him stood out a bit more but when he became popular they wanted him to slightly resemble Slenderman. You know what made horror characters like Jason stood out so that he wouldn't come off as a Michael Myers rip off? They fleshed his backstory out more and gave Jason his own characteristics that would make people see he isn't some Michael Myers clone. Thats what one should do with Jeff. I'd have Jeff actually be a symbol that best represents the worst of humanity. What humanity would be like without a moral conscience. You can do some interesting things with that.

Slenderman 

 
Unlike Jeff I thought this guy had a rather intriguing and admittingly creepy vibe going on and there was an aura of mystery around him in that you have no idea just exactly what he is. He could be a ghost or something that could be thought up by HP Lovecraft. Sadly like many horror characters before him once his popularity increases his scare factor starts to decrease.

What I've said about Slenderman was already said in a blog I did about him awhile back. Slenderman, recently, has became a parody of what he once was and the whole constantly trolling people by popping up out of nowhere bit can get irritating at times. It's the equivalent of a friend or a relative that would just drop by your house unannounced, especially when they do it at the worst time possible.

If there is any change I'd take with Slenderman it would be to increase the mystery about him but take a nothing is scary approach. Do not show him committing creepy acts but only it's build up and it's aftermath that way while nobody sees it you know it's there.

I also wouldn't give him followers. I think he'd be better off when he does things solo.

Slenderman would be a metaphor of the mystery that surrounds us. Ever go into a really dark area and that sense of fear starts to creep in as you venture into unfamiliar territory? Thats what Slenderman should be like. The kind that gives you a rather uncomfortable vibe, for some odd reason, and takes you out of your comfort zone

Vampires

I like the vampire concept, in actuality it was vampire movies that gave me my first exposure to horror films. The vampire flick I remember was Salem's Lot. What made it stood out was that the vampire wasn't a romantic, it didn't woo some teenage girl, it wasn't even attractive. It was a terrifying monster causing havoc on a small town. The novel Dracula had Dracula as an evil force of nature. But what caused vampires to loose it's menacing nature?

There is nothing I can say about this that hasn't been said already. But I wouldn't go as far as to say the vampire genre is dead(heh pun). In fact there are some good stuff involving vampires out there. The Night Flyer, Lost Boys, Let Me In, 30 Days of Night, Blade 1 &2, to name a few. As far as novels go The Dresden Files did some interesting stuff with vampires, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Necroscope, and Vampire Hunter D

While it's anime I'd still recommend Hellsing for a rather interesting take on Dracula.

I thought Whedon had the right idea when it came to vampires in that they best represent the worst aspects of humanity, especially once they take their souls away. Which could also be a metaphor of what a human being without a conscience would be like, minus the blood sucking. Also Supernatural had an interesting take on vampires.

There is terror left in vampires just one has to look to find it. Still most mainstream movies would tend to romanticize vampires into tortured creatures that would woo a pretty young thing that comes their way.

Thats my two cents on it. Thoughts on this or any additions you have for the topic then feel free to put a comment below.

Wonder Woman in Superman/Batman & How DC/WB Treats Other DC Characters

As if the Superman/Batman films isn't a broken base already you have Wonder Woman thats also announced to be apart of. One of the key issues is the casting. Personally I have seen Gal in Fast & The Furious and I find her a decent actress but as far as if I think she's able to do a good job in the role it depends on if I see any shots of her preparing or performing the part. The other issue is how some felt that DC/WB once again don't see any value in Wonder Woman to give her a solo film so they just paired her up with Superman/Batman. There are two sides to this type of complaint

1. I can see, on some level, where DC/WB is coming from. Lets say they do a movie but then what kind of a movie they will do? A straight up superhero flick or a adventure flick? There is also casting the right kind of actress that is marketable and would stick around for future movies. Given the utter failure that was the pilot series it was a walking on eggshells situation. However....

2. With it being her first film debut she's playing second fiddle to Superman/Batman? The two heroes have enough problems with people claiming how overexposed they are but to have WW play second fiddle to them is another issue. Also she is among the DC Big Three of Superheroes so it wouldn't kill them to give her one movie before doing a crossover with someone else. So on some level I can understand the arguments of how it may appear that Wonder Woman could be taking a backseat to Superman/Batman. Or is she?

Lets take a look at the other heroes who haven't had any sort of exposure

Aquaman: He had a stint on Smallville and two memorable parts in JLU and Batman:The Brave and The Bold but as far as live action films go the dude has squat. He doesn't even have his own animated movie. Also the guy has a pretty bad rep thanks to his role in the Super Friends. And yeah I get the Aquaman jokes but, as mentioned, it originated from a show thats pretty outdated and anyone with any knowledge in comics should be aware that Aquaman is one of the most underrated DC Heroes. So I have to ask is where is Aquaman's opportunity? When will he get a time to shine?

Captain Marvel: For once I'd like to see a movie either animated or live action where he doesn't have to depend on Superman to have his moment in the sun. I mean come on this guy screams a perfect escapist character for kids. An animated series featuring him would be gold

Not just those two but it seems that other DC Characters are getting the short end of the stick and some of whom I personally feel would make a interesting tv series, either animated or live action. Or even a movie, either animated or live action.

Zatanna has a good backstory to make a good supernatural tv series.
Green Lantern: If anyone in DC/WB had a braincell to do it properly would make a good space opera
A Legions of Superheroes tv series would be pretty good. Especially if they take a Doctor Who approach.
Suicide Squad
The list goes on..

They're doing a good job with Arrow and I heard a Flash series is on the way, which is good.

Yet the point is that it seems that DC/WB has a hard time in using and promoting their characters, who isn't Superman/Batman, properly while Marvel/Disney is actually the ones willing to use other characters who aren't Avengers. For instance there is a Guardians of The Galaxy movie coming out and there is Agents of SHIELD and there are rumors of a series that features street level Marvel Heroes. So if Marvel is able to use other characters then it wouldn't kill DC to take a gamble on other characters, who isn't Superman/Batman. Cause at the moment people are starting to get tired of seeing just those guys. Put some variety out there and Arrow, for now, is the only thing close to a variety