Why do people say things like "I can't believe we're getting a X movie! I can't believe we're getting X heroes in the...

Why do people say things like "I can't believe we're getting a X movie! I can't believe we're getting X heroes in the same movie! WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE!" ?
Like movies are an award given to the best comics, like a step up. Movies are no better or worse than comics as a medium.

I mean I get what you're saying kind of, but if had honestly told me back in 2008 that a Guardians of the Galaxy movie would be released in a few years and is a critical and financial success I don't think I would've believed you.

Hell the fact that Iron Man was made and was successful considering they didn't even really have a script when they filmed it still blows my mind .

because back when this all started, nobody thought that the iron man movie would lead to a complete MCU. A lot of people probably thought it wouldn't even be that successful.

Nobody expected Ant Man, Doctor Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy, or Black Panther to get a movie at all even after the success of Iron Man because they aren't very well known heroes.

I'm more asking about the "WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE" part. These movies are awful

>MY COMICS ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT

Yeah, no, except they're really not, dude.

importance =/= quality

>Like movies are an award given to the best comics, like a step up. Movies are no better or worse than comics as a medium.
Well, they do add audio and motion to the comic sources.

Because only movies they think will profit will get made, and the only movies that Disney thinks will profit are movies that will draw a large audience.

The thing is 30 years ago you wouldn't have such large audiences wanting to see Spider-Iron Rises 7: Apocalypse of the Avenging League, and that's impressive.

>the modern age of comics rivals capeshit from the 21st century

Yeah, no, except it really doesn't, dude.

Except these movies ARE awards to those comics. It means those elements will now be public knowledge and thus part of the larger pop culture system. I mean, you can buy Winter Soldier shirts now!

That's like saying all anime is better than its original manga because it adds background music.

Yeah, they add sound, but they lose things like panel size and art quality.

Who talked about "modern age" comics? Infinity War, a movie about to come out, will be based in a pretty old comic.
Also, what modern comics are you reading? Because Providence, Sandman Overture, Vision etc are all recent comics better than any movie released recently. "dude".

>Who talked about "modern age" comics? Infinity War, a movie about to come out, will be based in a pretty old comic.

Yeah, most of the movies are being adapted from older sources and the ones that aren't like the Civil War event, are different in every way but name. The point is movies are an award to comics, the comics the people love, the stories that have sold, are the ones that will get hundred million dollar investments.

Why? Because movies are a better medium than comics. Incredibly so. Comics cannot rival a movie's visual or audio story telling, a comic cannot rival a feature length film's depth on the plot. A comic isn't a detailed as a book, and isn't as touching on the senses as movie, for those reasons, a comic is - objectively, a terrible fucking medium.

dude

Because I enjoy those movies.

>a comic can't rival a movie's depth
Oh yeah, the Watchmen comic can't hold a candle to the Watchmen movie. Idiot.

>comics are an objectively terrible medium
Why are you on this board? To dump your smug reaction faces?

And the old comics most of these are based off of are of shit quality. Non-issue.

If movies aren't a better medium, as you described in your post, then how can getting a movie be considered a step up? If comic books are on the same level as a movie, isn't getting a movie the same as getting a new solo run?

Sure, a movie may be more expensive, but if a character with a movie is better than a character without one, then it's reasonable to assume that movies are a more valuable medium than comics, and that the two aren't equal.

>These movies are awful
For you.

...Anime IS better than Manga though. Like, undeniably.
>but they lose things like panel size

Except no one was arguing about the adapted comics, only about the mediums generally. And no cape movie is better than, say, Promethea.

>isn't getting a movie the same as getting a new solo run?
yes
thanks for summarizing my point.

>comics are an objectively terrible medium
>Why are you on this board?
You know you can like things while admitting they're heavily flawed right?

Well, congratulations. You got yourself caught.

Oh, yeah, such a superior medium.

What is page composition? What is lettering? Coloring? Line weight?

>Undeniably

Promethea's pretty dull senpai
Could've at least gone with Swamp Thing or Miracleman.
>yes, thanks for summarizing my point.
TWO UNBEATABLE SQUIRREL GIRL MOVIES WHEN

Now do a webm comparing them in motion
OH WAIT >:^)

My point is no medium is better. I'm not sure what you mean with that last sentence. I can bring up bad cape movies too.

see

Opinion is not fact. These movies will not be historically considered cinematic masterpieces, but they are entertaining and aren't put together poorly. They'll end up being a footnote in cinema history since it's the first time there have been a dozen or more interconnected movies that aren't direct sequels. They're just fun movies, popcorn flicks, if you will that you watch and enjoy but don't have a significant impact on cinema in the long run.

You're focusing on one part of the argument instead of addressing the main point. You've just said they'll be forgotten, so why do people act like they're a step up from the original source when sometimes that original source is material like Watchmen?

He seriously drew all of that for one scene?
Damn son, credit where its due. Das effort.

>Watchmen comic can't hold a candle to the Watchmen movie. Idiot.

I knew you would do that. I specifically pointed out that the successful comics that get adapted are the exception, and even then I knew some retard would reply with a succesful comic and think he's outsmart me. Bravo good sir. Quality reading comprehension.

I'm on this board because I enjoy comics, but I'm not fucking delusional as to think that comics are going to appeal to as wide of a market as capeshit movies, when they offer not half of what makes those stories successful. Stop being pitiful little neckbeards, comics will never be mainstream because comics - by an large - aren't. good.

That's just lazy anime animation.

That comic runs are a hell of a lot less exclusive and more disposable. Getting a new volume is in no way comparable to getting a movie.

>appeal
>success
I see you've gone back to your original point about revenue. Nobody is talking about that, dude. This is just an issue of quality. Even if you consider Watchmen an "exception" it proves the point that a movie adaptation isn't necessarily better than its original source. People who are glad to be alive in a time where the MCU is a thing are just casuals who don't read comics.

Exactly. Lazy anime are a thing - so saying anime is superior to manga is a generalisation and it's just plain wrong.

'Aight OP, how does this sound?
A lot of people aren't drawn to comics as a medium so much as they're drawn to the characters that happen to be confined to that medium. And, for reasons spelled out in this thread, would rather see them in other superior mediums if given the choice?

You want to get rid of capeshitposting? Go back in time and shunt superheroes to another medium. Or just nix them altogether; maybe kill the right guy and stop the Silver Age from happening. Of course then we'd probably be bitching about too many monster movie threads.

Before the movie, Watchmen was only famous among comic book fans. Normies had no idea what it was.

Watchmen as a comic book, also didn't have any impact on literature or the literary world outside of comic books. Historically in terms of Literature, Watchmen is just as forgettable any MCU movie is for cinema.

As to your other question about why people become thrilled at the prospect of a movie, I answered it, but didn't answer it in a way. People like going to see fun, popcorn flicks. And people who aren't so hung up on everything being exactly like the comic book like the idea of being able to see the characters they enjoy reading about in comics, up on the big screen. It's only people who can't accept the movies as an "adaptation" that get upset about things in those movies and go online to complain, which always boils down to "not muh comic character!"

TL;DR: Cape movies are fun and the source material isn't some sacred text.

So plebs who are too lazy to read don't want to use the superior medium and think the movies are good because they're casuals, got it.

I enjoyed the Watchmen movie more than the comic.

>people who are glad to see their favorite characters come to life in tangible ways, while seeing them live out their heroics with awe inspiring visuals are casuals
>the people who struggle to accomplish the same feeling from some shitty drawings are not casuals

Like I said, you're delusional. You're fighting a problem that isn't there. It's possible to like comics for what they offer and it's possible to like comics and still very much enjoy their adaptations for what they offer.

It is amazing to see superheroes portrayed in huge blockbosters. It is not amazing to see superheroes drawn on paper. It's just not. I'm sorry if you can't see that, but the big two certainly have.

>superior medium
Explain how the comic medium is superior to the film medium.

>impact
>audiences
>famous
Why do you keep talking about this instead of quality? What's more popular is irrelevant. I'm not going to address your rambling about faithfulness because no one has brought that up except you.

Nigga I'd wager I've read more than you. Film's still superior. No need to get salty over it.

>Movies are no better or worse than comics as a medium.

Moving pictures hurt my eyes.
Seriously though I'm pretty sure he's not arguing that at all. Just that they're equal. Also disagreeable, but more understandable.

>no runtime limit
>no censorship
>not having to worry about an actor aging
>60 years of stories building on one another
>detailed coloring

yeah that is superior to marvel's quipfests with no color grading and shitty villains

>greentext is an argument

>yeah that is superior to marvel's quipfests with no color grading and shitty villains
Wait which medium we talking about?

>Movies are no better or worse than comics as a medium.

Incorrect. Any live action medium is inherently inferior to things like comics, cartoons, and video games, which can literally do anything without limit.

Also
>not having to worry about an actor aging
This point is squarely within film's favor. Status Quo is a massive shit in comics' court.

>video games
Am I being baited here?

I'm actually a little bummed out that these two supposedly aren't friends any more.

Music's nourishes the soul, it's peak medium. Your chart a shit.

You'd think they'd be closer than ever considering.
grilPepe's Rosa right?

Because no one gives a shit about them being masterpieces. Just because you don't like them and thus, think they're poor quality doesn't mean they aren't "good" to most people who watch them. Why do you think McDonalds serves billions of hamburgers every day despite their food being mediocre to the nth degree? It's cheap and it tastes decent going down and it's readily available.

It's true just because something is popular doesn't make it good, but just because you think something is bad doesn't mean other people aren't fine with it and also doesn't mean other people don't enjoy it.

You're literally asking "Why do people talk about why they're excited for these movies when 'I' think they aren't any good?"

You're asking why people like something and I'm telling you why, but you keep dismissing the explanation because YOU don't like the movies.

Plenty of people like cape movies fine. And we like going and seeing them fine. And we look forward to the new ones that come out.

So superior visuals is all you need to be better? I bet you think the Transformers movies are the best thing ever.

What about depth? Plot? Character development?

>WAH WHY DONT PEOPLE SHARE THE SAME OPINION AS ME

the movies are great entertainment flicks, but get over yourself dude. some people just enjoy things that you don't.

Comic books are literature, so you're wrong.

Have you tried reading non superhero books? They are still comics, and so still prove they're a superior medium than movies.

Because quality is highly subjective and seriously using this as an argument leads to a cycle of sore salty snobbery?
Sentry's story arc is the very best Marvel has produced in the past 20 years, fight me fagt.

>no runtime limit
20 odd pages

>no censorship
What is the comics code

>not having to worry about an actor aging
But writer/artist do age, and on some artists it's hit them fucking hard

>60 years of stories building on one another
By this logic, soap operas are the greatest thing known to man because they've been running for so long

>detailed coloring
Are you mad your alien waifu didn't come out in the same colour on the big screen?

>they don't need to be masterpieces it's just entertainment xD

The issue of their quality is literally what I was addressing in the first place. If you aren't interested in discussing that why did you even open the thread? If you really think these movies are better than comics then give arguments besides their popularity.

Many. Give me an Incal movie pls.

>20 odd pages
What are graphic novels?

>What is the comics code
The thing that was abolished years ago?

>Are you mad your alien waifu didn't come out in the same colour on the big screen?
You love Marvel's lack of color grading and TV shots, don't you?

>Like movies are an award given to the best comics, like a step up. Movies are no better or worse than comics as a medium.

That's not why people say that, dumbass. People say that because comics are a niche market, much less mainstream than movies, let alone blockbuster movies produced for mass, global consumption. So when a movie gets made from a product in a niche market, that already has a niche audience within that niche market, i.e. GotG or Dr.Strange, it's doubly unheard of that big Hollywood companies want to take such a risk on a property that doesn't have a good sales history while compared to mainstream cinema.

That only address the "I can't believe" part, not "What a time to be alive!"
99% of superhero movies are a downgrade from their source material.

tbf the fact that we're specifically talking capeshit here, Mahvel capeshit at that, puts a big ol' stopper on that.
And I say that as a Marvelfag. I love them and their universe but let's be real; they're a marketing machine first and an arthouse second, have been since the 60s. IDS ENDERDAINMEBB XDDDD is a wholly acceptable statement here.

Also critiques like QUIPS and CHARACTERS are dependent on all sorts of moving parts that are relevant to either core medium so it seems redundant to bring up.

>they're a marketing machine first and an arthouse second
Only behind cameras. When you judge exclusively what they've put out then they've produced a lot more literature and art than the MCU. Just look at Miller, Alex Ross, Barry Windsor-Smith, Jack Kirby.

Quips aren't redundant to point out when you consider specifically what the movies have adapted. I don't remember Ultron making jokes in the comics.

Have you actually read their source material senpai? Like, the specific eras and arcs, no "wtf Thor 2 wasn't anything like God Butcher".
It was oftentimes bleary, retarded, and susceptible to many of the problems the movies supposedly have (shit where'd you think they picked it up from).

"What a time to be alive!" Is the reaction of older long time comic fans who thought they'd never get to see most of the characters they love in live action on a movie screen. As long as the movie isn't completely terrible it's exciting to see something you've loved for years, but has been confined to 2 dimensions, come to life. It's really that simple.

Why can't God Butcher be quoted when it's proof comics can do a better job than movies?
Yeah, I've read its source material. Ultron's origin was better than Age Of Ultron. Stan Lee did a better job with the Avenger's origin than Joss Whedon. Even the awful Ultimate Thor told a better Thor origin than the Thor movie. Ultimates did a better job designing a realistic Hawkeye and Widow than the movies, and also in their characterisation of Nick Fury. the list goes on and on.

I don't like movies user. Comics are my preferred form of entertainment. And I do think seeing a Ditko piece drawn by one dude is more amazing than something it took 100 keyboard jockies to put together- and still based off the work of Ditko. Yeah.
Stop pretending you like comics. It is okay to just like movies. They suck, but it's okay to like things that suck.
>impoetance, like I give a fuck.

Thor is a panel from Thor 121, the run actually improves dramatically after that.
Thor 131 alone is far better than any of the MCU stories.

>Aaron over Kirby
Maybe you should just stick to your movies.

>Muh visuals!!! It's not 2D anymore!!!!
what about the plot?

I never said Kirby was inferior, retard. I said Ultimate Thor was inferior.

The movies tend to be WORSE than the comics theyre based on.

So X getting a movie would be the WORST thing to happen to a property

this

Because deep down everyone knows that modern comics are unbearably unreadably bad and they'd rather see their favorite characters in a movie than have to endure the shitfests that are modern comics.

>deep down
We're very open about comics being shitty user, there's nothing deep down about it

Ultron was based off of the brainwaves of Tony Stark in this setting and not Hank Pym. It was straight-up attention to detail, there are better examples to choose from.

>Just look at Miller, Alex Ross, Barry Windsor-Smith, Jack Kirby.
Notice how the examples are a lot fewer and further between than DC, let alone creator-owned work? And I'd dispute Kirby, as far as I understand he was primarily a working-class family man trying to put food on the table. Dude's own technique shared more in common with printing presses than human artists. Also Ross might be a bad example for the strength of the artform, since his primary concern is making things look photorealistic anyway.
btw I recommend the Netlfix shows

>modern comics
>sandman overture
>providence
>vision
>atomic robo
>unbearably bad
Sure, please, lord, give us movies of these series so that we can survive.

>Why can't God Butcher be quoted when it's proof comics can do a better job than movies
You're the retard, retard.

What about it? Of course I'd prefer higher quality in both comics and movies. I'm just answering the initial question of the OP. There's really no argument here to be had. It's not a competition. Each medium has it's own strengths and weaknesses.

Because God Butcher was cool for reasons that can be applied to just about any other medium too.
>Even the awful Ultimate Thor told a better Thor origin than the Thor movie
Okay, yeah, nah, now we're just into bullshit territory. Did y'all leave after Act 2 or what?

Ultron having a justification in-universe has no relevance to whether it's better or worse. It was a decision of the filmmakers to change his personality to make him shallower.

Again, explaining why Kirby drew like he drew is saying nothing. He was a visionary with ten times the imagination and discipline than any other artist from nowadays. The point is yes, comics produce more art pieces than movies.

Kirby made great comics, his social class and work ethic have nothing to do with it.
What a stupid, stupid thing to say.

>It's not a competition

not an argument

Variable in either medium. And oftentimes improved upon by the movies anyway.

I don't argue with retards, user.

Please explain how any Marvel movie improved the plot of its original comics. Seriously, I can't wait.

Okay.
Hopefully they adapt more of that and less of the pre-Thor 121 material then. :^)

not an argument

Why not? The dialogues would have more prose than anything shown in the previous Thor movies so far.

>more art pieces than movies.
Is that a numerical fact? How do you measure that?

>And I do think seeing a Ditko piece drawn by one dude is more amazing than something it took 100 keyboard jockies to put together
Well given that the latter's easily 100 times more impressive...
>but it's okay to like things that suck
Naturally, why else would you be here defending children's books from the 60s and Mark fucking Millar?

There are dozens of marvel movies, there are thousands of marvel comics

>children's books
If you care to read them you'd notice the plots are far too complex for a child

All variable in either medium.
Seriously give the TV shows a go. More time to allow those things to breath.

Does it really matter though since people enjoy the movies and enjoy seeing those characters on screen? Not to mention, people can't be bothered reading anything these days. Movies are cheaper to buy.

>early Ultron
>not shallow
k
user he was literally fucking born yesterday