Chris Pratt Reveals What He Wants From DC Films

Chris Pratt DC Chris Pratt joins the likes of his Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 director James Gunn and DC Films producer Geoff Johns in reaching across the Marvel/DC divide to show that fans can enjoy both brands.

The rivalry between Marvel Comics and DC Comics has always existed, but now that both brands have a cinematic universe, the rivalry within the fan community has grown to bigger proportions. While the Marvel Cinematic Universe has consistently received positive critical reviews for the majority of their films, the DC Extended Universe hasn’t been warmly received by critics.

Interestingly enough, Pratt enjoys DC movies. When speaking to io9, the actor expressed his enjoyment of the films while also revealing what he would like to see the studio improve upon with future films:

I really like all the Warner Bros. movies. I think they’re really cool and I’m not a real tough critic on those movies. But one of the flaws might have been they were introducing too many characters in Suicide Squad. They spent 10 minutes telling us why should we care about these characters, rather than creating trilogies for each character and convincing us to care about the characters.

Pratt goes on to explain how he believes that given Marvel’s track record, the fact that Kevin Feige and company have developed this shared universe through individual movies before the big team-up showcases that the formula breeds success:

It’s like hardwood. They grew it really slowly so it’s strong. They didn’t create The Avengers first. They did Iron Man. And they tested it to make sure it worked. Then they did [Iron Man II] and [Iron Man III], then they did Cap, and then they did Thor. And they created a thirst for these characters, and that’s when they put them in The Avengers.

It is nice to hear a Marvel actor like Pratt express that he does enjoy DC films. Along with the Marvel characters, it seems likely that Pratt grew up enjoying DC characters as well. Plus, he’s already starred in a movie alongside Batman in The LEGO Movie. Safe to say he just enjoys good storytelling.

Set to the backdrop of ‘Awesome Mixtape #2,’ Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 continues the team’s adventures as they traverse the outer reaches of the cosmos. The Guardians must fight to keep their newfound family together as they unravel the mysteries of Peter Quill’s true parentage. Old foes become new allies and fan-favorite characters from the classic comics will come to our heroes’ aid as the Marvel cinematic universe continues to expand.

Directed by James Gunn and starring Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Michael Rooker, Karen Gillan, Pom Klementieff, Elizabeth Debicki, Chris Sullivan, Sean Gunn, Sylvester Stallone and Kurt Russell, Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 blasts into theaters on May 5, 2017.

Source: i09

10 Things We Would Like To See In ‘Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3’

Previous1 of 11

Guardians of the GalaxyGuardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is almost upon us, but we’re already talking about what’s next for our favorite ragtag group of cosmic heroes. It’s already been announced that writer/director James Gunn will return for a third outing in the Marvel franchise, with the upcoming sequel getting positive buzz on social media based from early screenings. Of course, the Guardians are also due to return for the upcoming Avengers: Infinity War films as well, teaming up with Earth’s Mightiest Heroes against Thanos as he gathers the Infinity Stones together to wield ultimate power.

Gunn commented on Facebook that the third film will “conclude the story of this iteration of the Guardians of the Galaxy, and help catapult both old and new Marvel characters into the next ten years and beyond.” While Phase 4 hasn’t been officially announced, it’s assumed that this third film will be Marvel Studios’ kick-off movie for their next batch of films, most likely eyeing a May 2020 release.

With a third Guardians of the Galaxy film on the horizon, where could they possibly go for the next movie? Although this iteration of the Guardians has only been around since 2008, there’s a lot of stories and characters that could be introduced. We’ve barely scratched the surface in the Marvel cosmic world. Here are a few things we could possibly see in a third Guardians film. Click Next to take a look….

Previous1 of 11

Noah Villaverde

Noah Villaverde

Cinema lover. Saxophone player. Coffee consumer. Chronic complainer. Oh, I also write. #TeamHeroic

  • Radar Technician Matt

    “But one of the flaws might have been they were introducing too many characters in Suicide Squad. They spent 10 minutes telling us why should we care about these characters, rather than creating trilogies for each character and convincing us to care about the characters.”
    I didn’t like SS as much, but is he for real? That’s exactly what GotG did….. *facepalm*

    • Ruben C Barron

      The only difference is that the Guardians are always a team. To do a guardians film you have to have them be a team and develop them in that context. Suicide Squad is also a team, but it’s the culmination of characters who are typically on their own as villains against the heroes and that’s where they are usually developed as characters. I don’t think it was wrong to go straight to Suicide Squad, but the film would have been better served if they had introduced and built each villain in the hero’s stand alone films first. I enjoyed Suicide Squad a lot. Was it a poorly edited film? Definitely. Could it have been better? Sure. Was the introduction of the characters the problem? I don’t think so. I don’t think the director was the problem either. I would’ve enjoyed seeing Ayer’s original vision before the studio stepped all over it. That was the biggest flaw, the pacing was horrendous. I was surprised when Deadshot ended up as my favorite character. He stole the movie for me and I’d love a stand alone with him.

      • Radar Technician Matt

        Let’s not forget the characters in X-Men and Watchmen. They did great job introducing them. Also let’s not forget how we almost got a Justice League (Mortal) movie directed by George Miller in 2009. I guess people back then wouldn’t complain with Miller introducing the League with no solo movies… because “not Snyder”.

        • Ruben C Barron

          Like I said, the Watchmen were basically a team, The X-men are teams. Would people have accepted Justice League Mortal in 2009 and liked it? Sure, because they’d never had something built from the ground up with stand alone films and thus couldn’t know that they would prefer it because they don’t even know it existed.

          If you like bologna and have never had anything but bologna, and you’ve never had Steak. Never known that Steak could even exist or taste so good, does that mean it doesn’t taste better? Does that mean you wouldn’t prefer a 16oz ribeye over a bologna sandwich? Just because something would have been appreciated in the past, that doesn’t mean people wouldn’t like something better.

          • OminousFlare

            lol Right, because Suicide Squad isn’t a team. Go read some comics.

          • Ruben C Barron

            You don’t read too well do you? I said they are a team, but the characters aren’t established in that team. The team comes later once they are established in other films as villains. Whereas the Guardians are known for being on that team more than as individuals.

    • Axxell

      …minus the introductory bios.

  • 12stepCornelius

    Ah, one in the “They should’ve done solo movies first” camp. He’s talking overcrowding in DC movies? Tell me, why were Vision, Scarlett Witch, Hawkeye, Ant-Man, and Spider-Man important in Civil War again?

    • Radar Technician Matt

      Spider-Man and Ant-Man made no sense to be there and were pure fan-service for sure. They had no connection with the story at all, but I guess fighting for a cause that’s none of their business made sense…. oh wait it didn’t.

      • Sumit Sinha

        Ant Man made sense as he was too introduced before CW and Avengers know him and his abilities..Spiderman was more of a cameo and now he is getting his own movie.He doesn’t require any introduction.

      • Ruben C Barron

        Of course, because a set of international accords that tell you when and where you’re allowed to use your abilities to help people according to the government’s agenda or face inprisonment has nothing to do with Vision, Spide-man, Scarlet Witch, or any of the other powered individuals for which the accords were created in the first place.

    • Sumit Sinha

      If you see in detail every marvel character was introduced already throughout major movies before they reach to civil war .And in suicide squad all the villain characters were new never seen in any film before.Also GOTG was also an independent movie to introduce cosmic universe.Its all well planned for Avengers 3.

      • Sumit Sinha

        Black panther introduced in CW and getting his own movie too.

      • 12stepCornelius

        Spider-Man was not though. He was just there for one battle and then that was it. Ant-Man got dragged in for no other reason than to blindly fight all these superheroes he looks up to and idolizes, and Hawkeye, Scarlett Witch, and Vision literally did next to nothing, other than SW killing people in the beginning of the movie. Then she was just sidelined for some unnecessary romance arc with Vision. Hawkeye just came in like, “Whaddup?” Then bolted after the fight. Messy.

        • Sumit Sinha

          See marvel has done one thing great.They are successful in convincing people that all the things are connected even though if they are not.But in some point later they do connect dots. How is it messy?DC fails in that area till now.They made MoS and then BvS. they should have made a standalone Batman movie to make their collision in BvS. so they could have got oppotunity to introduce some of the villains in SS before the SS movie.Similarly for flash and Aquaman.these are major characters.

    • Marquis de Sade

      Yeah, Marvel should follow dceu’s business model by introducing their new characters via Email w/ attachments, huh dceu sycophant? – Btw, how’s that flash movie coming along?

  • Keiran S-C

    his first statement is just hypocritical O_o second concerning how the mcu did sequels is wrong from my perspective, all i saw was them test the waters with IM1 and see it was great ppl liked it, then they simply replicated the exact same character persona and film formula for everyone else and called them all unique individuals who they then smashed into a combine movie with nothing tying them together other than a few hastily thrown in clips after the end credits :/ that isnt planning thats hoping a theme will catch on then jumping in more or less blind in my books.

    it feels like DC have planned their movies out alot more logically, especially when compared to the mcus method.

    its nice to see the heroes actually meeting or atleast knowing about each other and planning to form a team before hand, it gives the impression the universe is meant to be combined instead of came about by accident

    • Axxell

      One thing I can tell you is that nobody was confused about why Cap and Ironman were fighting in Civil War…can’t say the same for BvS.

      • Keiran S-C

        if you were confused over why they fought in BVS then that speaks volumes about your attention span aha.

        cw was lazyyy from start to finish just because their was a single good fight scene(if watched on its own) doesnt make up for soo many mistakes. story lines such as opening the movie with a woman blaming stark for the death of her son then having him run out and recruit the first under age kid he could get his hands on to fight the worlds most deadly assassin, is hypocritical storytelling.
        Having stark inform us hes broken up with potts, a relationship which spanned 3 standalone films, in a single emotionless sentence without the actress even being present then instantly hitting on the hot new milf in the next scene, while parker quietly agrees to fight the worlds most beloved hero in the background for literally no reason other than to team up with the guy whos latest mistake nearly ended humanity…. that is lazy writing.

        Then their was the big cringy play fight in the airport which was navigated though by one liners only to randomly end with vision shooting death beams at his mates and being surprised when they actually land and nearly kill one of the flimsy humans….. while spiderman has vanished leaving no impact on the narrative whatsoever xD

        and needless to mention bucky freezing himself lol and cap sending a nice little note and a phone to stark so they can remain mates for when times get tough urgh (and mr.stank…….) their was such poor writing in this film the only decent part atall was black pantha and the final fight would have been great if it didnt directly follow a comedy fest of a fight scene leaving 0 atmosphere to work with going in so it all had to be created, built up, concluded and resolved in a single scene

        • Axxell

          The fact you still claim Stark being hypocritical is a flaw of the movie shows how little you understand about the way Marvel’s characters work.

          But we’ve had this argument a hundred times and you still don’t get it. After all, you’re a fan of a publisher whose characters are presented as flawless, pristine “never-hypocritical” heroes. And even when they half äss their flaws to make them less boring, they still fail miserably at it (like the “world’s greatest detective” not knowing the guy he’s been preparing to fight for 2 years has a mom named Martha…).

          But I don’t need to go over every single way the DCCU has failed so far…there’s been volumes of digital ink written already, enough to fill the Library of Congress…

          • Keiran S-C

            you dont seem to have read the scenes i pointed out, i am not talking about his personality but story points that contradict one another. Unless stark is a heartless machine
            with no humanity like ultron then this scene makes no sense.

            To have you main hero blamed for the DEATH of a mothers son and have her push a photo of her son into his chest only to go out and grab the first kid he can to put in danger for the hel* of it!, is not ok because he has a cocky break all the rules personality it was simply poor writing, it felt like whoever wrote the opening scenes forgot to tell the writers in charge of spidermans story line and the narratives made no sense when shot side by side.
            It does seem like a well agreed upon rule for mcu fans to ignore the glaring plot holes in their films because it tarnishes their dreamy views on the franchise they love so much but that doesnt change the fact they are present.

            How would batman have known supermans mothers identity? the only person in the world to have figured that out was lois and thats because clark revealed himself to her before hand leaving a thread for her to unwind and follow back to him (he even knew she was doing so but allowed her to continue simply because he had the hots for her), in batmans case he has no lead to follow and sees what everyone else sees, you are essentially saying why doesnt the US government(for example) know who superman is by now they have unlimited resources at their disposal. That aside you are criticising a story point which has been around since the first meeting of batman and superman in the comics and has nothing to do with the quality of writing in the movie.

            i feel this is another downside to being an mcu fan it trains you not to think about grounding aspects of comics such as secret identities so that when they are actually shown on screen by a different franchise these type of fans start seeing them as flaws which is not the case and never has been.

          • Axxell

            Ah, but you ARE talking about his personality; otherwise you wouldn’t be using adjectives like “hypocritical”, “heartless” and “no humanity” to criticize the movie. You’re simply incapable of pointing out a plot hole in the decision to recruit Spiderman, that doesn’t attack Stark’s character directly. And it’s because you know well enough that it’s not a “plot hole”…in the grand context of the Marvel Universe, this decision is entirely plausible for Stark to make. Sorry. Nice try.

            As for your excuse of Batman’s veteran detective ineptitude, your argument falls apart quite easily with the many plot holes of BvS, first of which contradicts your opening statement on the subject: the fact Lex Luthor also knew who Superman was. And AFAIK he had no “thread” to do it. In the same amount of time that Batman was preparing to fight Superman, Luthor discovered Superman’s weakness AND his secret identity, meanwhile I can’t remember a dåmn thing Batman found out on his own about Supes, that Lex didn’t already know.

            But I find it amusing that you speak about the “grounding aspects of comics such as secret identities” in DC, where Superman’s sole protector of his secret identity is a pair of bifocals. How “grounding”…

          • Keiran S-C

            no i didnt describe starks personality as a means to criticise the movie i used it to show how the narrative makes stark look and how that is not an accurate assumption for the character to proceeded along this storyline.

            Lets say spiderman was apart of the main narrative… that he actually held some significance and was essential to the story continuing. For a quick example lets say Parker had a beef with one of caps team and some intel on cap or WS which stark needed! to track them down and catch up instead of running on their coat tails.
            That would make sense from starks perspective, he would have to hire this kid against his better judgement with the weight of the woman’s accusation resting heavily on his mind because parker wouldn’t give him the intel otherwise. <<< that works, starks ego and greed would over power his logic and feelings of doubt, playing right into his character.

            BUT having him simply ignore the woman and not feel any guilt whatsoever is simply inhuman, he didnt need spiderman, he wanted him and the writers simply forgot about the opening scenes and the impressions that would leave on his character for this situation. The fact spiderman was unnecessary makes the decision to put him in danger a plot hole and the fact stark choose to completely and utterly ignore the womans accusation in the opening scenes doesnt correspond with his personality atall(unless he has amnesia) it shows a lapse in the writers understanding and thus makes this an out of character decision since theirs no logic or need behind it to over come feelings.

            As for lex knowing supermans identity i think this link sums up the reason why it is unexplained:


            Its essentially the same reason we are not told the jokers origin in TDK, it takes away from the importance of the character and their accomplishments in this case the genius that is Lex Luthor.

            A good assumption for this specific situation would be that lex is a villain, he goes to much darker lengths to achieve his goals than batman and it is a fair assumption that he has tracked clarks movements for over a year now, even creating situations for him to reveal his trajectory and confirm his suspicions of supermans identity, for example the dessert scene could be one of dozens of situations lex has master minded inorder to calculate how fast superman takes to arrive and the location his trajectory points towards.
            This is backed up by Lexs agents in the dessert camp knowing exactly how long superman is going to take to arrive and timing their plan for his arrival and their exit to perfection.

            Its also obvious why bamtan is still in the dark, he isnt willing to go to those lengths to kill innocents to bait out superman, he is more concerned with stopping him not understanding or kidnapping his relatives to blackmail him. Batmans goal is to stop him kill him not talk about his parents and get to know one another

            yes it would be nice to know everything but i dont consider this a plot hole at all it adds to the narrative and to Lexs character.
            Its also the reason Lex asks for clark to cover the ball fyi and introduce him to bruce face to face.

            really? your going to keep on about supermans glasses hiding his identity, again that has nothing to do with the consistency of the film it is apart of supermans character.
            As any superman fan knows its not a simple matter of putting on a pair of glasses he lowers the octave of his voice by manipulating his vocal cords, changes his hair style, relaxes his muscles to appear a few inches smaller, wears clothes that are too big for him to hide his muscle mass and definition, its all common knowledge to comic fans and semi believable since hes an alien with more control over his own body than a human has, all that aside this is a superhero we re talking about and who the hel* expects superman to have a secret identity and work along side you xD
            Their is a famous comic which uses these exact reasons to explain how he gets away with it.

            Batmans identity is equally as thin if not more so given his job, same thing could be said for 90% of superheros secret identities but at least DC are keeping that crucial part of their characters true and not throwing it out the window.

          • Axxell

            Your little scenario makes me glad you’re not a writer…You’d starve to death. If Marvel tasked you to make Stark look “egotistical and greedy”, you’d actually achieve the opposite, with Spiderman blackmailing Stark into letting him on to the team for his own personal (read: egotistical) vendetta, and Stark looking like the one having to make an emotionally neutral choice for the good of the cause.

            Man known to make dubious, reckless decisions (like giving his domicile address to the public in IM3)…makes dubious, reckless decision (like bringing a (superpowered) kid into a superhero fight). If that’s not in character, nothing is.

            The fact you used the phrase “better judgement” and “Stark” in the same sentence proves beyond doubt you don’t understand the character, and are in no position to say what constitutes a plot hole. Not that your incessant strain in your attempt to find something to criticize Marvel with doesn’t give it away, mind you…Seriously, you’re trying too hard, and you can’t possibly believe it for real yourself.

            The problem I pointed out in BvS isn’t about Luthor knowing their identities; I couldn’t care less about that decision. The problem happens when the “world’s greatest detective”, with virtually unlimited resources and supposedly top notch technology and genius, can’t do what script kiddies in 4chan do in 2 or 3 red bull fueled nights: doxx someone. And don’t hide behind his “no-kill” rule; the comics (and animations) are loaded with stories of Batman figuring out Superman’s identity, without ANY casualties. Either this is a plot hole, or Batman is nothing but a guy in a leather costume. Again, you speak of keeping the secret of Luthor’s methods to “add to the narrative and to [his] character”…but what about Batman’s narrative? Where exactly did Batman put to use his 20 something years of crimefighting experience and genius? What did he achieve or discover in the movie that wasn’t due to something Luthor did? Of course, we all know this was just WB needing a lazy excuse to shoehorn the canned cinematic go-to Dark Knight Returns storyline and emulate the popular intra-hero fights of the MCU, by having Batman and Superman fight for no logical reason.

            I have no problem suspending disbelief; I know it’s a part of comic book stories. What gets me is how DC fans want to have it both ways; bragging about DC being more realistic when convenient, and hiding behind the sci-fi label when not. If you know Superman’s secret identity is a widely known laughingstock that demands suspension of disbelief (talk about “training you not to think”…), why do you thump your chest about DC being more “grounded”, especially on a subject DC excels only for it’s ridiculousness? Not to mention that this discussion is about the movie, not the comics; he does none of the stuff you claim he does to keep his secret in the movie, so my criticism still stands.

          • Keiran S-C

            you get that my scenario wasnt submitted as a final draft for a future film right ??? it was simply to show the need for spidermans character which was absent in the film and how that would have justified starks decision making instead of the heartless uncaring machine you claim he is.

            The fact that stark to his better judgement signs the contract with the government giving them control over the avengers proves he felt guilt and remorse over his actions, he made a decision for the greater good and the woman blaming him at the start of the movie played a big role in that decision otherwise why have it as one of the first things your audience see when watching the film.

            Hiring a kid and putting him in danger mighttt be believable for the character if this was any other film and if it didnt directly go against the character’s entire development since Age of Ultron and the reason behind why he makes the driving decisions in this narrative which are so controversial to Cap. Im not saying hes a docile pus*y cat, but it makes no sense to have him so willing to sign up with the government, which for him is a small way to repent for the near global genocide he was almost responsible for in the last movie, if hes so willing to forget about it when it best fits the studio’s plan to cram spiderman into the universe…

            Stretching to find a flaw? O_o really this is the introduction of one of marvels most popular superheros if not the most popular, its not a small matter i have fished out of the narrative that was rather irrelevant, it was glaringly obvious to anyone whos not blindly supporting the franchise.

            Batman has no need to know his secret identity or even suspect he has one. He acknowledges supes must of had parents during their fight, he says something along the lines of “i bet your parents told you, you would be a hero and save people”. you are still looking at this batman as if hes the guy who wants to arrest all the bad guys in gotham and never harm a soul. This is not that kind of batman, he is 20 years into his career and has lost his way, he is violent, angry and doesnt want to bring superman in alive his goal is to kill him because he poses a threat to humanity on a whole and has already nearly ended their existence by simply taking residence on earth whether for good reasons or bad the risk outweighs allowing one soul to continue living on earth 7 billion times over.
            Especially when if that one being has a difference of opinion or loses his temper even once he could annihilate a city in a second

            Batman doesnt care who superman is when hes not wearing the cape (if he even has a secret identity) he is obsessed with killing him and lex is his means to that.

            You claim he doesnt put his 20 years of detective work to use because lex had the majority of the information he needed ?? batman got that information from the closes source via deception!! that is what he does where else would he have looked O_O.
            Youre saying hes not a good batman because he stole the information from the main villain who had researched the majority of his own plan before executing it.
            I honestly have no idea what your criticism is here.

            and what would have given supermans identity away if he hacked every device clark ever used, like your 4chan uses or whatever your terrible accusation was, do you think he takes selfies of himself in the kryptonian suit? no, batman would of gained valuable information on a reporter from smallville with nothing pointing towards his other identity.

            You accuse me of making a stretch lol xD youre trying your hardest to make out you have to suspend disbelief to simply accept a superhero has a secret identity…. mcu fans right there. It is not a hard thing to believe in the first place.
            Clark was raised on a farm thus the muscles, he works at a newspaper publisher for 8 hours or more a day, wears a buttoned up shirt with a tie, specy glasses and a da*n trench coat aha needless to say he is married to a human woman and the other steps he takes to hide his identity which i mentioned earlier.
            oh God!!! he has muscles and black hair why doesnt everyone suspect hes Superman!!!.

            Thank god youre not a reporter, you would wind up walking into any gym anywhere and assuming their was a dozen supermen in the world.

          • Axxell

            Your scenario is unnecessary because the need for Spiderman is already established in CW. And even as a first draft, it’s so flawed it ends up damaging the established ethos of the franchise. Spiderman as an egotistical blackmailer? No thanks.

            The reason why you don’t get Stark’s seemingly contradictory decision to bring Spiderman with him to the fight is because you don’t get the point of the story…Stark is a man struggling with his ego. The lengths to which he goes to prove himself are what drive him to make reckless decisions. Everyone knows he has a rivalry with Cap since the moment they met. He may have started supporting registration, motivated by the death of the kid, but it’s obvious by the time Spiderman is recruited that Ironman has made the fight personal. And to that end, he’s forgotten why he started fighting in the first place; all in the name of beating Captain America.

            You know what’s really “heartless and uncaring”? Using those words to describe a human falling back on old habits. Even as reckless as it was to involve a kid in his fight with Captain America, it’s not like he picked a random kid and threw him to the wolves; he picked an experienced one who could actually stop 3000 lbs of steel at 40 mph. And specifically told him to stay away from the fighting. Dubious, selfish choice? Yes. “Heartless and uncaring”? No evidence of such. Anyone who knows Ironman in the comics is well acquainted with his waffling between periods of responsible decisions and reckless choices; that’s his character develpment through history. Anything else would be a break of character.

            I pretty much gathered that Batman wasn’t interested in arresting Superman. But the fact he didn’t feel it necessary to know who he was, if he had a secret identity (which he’d have known just listening to Zod in MoS talking abou him living among humans for years…), just goes to show how bad of a detective he was. Obviously WB wanted to set Batman up as a victim of Lex’s manipulation (who ALSO wanted to kill Superman, but unlike Bats, actually did the detective work), but for a crimefighter of 20+ years, to not have done a lick of research, is simply unbelievable. Any person with a cursory knowledge of detective work knows how important it is to know EVERYTHING about your target. Case in point, Lex being able to use Martha Kent to manipulate Superman. The fact he could do this showed why Batman NEEDED to know Supes’ identity. As I mentioned, Batman in other media further exemplify this, which is one more thing where BvS failed.

            Nice try conflating the argument about Superman’s ridiculous secret identity, with “all secret identities aren’t grounded”…you need that straw man. And all those other steps you claim he does to hide his identity, but you can’t prove he really does in the movies…

    • Marquis de Sade

      Oh yeah, totally ignore Nick Fury and S.H.I.E.L.D. orchestrating the formation of THE AVENGERS INIATIVE over the past 5 movies that proceeded the CITIZEN KANE comicbook adaptations, huh?

      • Keiran S-C

        oh please that was not orchestrated at first all they wanted was iron man to be a member along side black widow and hawk eye, then they simply happen upon cap and woke him up hoping hed survive then furys like f*ck it hes in the team thatl do, then thor turns up and sheild all lose their sh*t.

        Then they randomly find banner at the start of the avengers film and go sure uncontrollable monster with anger issues who cant tell friend from foe hes in too! why not what could go wrong(> brings a billion dollar ship down in the next scene). Thor turns up to shields complete surprise and again fury turns around and goes ah yeah a god! get him in the team too, itl be fun….

        Their was nothing orchestrated about this the team just fell together because fury kept blagging his way though situations xD
        DC have shown their characters meeting before they decide to form a team of their own accord, to defend the world… they even have batman & wonder woman looking into super beings who could potentially join the team and picking the best among them. << This is more planning than the mcu did but to their credit they were the first to attempt this kind of combined universe so kudos for doing their best

  • Marquis DC Sade

    All of Marvel’s “careful planning” went out the window pretty quick when Kevin Feige caught wind of BvS. He didn’t want to get shown up at the box office last year so he turned a Cap sequel into an Avengers movie, jammed BP’s origin story in there and started blowing Sony until they kinda, sorta, temporarily, gave him Spider-Man…who served no purpose in the film.

    • Axxell

      And that’s how Civil War still kicked the äss of Justice League Zero (aka BvS)…

      • Maxi Iroh

        I still think CW and BvS are movies of the same level, different types but still on par with each other, with CW edging out a little over BvS:UE.

      • Marquis DC Sade

        Haha Axx-hole, marshmellow fluff always does better with the masses, they get to turn their brains off and aren’t forced to think or feel anything icky. Logan only made around 600 mil despite being better then at least 90 percent of MCU films.

        • Keiran S-C

          Logan only made that much wow it has to be one of the best superhero movies to date the only films id rate higher would be MoS and maybe TDK.
          Crazy its almost like money isnt a good judgement of quality xD

          it baffels me how anyone can defend CW though the storytelling was just abysmal not to mention hypocritical and the tone of the film was all over the place jumping from comedy to forced tension like transitions or timing didnt matter to the director

          **The way they just used and abused spidermans character as this tool to get some easy profit was just sad for both studios :(

        • Axxell

          Whatever helps you fanboys sleep at night…

  • Daniel

    “It’s like hardwood. They grew it really slowly so it’s strong. They didn’t create The Avengers first. They did Iron Man. And they tested it to make sure it worked. Then they did [Iron Man II] and [Iron Man III], then they did Cap, and then they did Thor. And they created a thirst for these characters, and that’s when they put them in The Avengers.”

    That’s exactly why Star Wars sucked so much: Because they didn’t bother to give us three Han Solo movies, three Luke Skywalker movies, three Princess Leia movies, and three Chewbacca movies before bringing them all together in Star Wars. We never felt like we got a chance to know the characters over a trilogy of solo movies for each character. That’s just bad filmmaking on the part of George Lucas!

    • OminousFlare

      Not to mention Guardians of the Galaxy sucked! Compared to Star Wars anyway. How ironic.