Geek S**T Generation 2.0

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
Who the fuck insulted Thor?

I think it was Professor X. We’re cool, but I’m sorry, X.

First, Wolverine is an overrated piece of dog shit. If not for is popularity, he’d get his ass handed to him by crap villains like Stilt-Man.

Second, Thor has done more than Wolverine could ever hope to do. When Wolverine shows up, this is what super heroes think:

“Great, Wolverine’s come to make jokes, look mean, and cut random ninjas with his butter knives. Too bad he’s useless against Ultron, Dr.Doom, and Hulk.”

When Thor shows up, this is what happens:

“Thank God, we can win now. While he takes on the heavy hitters, we’ll rest up and attack from the side”

The only reason the Hulk vs Wolverine was better than Hulk vs Thor is cause the movie was a Wolverine Blowjob put on Dvd. They stroke him like a high priced hooker.

Fuck Wolverine, he can rot and die with his butter knife weapons.

Wolverine doesn’t fight Hulk on the regular and if he does, he never beats him. He either gets his ass whipped or survives.

Thor throws hands with Hulk on the regular. No other super hero has as many single matches against the Hulk like Thor. And Thor isn’t fighting watered down Gray Hulk or Hulk with Banner’s mind or Hulk who doesn’t feel like fighting.

Thor fights the Hulk who’s trying to smash everything up.[/quote]

Just now reading this.

Wolverine is popular because of his “Dirty Harry”-esque personality along with the “X-gene” business. That makes his character work on several levels. This was confirmed by how he was accepted in the movies despite the ridiculous haircut.

I don’t doubt that Thor is one of the most powerful beings on the planet, but to deny how relatively BORING that character is simply can not be tolerated.

Yes, we get it…blond hair, big mutherfucker, giant fucking hammer and the ability to control lightening. That all sounds really bad ass…until you compare him to more interesting characters in the Marvel universe that have more humanity and more overall depth.

Hell, give me Iron man - a guy who basically made himself into one of the world’s greatest weapons - over some guy who is apparently indestructible…even though he can still die…any day.

That Thor vs Hulk just exposed how boring that concept can be if they don’t give him MUCH more personality.

He had NONE in that movie. He was basically a blond mannequin with a funny voice. That was as “deep” as his character ever got.

If it weren’t for Loki and several other colorful side characters, there would be nothing to him.

In fact, the test of a true “superhero” is if they are still interesting if they lose all of their powers.

Thor would NOT be.

I rest my case.

Rourke has been confermed as playing Whiplash in Iron Man 2.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just now reading this.

Wolverine is popular because of his “Dirty Harry”-esque personality along with the “X-gene” business. That makes his character work on several levels. This was confirmed by how he was accepted in the movies despite the ridiculous haircut.

I don’t doubt that Thor is one of the most powerful beings on the planet, but to deny how relatively BORING that character is simply can not be tolerated.

Yes, we get it…blond hair, big mutherfucker, giant fucking hammer and the ability to control lightening. That all sounds really bad ass…until you compare him to more interesting characters in the Marvel universe that have more humanity and more overall depth.

Hell, give me Iron man - a guy who basically made himself into one of the world’s greatest weapons - over some guy who is apparently indestructible…even though he can still die…any day.

That Thor vs Hulk just exposed how boring that concept can be if they don’t give him MUCH more personality.

He had NONE in that movie. He was basically a blond mannequin with a funny voice. That was as “deep” as his character ever got.

If it weren’t for Loki and several other colorful side characters, there would be nothing to him.

In fact, the test of a true “superhero” is if they are still interesting if they lose all of their powers.

Thor would NOT be.

I rest my case.[/quote]

Some folks know how to write for the God-like super powers, but most don’t. Thor has as much soul as any of the Marvel half-pints. Thor was probably the best thing (next to the horny, psychotic Hulk) to come out of the Ultimates comic books. Their treatment of the Norse god is perfect and don’t rely on some crazy split personality / transformation gimmick to interject his humanity.

Besides Wolverine has had plenty of crappy stories in his time. Try reading the turd that Daniel Way wrote in Wolverine: Origins and compare that to Joss Wedon’s use of Wolvy in Astonishing X-Men.

[quote]Himora22 wrote:
Rourke has been confermed as playing Whiplash in Iron Man 2.

[/quote]

Pffft. There’s another interesting villain for us… rolls eyes

Where the HELL is Mandarin?

It’s funny you mention Joss Whedon. Some of you may have seen this, but I thought he had an interesting take on why it’s harder to get DC characters on the big screen (this would also apply to Thor).

He also talked about his involvement in Wonder Woman before it got shelved.

http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2009/02/joss-whedon-why-its-so-hard-ge.html


The trailers for X-Men Origins: Wolverine look great, but I’m left wondering:

WTF!?!?!?!?!?! Is going on with Deadpool?

  1. The “Merc with the mouth” is now a silent killer?

  2. What about him being bat shit crazy, and his little slips into “Deadpool Vision”?

  3. Where’s the trade mark costume?

[quote]SSC wrote:
Himora22 wrote:
Rourke has been confermed as playing Whiplash in Iron Man 2.

Pffft. There’s another interesting villain for us… rolls eyes

Where the HELL is Mandarin?[/quote]

With Rourke its always interesting

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Wolverine is popular because of his “Dirty Harry”-esque personality along with the “X-gene” business. That makes his character work on several levels. This was confirmed by how he was accepted in the movies despite the ridiculous haircut.

I don’t doubt that Thor is one of the most powerful beings on the planet, but to deny how relatively BORING that character is simply can not be tolerated.

Yes, we get it…blond hair, big mutherfucker, giant fucking hammer and the ability to control lightening. That all sounds really bad ass…until you compare him to more interesting characters in the Marvel universe that have more humanity and more overall depth.

Hell, give me Iron man - a guy who basically made himself into one of the world’s greatest weapons - over some guy who is apparently indestructible…even though he can still die…any day.

That Thor vs Hulk just exposed how boring that concept can be if they don’t give him MUCH more personality.

He had NONE in that movie. He was basically a blond mannequin with a funny voice. That was as “deep” as his character ever got.

If it weren’t for Loki and several other colorful side characters, there would be nothing to him.

In fact, the test of a true “superhero” is if they are still interesting if they lose all of their powers.

Thor would NOT be.

I rest my case.[/quote]

I don’t see how smoking cigars, going berserk, and getting your ass kicked is considered deep. A supposed “Bad boy” with anger issues.

The Hulk vs movies might as well be called “Wolverine” and friends. The budget was obviously in Wolvie’s favor.

They never show case the times when Thor is drunk and is rough housing with his friends. They never show case when his woman issues with Enchantress and Freya. Thor isn’t just some blonde robot. He’s had issues where emotional shit has happened to him.

And how can you test a superhero based on interest and popularity? Captain America. Some would consider him a robot with a shield, but he’s a true hero. Spider-Man. He’s fought people stronger than him and fights as hard as possible without some bullshit healing factor.

Thor: His hammer has has broken apart so many times! He’s lost his belt of strength so many times! He’s been thrashed by people like Hulk, Dessak, Absorbing man, Loki, etc. He keeps on fighting.

When I think of heroes I want by my side at the end, it would be people like Cap, Spidey, and Thor. Wolvie is just some wanna be bad boy with butter knives in his fist.

When Thor fought the Celestials, he had to enter the body of one of the celestials and fight the immune system. His hammer was broken up and he had to collect the pieces. The celestials were the size of mountains and I think that was the smaller one.

Thor is the ultimate T-man. He drinks, fucks, gets wounded in battle, and comes back to fight and win. He just doesn’t make a show of it like Wolverine does.

Iron Man: A smart alcoholic in a iron suit.
Wolverine: mutant with an over exaggerated healing factor and bone claws. The adamantium was given to him.

[quote]Bujo wrote:
The trailers for X-Men Origins: Wolverine look great, but I’m left wondering:

WTF!?!?!?!?!?! Is going on with Deadpool?

  1. The “Merc with the mouth” is now a silent killer?

  2. What about him being bat shit crazy, and his little slips into “Deadpool Vision”?

  3. Where’s the trade mark costume?

[/quote]

Not to hard to believe. Fox like to finds ways to fuck its self. But for now this is just hear say.

[quote]WolBarret wrote:

Wolverine: mutant with an over exaggerated healing factor and bone claws. The adamantium was given to him.[/quote]

Nothing wrong with being a mutant, buddy. I’m one.

[quote]Bujo wrote:
The trailers for X-Men Origins: Wolverine look great, but I’m left wondering:

WTF!?!?!?!?!?! Is going on with Deadpool?

  1. The “Merc with the mouth” is now a silent killer?

  2. What about him being bat shit crazy, and his little slips into “Deadpool Vision”?

  3. Where’s the trade mark costume?

[/quote]

What the hell?! That is so wrong! I always figured the whole reason they cast Ryan Reynolds was because he’s a smart-ass, motor-mouth type of guy and that fit in well with Deadpool’s personality. Now he’s going to be silent?!

I really hope that is not true at all. If it is, then they really f-ed up and that is going to suck.

[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
WolBarret wrote:

Wolverine: mutant with an over exaggerated healing factor and bone claws. The adamantium was given to him.

Nothing wrong with being a mutant, buddy. I’m one.[/quote]

Your breasts and ass isn’t a mutant defect, but a gift from God. Big difference.

Here is a GREAT(!!) break down of the newest Wolverine triler. IGN’s movie editors go through it frame by frame and give a good take on the trialer as a whole.

Iron Man 2
May 7, 2010 May 7, 2010

Spider-Man 4 May 6, 2011

Thor
July 16, 2010 June 17, 2011

The First Avenger: Captain America
May 6, 2011 July 22, 2011

The Avengers
July 15, 2011 May 4, 2012

Aasif Mandvi, Shaun Toub and Cliff Curtis have joined the cast of M. Night Shyamalan’s The Last Airbender. Mandvi is set to play the role of Commander Zhao. Toub, last seen in Iron Man and The Kite Runner, is cast as Uncle Iroh. Curtis is set to play the ruthless ruler Fire Lord Ozai.

[quote]Himora22 wrote:
The Avengers
July 15, 2011 May 4, 2012
[/quote]

Whew… thank God. Hopefully it doesn’t get pushed back, or none of us will get to see it…

:S

For you fans of Iron Man, Scarlett Johansson, and Scarlett Johansson’s breasts:

I am kinda shocked in that Emily Blunt would give up Iron Man 2 for Gulliver’s Travels. I would tell Gulliver to fuck off in my opinion, unless contractual shit has been signed already.

[quote]SSC wrote:
Himora22 wrote:
The Avengers
July 15, 2011 May 4, 2012

Whew… thank God. Hopefully it doesn’t get pushed back, or none of us will get to see it…

:S[/quote]

I’m actually glad they pushed it back. Maybe this means Favreau can still direct it. He mentioned that he would love to be involved in The Avengers (in another interview he said he was kind of looking at The Avengers as the third Iron Man movie, rather than make Iron Man 3), but said that there’s no way he could do Iron Man 2 for release in 2010 and then have The Avengers done a year later.

He even expressed concern that 2011 was too aggressive of a release date even if a different director was involved. I’d rather they push it back and take the time to make a better movie, rather than rush a movie out just so they have something big coming out fo the summer of 2011.

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
Bujo wrote:
The trailers for X-Men Origins: Wolverine look great, but I’m left wondering:

WTF!?!?!?!?!?! Is going on with Deadpool?

  1. The “Merc with the mouth” is now a silent killer?

  2. What about him being bat shit crazy, and his little slips into “Deadpool Vision”?

  3. Where’s the trade mark costume?

What the hell?! That is so wrong! I always figured the whole reason they cast Ryan Reynolds was because he’s a smart-ass, motor-mouth type of guy and that fit in well with Deadpool’s personality. Now he’s going to be silent?!

I really hope that is not true at all. If it is, then they really f-ed up and that is going to suck.[/quote]

Exactly what I thought. Why else cast a comedic actor in the role of a comedic character? Oh, well. We shall see.

[quote]Himora22 wrote:

Not to hard to believe. Fox like to finds ways to fuck its self. But for now this is just hear say.[/quote]

There is a true-to-the-comics Deadpool action figure available on the shelves now. Which gives credence to the rumor that Deadpool will undergo some transformation into the evil anal prober I posted earlier.

Plus all you dorks out there can stage your own Deadpool vs Snake Eyes duals.