re: 'Captain Marvel' Tomatometer 79% - Box Office Watch - One fan has watched it 116 times

quote:

---

Code for "Carol Danvers is a bad character that they can't sell to the comic buying crowd. So they keep throwing shite on the wall hoping they buy it this time."

---

Even the great Batman has TONS of retconning in his past, not limited to League of Assassins, his Kill Rule, Philip Wayne/Alfred, his founding of the Justice League, Joe Chill, etc.

And not all retcons are bad anyway, it's called many, many different writers over literal decades. it's often a part of the charm of comic books.

BTW, I don't know if you know, but comic book characters never age. Should probably point that out.

quote:

---

And not all retcons are bad anyway, it's called many, many different writers over literal decades. it's often a part of the charm of comic books.

---

So why do fans flip out when a movie tries to change it up? MOS, being the biggest example.

It’ll get hammered by the left for not being feminist enough and hammered by the right for being too feminist.

I just hope it’s enjoyable. Not looking for life changing shite here

quote:

---

It's only the Indies that apparently don't have a slush fund that get pissed on.

---

A few Indies from last year and their RT rating:

The Favourite - 93%
First Reformed - 93%
Leave No Trace - 100%
You Were Never Really Here - 89%
Mandy - 91%
Private Life - 93%
Won't You Be My Neighbor - 98%
Sorry to Bother You - 93%
Eighth Grade - 99%

I mean, come on...

quote:

---

Score on metacritic is down to 66% by the critics(lol at RT numbers)

---

66% on Metacritic isn't a bad number.

For comparison purposes:

Ant man and the Wasp has a higher metacritic score than infinity war? Whaaaaat

quote:

---

Marvel took A LOT of liberties with characters that no one said a peep about, it's HOW and what the changes are, and how they match the characters that are important.

---

Which is pretty important with Carol Danvers. "The Rape of Ms. Marvel" is a feminist critique of Avengers #200 written in 1980 and it might be the single most important essay ever written about comic books as a medium. We can argue about when comics became a respected art form, but that essay is a huge part of the story and it showed comics could withstand true critical analysis (even an exceedingly harsh one).
LINK

Most importantly, the essay reached Chris Claremont, former writer of Ms. Marvel (and at the time, current X-Men writer). Claremont wrote Avengers Annual #10, which attempted to rectify some of the worst transgressions of Avengers #200 and most importantly, he took over Danvers and essentially prevented further harm to her character by taking her off the board and having Rogue kill her and steal her powers.

Pretty much everything that happened to the character from that point on has an echo of the Rape of Ms. Marvel controversy until finally Kelly DeConnick took over the character, dropped the Ms. and the swimsuit/thong, and designed her character after her Air Force pilot father. There is no character who was more badly in needing of rewrite, so much so that not even Clarmeont could fully rescue her from the damage done.

The WHY of Danvers is maybe more interesting than the comic itself. Her character history, and the backroom wranlging in Marvel's bullpen over it, is perhaps the most interesting in comic book history.

You do the research. I looked up last month's numbers, and this is what I found. It's literally #1. I make no argument about the sales in 2015 or whatever. The argument was that it's a poor selling comic, and I demonstrated that claim is incorrect. I feel no need to do more research on the topic. If no one was interested in the film, there would be no sales bump. The very proof there IS a bump shows interest that the OP denied existed.

And is your argument that it was Marvel's ONLY issue #1 that month?

Metacritic has it as a 67.

My biggest fear for the movie is what the New York Post reviewer said. Larson is a bore in the role.