Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I still see WW used in memes about role models and such things.

Rotten Tomatoes has lost a lot of relevance in the last couple of years. I'm not sure a bad or good tomato score matters to most moviegoers any more.

Once I started seeing RT scores in actual movie commercials, I knew it was now worthless, completely compromised, and being gamed.

Edit: On a related note, my wife and daughter are looking forward to seeing the film. However, they like all the Marvel films.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
I don't really recall this happening to Wonder Woman and think it's a combination of rumors that Captain Marvel will be more powerful than Thor and that Brie Larson is disliked compared to Gal Gadot.

Nah, it's everything to do with the fact that Carol's comics reboot over the last six years or so is a direct punch in the dick to the kind of knuckle dragging basement dwellers that want non-male superfolk to not exist, or be nothing but tits and skin. She's a symbol to many who have been doing work to excavate human shaped sacks of excrement from "nerddom", and that makes her a target.

Just wanted to quote this in case anyone missed their daily dose of venomous, hate-filled garbage on the internet.

Given it is currently being review bombed by hateful gits prior to the review copies... It seems hard to declare that an inaccurate summary, if immoderate in tone.

Voss wrote:
Given it is currently being review bombed by hateful gits prior to the review copies... It seems hard to declare that an inaccurate summary, if immoderate in tone.

Given that the backchannel suggests that someone went too far in pushing this as a Feminist movie, rather than a really good (and long overdue) movie that just happens to feature a female lead kicking ass, it's deserved.

Note that Alita isn't getting hammered, despite the protagonist being an ass-kicking female. But then, nobody's running their mouths trying to make it some kind of statement.

If the movie is legitimately good, then that's all it needs to be. People will be happy with that. That's what I hope this will be.

It's like nobody learned anything from how badly the Ghostbusters remake was marketed.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Voss wrote:
Given it is currently being review bombed by hateful gits prior to the review copies... It seems hard to declare that an inaccurate summary, if immoderate in tone.

Given that the backchannel suggests that someone went too far in pushing this as a Feminist movie, rather than a really good (and long overdue) movie that just happens to feature a female lead kicking ass, it's deserved.

Note that Alita isn't getting hammered, despite the protagonist being an ass-kicking female. But then, nobody's running their mouths trying to make it some kind of statement.

If the movie is legitimately good, then that's all it needs to be. People will be happy with that. That's what I hope this will be.

It's like nobody learned anything from how badly the Ghostbusters remake was marketed.

When it comes to the Rotten Tomatoes "review bomb" does anyone realize that the poll put up is actually being used as intended? It's not asking if it's a good or bad movie, it's asking if you are planning on seeing it. So any response to that poll is valid.

Quite frankly, there are a number of reasons to not see this movie. Ticket sale estimates have plummeted from near $200 million to $80 million. If corporate people are losing faith, it's an omen of bad quality. Then there are a number of questionable comments made by the lead actress. Disenfranchising a rather large segment of the population isn't a good idea.

In my humble opinion it's at least partially being marketed as "Woman lead makes good movie". Which is both a non-valid argument, and the same marketing mistake made for Ghostbusters 2016.

Will this be a good movie? I don't know. I hope it is, but at the same time I am cautiously hoping they don't turn Captain Marvel into a huge Mary Sue. The marketing strategy has been flawed.

Also, as a side note, the tagline for this move is "Higher, Faster, Further". Damnit, did no one on the production team pass an English class? It's "Farther, not Further".

As I said earlier in the thread, if the studio can keep Brie larson in line and not push this political nonsense, then all is good, but they did it, they pushed politics, they didnt keep a tight hold of Brie larson and now I think that they will suffer for getting involved in the culture war, if its not this film then it will be another as the fanbase, which overwhelmingly are sick of this nonsense, form a backlash, try to blame it on trolls if you want people just know that they didnt fire the first shot, the marketing team did and now the consequences are on the way..... it bloody sucks....

AAAAAand with all that in mind, Alita Battle Angel has a strong female lead, who as above said, kicks arse, is a great role model for young woman, strong, independent, vunerable, makes mistakes and learns from them so grows as a character, the film may not be perfect but it has done all that so well, I was happy to go and see it again with my family in tow..

and just to hammer home how to do marketing correctly



Moral of the story, stay as far away from the streaming cesspit that is the culture war and anyone associated with it as much as possible, it never ends well.

Also, as a side note, the tagline for this move is "Higher, Faster, Further". Damnit, did no one on the production team pass an English class? It's "Farther, not Further".

Only pertaining to distance, not a figurative journey beyond what has been. So it's only incorrrect in a literal sense, but without intent or further context, we can't make a call on whether it was intended literally or not.

 Elbows wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
I don't really recall this happening to Wonder Woman and think it's a combination of rumors that Captain Marvel will be more powerful than Thor and that Brie Larson is disliked compared to Gal Gadot.

Nah, it's everything to do with the fact that Carol's comics reboot over the last six years or so is a direct punch in the dick to the kind of knuckle dragging basement dwellers that want non-male superfolk to not exist, or be nothing but tits and skin. She's a symbol to many who have been doing work to excavate human shaped sacks of excrement from "nerddom", and that makes her a target.

Just wanted to quote this in case anyone missed their daily dose of venomous, hate-filled garbage on the internet.

Thank you for pointing this out. The post you quoted proves something I've said for a LONG time: Whackadoo lunatic behavior for a noble cause is still whackadoo lunatic behavior, and should be called out as such loudly and often.

I admit, no interest in watching this movie, though I do love Brie Larson (especially in "Free Fire" and "Kong") but it is because I have next to no idea who captain marvel is, I don't like comic books or superhero movies as a whole. I have seen a lot of arguments about the movie. I do see it as pushing a character that pretty much only comic fans will recognize and being upset that it may not be as well received as Wonder Woman, who is a character I am pretty sure most people who aren't even comic fans know about.

Projections dropping down by $80,000,000.

Excuses for failure/mediocrity have already begun.

Movie studios are probably going to implement some way to make celebrities control their outbursts and tirades when money is on the line.

And sad, I kinda wanted to see this but it's gone from entertainment to culture war/activism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:
Given it is currently being review bombed by hateful gits prior to the review copies... It seems hard to declare that an inaccurate summary, if immoderate in tone.

Yeah, just like they did during... Wonder Woman?

Oh, wait.

Those 'review bombs' all appear to be people saying "I have no interest in seeing this". You know how some folks like to say, "Oh well, if you don't like it don't watch it!" Yeah, well- that's kinda what appears to be happening right now.

Sterling191 wrote:
Nah, it's everything to do with the fact that Carol's comics reboot over the last six years or so is a direct punch in the dick to the kind of knuckle dragging basement dwellers that want non-male superfolk to not exist, or be nothing but tits and skin. She's a symbol to many who have been doing work to excavate human shaped sacks of excrement from "nerddom", and that makes her a target.

Well it's a good thing she's absolutely shattering the trend, because absolutely no female leads in any action or sci-fi movie have existed prior to 2019 and I'm sure if they did, these human-shaped sacks of excrement probably would have hated them.

They can't all be Allen Ripley from Alien, Larry Croft from Tomb Raider, Sam Connor from The Terminator, The Groom from Kill Bill, etc.

That's why they're all going to watch Battle Angel Elliot instead.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
$622.7 is paltry? Most movies would kill to make half that.

To be fair, most movies also have less than 10% the budget...

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Projections dropping down by $80,000,000.

Excuses for failure/mediocrity have already begun.

Movie studios are probably going to implement some way to make celebrities control their outbursts and tirades when money is on the line.

And sad, I kinda wanted to see this but it's gone from entertainment to culture war/activism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:
Given it is currently being review bombed by hateful gits prior to the review copies... It seems hard to declare that an inaccurate summary, if immoderate in tone.

Yeah, just like they did during... Wonder Woman?

Oh, wait.

Those 'review bombs' all appear to be people saying "I have no interest in seeing this". You know how some folks like to say, "Oh well, if you don't like it don't watch it!" Yeah, well- that's kinda what appears to be happening right now.

Sterling191 wrote:
Nah, it's everything to do with the fact that Carol's comics reboot over the last six years or so is a direct punch in the dick to the kind of knuckle dragging basement dwellers that want non-male superfolk to not exist, or be nothing but tits and skin. She's a symbol to many who have been doing work to excavate human shaped sacks of excrement from "nerddom", and that makes her a target.

Well it's a good thing she's absolutely shattering the trend, because absolutely no female leads in any action or sci-fi movie have existed prior to 2019 and I'm sure if they did, these human-shaped sacks of excrement probably would have hated them.

They can't all be Allen Ripley from Alien, Larry Croft from Tomb Raider, Sam Connor from The Terminator, The Groom from Kill Bill, etc.

That's why they're all going to watch Battle Angel Elliot instead.

In all fairness the hit pieces have started on Alita now too, certain "journalists" have tried claiming all sorts of outlandish things about it, its almost as if they are paid to defame the competitor

 Formosa wrote:
In all fairness the hit pieces have started on Alita now too, certain "journalists" have tried claiming all sorts of outlandish things about it, its almost as if they are paid to defame the competitor

Oh, you mean the "Usual Suspects" that take payouts to write hit pieces of puff pieces? I'm shocked it took them this long, maybe the Studio is being a bit more frugal with the checks, what with all the anticipated financial loss.

Or perhaps they're learning that the majority of people know the "Usual Suspects" write articles with about as much credibility as the ones you find in Weekly World News. Which is, quite honestly, kind of terrible- I mean, when Weekly World News journalists write about aliens it's very possible they could exist, unlike anything the Usual Suspects pull out of their rectal cavity.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
That's why they're all going to watch Battle Angel Elliot instead.

Gary. Her Japanese name is "Gary", because that's the name of Ido's cat.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Gary. Her Japanese name is "Gary", because that's the name of Ido's cat.

It's my mythological woman-hating incel parody, get your own. And leave precious kitties out of it, please.

I thought it was Gally, in reference to Galatea.

 Manchu wrote:
I thought it was Gally, in reference to Galatea.

"Gally" is the Romanized version of the Japanized version of "Gary".

The manga explicitly covers that "Gally" was a Tom.

One of the reviewer guys I trust in the US has seen a preview of it and he's extremely positive about it. He is one of the classical liberal types, but still he's got plenty of depth to his personality that I trust him.

Cpt Marvel will open at $100 M, give or take $15 M and close with around $600 M. The money is IMO not contriversial and entirely beside the point. TLJ made over $1 B but significantly dissipated audience good will at a delicate time. Cpt M will make a lot of money but will it divide a heretofore unified audience? If so, will Endgame heal or exacerbate that problem? These are the real questions.

Captain Marvel is already dividing the fanbase and creating audience badwill where there was none before. It's unbelievably stupid in the run-up to Endgame.

Yes, Marvel is long overdue in launching a female-led franchise. Yes, they should have done a Black Widow movie back when ScarJo was younger and "new". Yes, it's good to acknowledge this as a mea culpa. But no, it doesn't need to go farther than that.

Assuming that Brie continues to run her mouth and say stupid SJW gak, she's only going to hurt her Captain Marvel sub-franchise, bringing the worldwide gross down to a pitiable $450M. This would be fine, because it was budgeted at $150M, and ties into the overall Avengers franchise.

Worst case, she brings Avengers Endgame down from an Infinity War $2.0+ BILLION down to an Ultron $1.4 BILLION for a -$600M hit. If that happens, you will never see Brie Larsen again, and Captain Marvel will go on indefinite hiatus like The Incredible Hulk.

I think thats a load of crap.

Again, the vast majority are not reading what we are reading or taking from it what you are taking from it. IF any miniscule group decides to get their panties in a bunch over captain marvel being promoted as pro female (not a political stance btw) they wont be dividing anything.

TLJ didnt tank solo. Solo tanked solo. Between its poor release time, neglible promotion, and vastly public troubled profuction it didnt need any help to do the numbers it did.

CM will get ranked just like ANY other marvel movie. I expect that like black panther there will be a bunch of hub bub about minority movie whatever and representation and a year later nobody will be talking about it. End game wont have to save anything. It will just make stupid amounts of money like IW did.

And hulk isnt on hiatus because of performance. Another studio (universal?) Owns the rights to a solo hulk movie. Its the ONLY reason we havent seen another solo hulk outing acording to marvel movie execs.

 Lance845 wrote:
I think thats a load of crap.

Again, the vast majority are not reading what we are reading or taking from it what you are taking from it. IF any miniscule group decides to get their panties in a bunch over captain marvel being promoted as pro female (not a political stance btw) they wont be dividing anything.

TLJ didnt tank solo. Solo tanked solo. Between its poor release time, neglible promotion, and vastly public troubled profuction it didnt need any help to do the numbers it did.

CM will get ranked just like ANY other marvel movie. I expect that like black panther there will be a bunch of hub bub about minority movie whatever and representation and a year later nobody will be talking about it. End game wont have to save anything. It will just make stupid amounts of money like IW did.

And hulk isnt on hiatus because of performance. Another studio (universal?) Owns the rights to a solo hulk movie. Its the ONLY reason we havent seen another solo hulk outing acording to marvel movie execs.

They dont need to read it, thats why the marketing is so important and thats why keeping brie larson in check is important, the marketing has already started to push an agenda and the general public will notice, as to the effect that has, well thats up for debate, I think they will lose money over it, but the film will still make heaps of money.

the lies and propaganda have already started, if the film fails (fat chance of that) they will blame the sexist trolls, if it does well, they will say woke movies can work, from either standpoint we all lose, because this nonsense will continue to poison the film industry, like its poisoned every other industry its touched, people dont want politics in their entertainment that is not in the context of the film and internally consistent , recent pew poles showed that "progressives" were 8% of the US pop, "conservatives" were 12% and the rest..... the politically exhausted...... THAT is why this stuff needs to stay away, the majority of the audience will be the Politically Exhausted, we just want our escapism.

And again, that is why Alita is so good, it was a film that left the nonsense out.

 Lance845 wrote:
TLJ didnt tank solo. Solo tanked solo. Between its poor release time, neglible promotion, and vastly public troubled profuction it didnt need any help to do the numbers it did.

Ah... don't be so sure. I know quite a few people who went to see every SW movie on opening night who still have NOT seen Solo in retribution for the gak storm that was TLJ.

Even after I told them Solo was a far better movie than TLJ.

And this seems to be a rather common theme among the dedicated SW fans who would routinely go see a SW movies a dozen times or more in the theater.

All this negative publicity must be going on somewhere else. All I see are the trailers.

Oh dear.

If Captain Marvel does well, it’s because it’s Marvel, people freaking love Marvel. And that’s because Marvel produces films with lots to enjoy.

Rather than proving as claimed that ‘woke’ Movies can work, it’ll prove that it’s not a hindrance.

This is why Black Panther is notable. For a long time, perceived wisdom was that a predominantly black cast wasn’t a box office draw.

This is why Wonder Woman and other female centric movies have been notable of late. Because they’ve been successful (no, not universally so, but I’m getting to that) despite the perceived wisdom that a female centric movie, or even a female lead, wasn’t a box office draw.

And here’s we look at something interesting.

How many crap superhero films have there been? Superman Returns. Batman va Superman. Fantastic Four (all three, though I’ve a soft spot for Silver Surfer), X-Men 3, Spider-man 3, Amazing Spider-Man 1 and 2, Hulk, Daredevil, Electra, Catwoman, Green Lantern, Ghost Rider 1 & 2, Jonah Hex, Wolverine 1 & 2, Supergirl.

That’s just some off the top of my head.

Now, care to spot which were held up as an example that the gender of the lead had a damned thing to do with it?

Anyone? No? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Dust. Anyone? No? Dust.

Well, I’ll tell ya. Elektra, Catwoman and Supergirl.

Never mind all three were just crap, the perceived wisdom is they’re crap because Wimmins Can’t Lead. The others? Didn’t put anyone off Male leads, despite being box office disappointments, bombs or outright disasters.

And now we have to put up with sad little keyboard warrior oiks getting out their prams to decry female lead films the second they’re announced (not including anyone here in that comment)

Can you see why successful ones are held up? Can you see why that success is celebrated? It’s not just the inclusion factor (which is cause for celebration in itself if you ask me), but showing the ‘perceived wisdom’ for the utter bollocks it’s always been.

If you really cannot grasp in your cerebral tentacle why that makes certain films important, I give up. It’s not about you enjoying them yourself. It’s about the audience they found loving them, and being largely new audiences for the wider genre.

Variety is not a bad thing. Never has been. Never will be. Nobody is demanding ‘like Ghostbusters: Answer The Call, OR ELSE’. Nobody is demanding a silence on all criticism of Black Panther or Wonder Woman (Black Panther is ultimately your standard Marvel back story fare, complete with Evil Twin baddie. Wonder Woman? Gal Gadot cannot act to save her life, makes my antique wooden bookcase look animated, and has all the emotional range of a Kipper if you ask me). And peeps really need to stop pretending that’s the case by holding up a comment by the odd fringe lunatic as proof.

Now. Can we all be about our business, and at least agree that nobody really cares what anyone thinks about a film if we ourselves enjoy it? No need to justify your reaction either way.

If Captain Marvel does well, it’s because it’s Marvel, people freaking love Marvel. And that’s because Marvel produces films with lots to enjoy

yep, thats the ONLY reason why it will make money, because Marvel is an established universe, no one has heard of captain marvel, no one cares about captain marvel, the comics are a failure and now we get this movie BEFORE a Black Widow one???

Rather than proving as claimed that ‘woke’ Movies can work, it’ll prove that it’s not a hindrance.

Their words, not mine, like i said the article have already started to pump out, and again, they made it about this, not me, and yes it can and has been a hinderance, "dont like it, Dont buy it"

This is why Black Panther is notable. For a long time, perceived wisdom was that a predominantly black cast wasn’t a box office draw.

Black Panther is notable as being the first mega movie that used activist marketing, it really was a sight to see and very impressive, they turned it into a cult following by using race as a marketing tool, it made so much money that this will likely become the norm now.

This is why Wonder Woman and other female centric movies have been notable of late. Because they’ve been successful (no, not universally so, but I’m getting to that) despite the perceived wisdom that a female centric movie, or even a female lead, wasn’t a box office draw.

The entire Rom/Com and Romantic movie industry proves this wrong, woman like different things generally, nothing wrong with that, men like their strong female characters to be badass, strong but still vunerable and not mary sue, woman like their male versions to be similar, strong, badass and a bit damaged, it appeals to both sensabilities, men want to protec, woman want to heal, but both genders HATE mary sues/marty stus.

Wonder woman did very well because it was a great story and had great acting the hopefulness of wonder woman and the cynicism of pine worked so well as a dynamic.

How many crap superhero films have there been? Superman Returns. Batman va Superman. Fantastic Four (all three, though I’ve a soft spot for Silver Surfer), X-Men 3, Spider-man 3, Amazing Spider-Man 1 and 2, Hulk, Daredevil, Electra, Catwoman, Green Lantern, Ghost Rider 1 & 2, Jonah Hex, Wolverine 1 & 2, Supergirl.

Wanna know what they all have in common, not taking the source material seriously, needless changes, bad scripts, bad acting and studio interference, the perfect storm of mediocrity.

Now, care to spot which were held up as an example that the gender of the lead had a damned thing to do with it?

Again the marketing are the ones making a big deal of it, people are reacting to it, and rightly so.

Well, I’ll tell ya. Elektra, Catwoman and Supergirl.

None of those films used identity politics to push an agenda or shout down negative views, because all this nonsense didnt really kick off until 2014/15

Never mind all three were just crap, the perceived wisdom is they’re crap because Wimmins Can’t Lead. The others? Didn’t put anyone off Male leads, despite being box office disappointments, bombs or outright disasters.

No, that is YOUR perceived wisdom and that of your tribes wisdom, the rest of the world do not care about the gender of the lead role as long as the film is good, one need only look at the backlash ben afleck got for batman, had he been female then the usual propaganda would have been used, sexism etc. to defend him, the whole thing is just a stupid game by a tiny number of people who are very very loud and have a lot of power.

And now we have to put up with sad little keyboard warrior oiks getting out their prams to decry female lead films the second they’re announced (not including anyone here in that comment)

again this is a false narrative used to try and discredit and disenting views, your a smart guy Doc, so you know that most of the comments are not from people like above, but normal every day people.

Can you see why successful ones are held up? Can you see why that success is celebrated? It’s not just the inclusion factor (which is cause for celebration in itself if you ask me), but showing the ‘perceived wisdom’ for the utter bollocks it’s always been.

Because they are entertaining and tell a good story, full stop, thats it, a movie can be "woke" as hell but awful because it sacrificed story and acting for a message that the massive majority does not want to hear, they dont want to be preached at, they want to go to the cinema and watch a fun film.

If you really cannot grasp in your cerebral tentacle why that makes certain films important, I give up. It’s not about you enjoying them yourself. It’s about the audience they found loving them, and being largely new audiences for the wider genre.

I understand what makes certain films important, American history X, Citizen Kain, 2001 a space oddessy (SP?) all had their takes on social commentary, none of them were popcorn super hero films designed to entertain, they all very clearly wanted to tell a story and teach a lesson, so people are free to seek out those movies and watch them if they choose.

Variety is not a bad thing. Never has been. Never will be. Nobody is demanding ‘like Ghostbusters: Answer The Call, OR ELSE’. Nobody is demanding a silence on all criticism of Black Panther or Wonder Woman (Black Panther is ultimately your standard Marvel back story fare, complete with Evil Twin baddie. Wonder Woman? Gal Gadot cannot act to save her life, makes my antique wooden bookcase look animated, and has all the emotional range of a Kipper if you ask me). And peeps really need to stop pretending that’s the case by holding up a comment by the odd fringe lunatic as proof.

actually, yes they are, and i can provide you links, I can provide you proof that people tried to silence criticism of black panther with direct threats (twitter... anyone shocked) and wonder woman didnt get involved with the culture war nonsense, and I wont use an odd fringe lunatic, i will use only mainstream sites, you wont like what you read.

Now. Can we all be about our business, and at least agree that nobody really cares what anyone thinks about a film if we ourselves enjoy it? No need to justify your reaction either way.

yes thats true, but people are actively trying to force a point of view on us, they are telling us to like it or we are sexists, evil etc. so while i agree with you, its aint us thats the problem, we didnt start this crap, we just want it gone and to get on with our lives.

I would suggest that Wonder Woman did so well because it was the best DCU movie to come out to date, the bar having been successively lowered by thing like Suicide Skwad coupled with an inane "edgy" marketing campaign leaking Leto being a donkey cave to everyone on set. Stepping over an ant was a great accomplishment, and DC fans were desperate for anything that didn't suck. Tie that with an above-par movie, and social relevance, and it did very well for a DC movie, about as well as Thor: Ragnarok.

As for social commentary, many Marvel movies have touched on it in some way or other, but they don't go out of their way to make it at the fore. How many moviegoers knew that Infinity War would be about Sustainability and the Malthusian Trap? I'm guessing almost none, because they didn't have their marketing team and Josh Brolin referencing the Paris Carbon Agreements. Those would all have been on-point commentary, but it's not the point. But if they had made Infinity War about manmade Global Warming, the controversy would have split the (US) audience.

So... we'll see how CM is received. Personally, I am not planning to see CM in the theatre, but maybe I'll borrow it from the library down the line. I will be watching Endgame, though. And I will be watching Alita.

Again, not seeing where you are getting all that. But that's cool.
Edit: refers to Formosa's post.

Mostly nerds love to see stuff fail (desperately) through some sociopathic need to see the world burn to feel better about themselves.

For some, Captain Marvel HAS to suck, so they can be in the "in" crowd complaining about it.

As for myself, I assume it will be a fun to watch but horribly by-the-books "hero's journey", just like Black Panther. Black Panther was awesome to watch, but you could see every plot twist a mile off. Its the same as how Dr Strange and Tony Stark went through the EXACT same personal journey, despite being awesomely fun to watch.

I personally don't care if Cpt. marvel is a woman, as long as I have fun in the theatre (though I love strong female leads).

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Its the same as how Dr Strange and Tony Stark went through the EXACT same personal journey, despite being awesomely fun to watch.

Also Thor & Spider-Man -- that particular journey is one that Marvel *loves* to tell as the origin story.