RealGM

Change of topic...

I didn't follow the MCU save for one-off movies I happened to or wanted to see. With the X-Men now just being part of the MCU after the Fox acquisition and no released plan yet (that I have seen) for weaving them in, I'm curious how Scarlet Witch (and Quicksilver, if he was used) was handled in The Avengers. Both are true Avengers members so I get why they were in those movies - though I'd be interest to see how contracting worked out to determine which heroes fell to which franchise/studio - but it's my understanding that "mutants" were never really addressed in MCU to this point. So...how did they handle Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver being mutants? They're the children of Magneto. Was it referenced at all, or was there just no back story provided for her/them? Go off-lore and make up a new story?

Just started to think about this as I was reading about WandaVision, getting excited for a mutant-related superhero show unrelated to Fox.

Eddie Murphy will host SNL this fall.

Giddy. Up.

MikeIsGood wrote:Change of topic...

I didn't follow the MCU save for one-off movies I happened to or wanted to see. With the X-Men now just being part of the MCU after the Fox acquisition and no released plan yet (that I have seen) for weaving them in, I'm curious how Scarlet Witch (and Quicksilver, if he was used) was handled in The Avengers. Both are true Avengers members so I get why they were in those movies - though I'd be interest to see how contracting worked out to determine which heroes fell to which franchise/studio - but it's my understanding that "mutants" were never really addressed in MCU to this point. So...how did they handle Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver being mutants? They're the children of Magneto. Was it referenced at all, or was there just no back story provided for her/them? Go off-lore and make up a new story?

Just started to think about this as I was reading about WandaVision, getting excited for a mutant-related superhero show unrelated to Fox.

Magneto was never mentioned, and Wanda and Quicksilver were kept more as experiments by Hyrda and it wasn't explained how they got their powers (I think...). Quicksilver was killed off in the one movie he appeared in.

ReasonablySober wrote:Ready or Not is great.

I enjoyed it and it had some fun moments, I just worry that every horror director is just now going to try to do Jordan Peele movies.

I'm absolutely going to pick up Disney +. I've got ESPN+ already and Hulu comes bundled with Spotify for no extra cost now, so that bundle doesn't really make sense for me, but that's a nice deal for people looking to bundle all three.

The original Avengers and SW content will be enough to get me bought in.

ReasonablySober wrote:

MikeIsGood wrote:Change of topic...

I didn't follow the MCU save for one-off movies I happened to or wanted to see. With the X-Men now just being part of the MCU after the Fox acquisition and no released plan yet (that I have seen) for weaving them in, I'm curious how Scarlet Witch (and Quicksilver, if he was used) was handled in The Avengers. Both are true Avengers members so I get why they were in those movies - though I'd be interest to see how contracting worked out to determine which heroes fell to which franchise/studio - but it's my understanding that "mutants" were never really addressed in MCU to this point. So...how did they handle Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver being mutants? They're the children of Magneto. Was it referenced at all, or was there just no back story provided for her/them? Go off-lore and make up a new story?

Just started to think about this as I was reading about WandaVision, getting excited for a mutant-related superhero show unrelated to Fox.

Magneto was never mentioned, and Wanda and Quicksilver were kept more as experiments by Hyrda and it wasn't explained how they got their powers (I think...). Quicksilver was killed off in the one movie he appeared in.

Also they're no longer Magneto's children; that was retconned.

emunney wrote:

ReasonablySober wrote:

MikeIsGood wrote:Change of topic...

I didn't follow the MCU save for one-off movies I happened to or wanted to see. With the X-Men now just being part of the MCU after the Fox acquisition and no released plan yet (that I have seen) for weaving them in, I'm curious how Scarlet Witch (and Quicksilver, if he was used) was handled in The Avengers. Both are true Avengers members so I get why they were in those movies - though I'd be interest to see how contracting worked out to determine which heroes fell to which franchise/studio - but it's my understanding that "mutants" were never really addressed in MCU to this point. So...how did they handle Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver being mutants? They're the children of Magneto. Was it referenced at all, or was there just no back story provided for her/them? Go off-lore and make up a new story?

Just started to think about this as I was reading about WandaVision, getting excited for a mutant-related superhero show unrelated to Fox.

Magneto was never mentioned, and Wanda and Quicksilver were kept more as experiments by Hyrda and it wasn't explained how they got their powers (I think...). Quicksilver was killed off in the one movie he appeared in.

Also they're no longer Magneto's children; that was retconned.

UUUUUGGGGGGHHHHH.

https://theclassicdad.com/2016/12/magneto-you-are-99-9-not-the-father/

This is stupid and I hope they un-retcon it now that Marvel owns everything again.

3 years of Disney+ for $141 if you're a D23 member FYI. Website is locked up tho with so many people trying it.

crkone wrote:3 years of Disney+ for $141 if you're a D23 member FYI. Website is locked up tho with so many people trying it.

Cool, thanks for sharing this! I’m guessing that deal doesn’t include Hulu and ESPN+ as well? If the bundle is $13/mo and this deal $3.92/mo for just Disney+... I guess I need to figure out if I’d want ESPN+ and/or Hulu too.

Or am I missing something?

Has anyone viewed 'American Factory' on Netflix? I thought it was an incredibly fascinating documentary piece.

It centers around a formerly closed GM plant in Dayton Ohio and the plight of those left without a job.

The property was purchased by a Chinese billionaire industry magnate who morphs the site into an automotive glass factory.

The parallels of societal differences will blow your mind.

Watched Chappelle's "Sticks and Stones" last night. Far from my favorite stand up of his, and seemed like Dave was going for more shock value than previous performances, but still really confused of the backlash. He's a comedian. He tells jokes for a living. Not sure why the pearl clutchers are out in full force for this one. By all accounts Dave Chappelle is a good human. It seems extremely forced to huff and puff with selective outrage about a joke or two and throw "see, he still doesn't get it" accusations. But according to my twitter feed, apparently thats where we are this week.

Ryan5UW wrote:

crkone wrote:3 years of Disney+ for $141 if you're a D23 member FYI. Website is locked up tho with so many people trying it.

Cool, thanks for sharing this! I’m guessing that deal doesn’t include Hulu and ESPN+ as well? If the bundle is $13/mo and this deal $3.92/mo for just Disney+... I guess I need to figure out if I’d want ESPN+ and/or Hulu too.

Or am I missing something?

You have to pay a lot to be a D23 member if I'm reading that correctly on their site.

ReasonablySober wrote:

Ryan5UW wrote:

crkone wrote:3 years of Disney+ for $141 if you're a D23 member FYI. Website is locked up tho with so many people trying it.

Cool, thanks for sharing this! I’m guessing that deal doesn’t include Hulu and ESPN+ as well? If the bundle is $13/mo and this deal $3.92/mo for just Disney+... I guess I need to figure out if I’d want ESPN+ and/or Hulu too.

Or am I missing something?

You have to pay a lot to be a D23 member if I'm reading that correctly on their site.

You can sign up for the free account (a newsletter, basically) and still get the deal.

I got my sign up done for that Disney+ three year discount. Dope deal.

JimmyTheKid wrote:Watched Chappelle's "Sticks and Stones" last night. Far from my favorite stand up of his, and seemed like Dave was going for more shock value than previous performances, but still really confused of the backlash. He's a comedian. He tells jokes for a living. Not sure why the pearl clutchers are out in full force for this one. By all accounts Dave Chappelle is a good human. It seems extremely forced to huff and puff with selective outrage about a joke or two and throw "see, he still doesn't get it" accusations. But according to my twitter feed, apparently thats where we are this week.

We must end him..culture. My feels.

JimmyTheKid wrote:Watched Chappelle's "Sticks and Stones" last night. Far from my favorite stand up of his, and seemed like Dave was going for more shock value than previous performances, but still really confused of the backlash. He's a comedian. He tells jokes for a living. Not sure why the pearl clutchers are out in full force for this one. By all accounts Dave Chappelle is a good human. It seems extremely forced to huff and puff with selective outrage about a joke or two and throw "see, he still doesn't get it" accusations. But according to my twitter feed, apparently thats where we are this week.

I thought Le Batard said it pretty well today. He's gone from punching up to punching down. He's now protecting the 1% class. Le Batard said he still thought it was funny, even as he was disappointed.

Personally I turned it off pretty early.



I LOVE offensive jokes. Anthony Jeselnik is maybe my favorite comedian of all time and his thing is saying the worst possible stuff. But what Dave is doing is different. He's siding with CK, Jacko. That's super **** up.

ReasonablySober wrote:[
I LOVE offensive jokes. Anthony Jeselnik is maybe my favorite comedian of all time and his thing is saying the worst possible stuff. But what Dave is doing is different. He's siding with CK, Jacko. That's super **** up.

Well said. Dave seems like he's trolling. Jeselnik is trying to be funny.

ReasonablySober wrote:

JimmyTheKid wrote:Watched Chappelle's "Sticks and Stones" last night. Far from my favorite stand up of his, and seemed like Dave was going for more shock value than previous performances, but still really confused of the backlash. He's a comedian. He tells jokes for a living. Not sure why the pearl clutchers are out in full force for this one. By all accounts Dave Chappelle is a good human. It seems extremely forced to huff and puff with selective outrage about a joke or two and throw "see, he still doesn't get it" accusations. But according to my twitter feed, apparently thats where we are this week.

I thought Le Batard said it pretty well today. He's gone from punching up to punching down. He's now protecting the 1% class. Le Batard said he still thought it was funny, even as he was disappointed.

Dave has always punched everywhere. I feel like people who maybe only know him from, or just romanticize the Chappelle's Show era of Dave have a different idea of who he is that doesn't actually match up with who he actually is. He's just more aggressive with his message now because he's clearly pissed off at how the PC mob mentality powered by social media exists now in a way that it never has before.

I don't even understand how 2 jokes about MJ and CK means that he's now protecting the 1% class but you did say you turned it off so you probably didn't see most of the special.

I thought it was easily his best on Netflix and right up there with For What It's Worth as his best overall.

ReasonablySober wrote:

JimmyTheKid wrote:Watched Chappelle's "Sticks and Stones" last night. Far from my favorite stand up of his, and seemed like Dave was going for more shock value than previous performances, but still really confused of the backlash. He's a comedian. He tells jokes for a living. Not sure why the pearl clutchers are out in full force for this one. By all accounts Dave Chappelle is a good human. It seems extremely forced to huff and puff with selective outrage about a joke or two and throw "see, he still doesn't get it" accusations. But according to my twitter feed, apparently thats where we are this week.

I thought Le Batard said it pretty well today. He's gone from punching up to punching down. He's now protecting the 1% class. Le Batard said he still thought it was funny, even as he was disappointed.

Personally I turned it off pretty early.

Read on Twitter

I LOVE offensive jokes. Anthony Jeselnik is maybe my favorite comedian of all time and his thing is saying the worst possible stuff. But what Dave is doing is different. He's siding with CK, Jacko. That's super **** up.

Nah. He's a comedian. Those are jokes. He's not siding with anyone. He's performing. Jeselnik does the same sh*t.

Its just strange to me to take the Jacko and LGBTQ bit and deduce that "Dave is being serious about this part, f**k him!" But the rest of the performance, the other 50 minutes that "don't offend me personally," those are all just jokes and kind of funny. Do you think his wife was offended when he said "there is no such thing as good 36-year old p*ssy"? Her being 45 and all. Of course not.

I'm not gonna get into it here because as I'm sure you know, a lot of better writers piled on Dave this week.

It all comes down to evolving as a person and with the times and Dave hasn't.