Careercow Robert Chipman / Bob / Moviebob / "Movieblob" - Middle-Aged Consoomer, CWC with a Thesaurus, Ardent Male Feminist and Superior Futurist, the Twice-Fired, the Mario-Worshipper, publicly dismantled by Hot Dog Girl, now a diabetic

How will Bob react to seeing the Mario film?


  • Total voters
    1,451
Status
Not open for further replies.
I've asked this before, and I'll ask it again: If Moviebob believes borders are bad, then why does Bob still live in an "apartment"? The walls in which Bob lives are no less arbitrary than the border between Mexico and the U.S.
I'm sure Bob would be just thrilled if 10 people just waltzed into his luxury basement apartment and refused to leave.

I can just picture his jowls quivering with rage "Hey you can't BE in here! This is my (mum's) property! WAIT DON'T TOUCH MY MARIO TOASTER!"

"Wow Bob, private property is a relic of an inferior past didn't you know. Get with the times old man. Now go marinade us some of that delicious mountain dew chicken and order us a small amount of McDonald's while you're at it. Lol no we're not paying you a penny."
 
1.png
So the Chipbrats didn't go to church outside of school. I can see how that would instill a hatred for church. It kinda confirms that there was no spiritual upbringing, besides maybe some perfunctory stuff around Easter and Christmas, at home.
"Ashley Lynch", the tranny responsible for Bobby's "Like Kurosawa" handle, is being genocided again for his MCU fanboyism.
ratio.png
How does liking a quote retweet "ratio" the tweet quoted? I really don't know how this ratio game is played.

Sir Robert comes galloping with his attendant pages.
ratio2.png
It astounds me how these retards think. The act of ratioing has been so twisted and perverted that it almost means nothing anymore, thanks to dipshits like Lucas "Keffals" Roberts. A ratio is SUPPOSED to mean that a tweet is so disliked that it has far more comments or quote tweets than likes. What these mental midgets have turned it to, because it's far easier to have someone click a button than have them type out a comment, is "my comment has more likes than yours".
Sean's tweet
1659016156154.png
Rando faggot's tweet
1659016203786.png
Rando faggot begging people to like his tweet
1659016267115.png
And to make matters worse/funnier there are dipshit's like longtime Angel Abolmer who act like a "ratio" is something to take seriously. I cannot imagine a life where any of this truly matters. Shout out to Tyler Freshcorn, real name Embarrassment, to whom I now kneel to his expertise as being less than a Grip on a student/amateur film and a "background extra" in Dark Knight Rises.
Arkle thinks that MCU is what has prevented shitbags from being completely radicalized by the far right.
lynch5.png vfx4.png
"Never hope that I'm wrong. You'll lose."
1659017025754.png
tfw you're wrong
Bob's wrong.PNG
 
You know what is funny about the whole Disney buttfucking FX artists and Robert's and his manlet troon take on it? They aren't wrong.

Yeah, it ain't just Disney doing this, it is a common standard practice in the "industry" and yes, I think Robert is right when he calls out that a lot of people harping on Disney after these articles dropped are not doing this out of concern for the artists, but because Disney is the biggest game in town and yes, also because a lot of people don't like Disney for their progressive soy-bitch pandering.

Said that, fucking spare me with the "disingenuous weasles"talk, were similiar accusations raised against a company or a person Robert doesn't like, say, like Tesla and Elon Musk, then I would love to see Robert going in apologetic sounding takes as such "Well, yeah this is bad on Tesla, but it is a widespread problem in ALL automobilistic industry", yeah?

No, of course not, Robert would go on never ending rant about Musk is the worst person walking on this green earth and for whatever jsutifications he might give, we all know it is because Musk doesn't quite share the "good guys" views on his twitter politics.

So no Robert, go fuck yourself. Your talks about nuance and looking at the bigger problem only apply when it is for your convenience, and you only have this stance when it affects your weird tribal politics.

And no, nobody buys this shit "I have no skin in this game, yes, Disney is bad" pre-emptive lampshading shit you pull Robert. You only say that because you know how pathetic it is to go to bat for the mouse, but you still do so because the people you don't like do like to bash Disney, and you can't break free from this stupid culture wars shit, when you look a pathetic weasel trying to squeek a excuse on why it ain't just a "Disney problem" and people giving you shit for that.

Don't even bother I say Robert, people already pegged you for a mark, might as well live it.
This fake-ignorance is just dishonest. Yes, Disney is the problem, because Disney is a huge chunk of the industry. If someone brought me statistics saying that 30-40% of the entire VFX industry was Disney and it's subsidiaries, I'd buy it. Disney is, if not THE biggest VFX customer, the most widely-known of the very big customers. Using an article that talks about a trend to criticize a very big contributor towards that trend makes perfect sense, especially given the specific people interviewed in the actual article are talking about working at Marvel! It's just that criticism of Disney and the MCU are verboten because Bob et al are colossal manchildren and they want to pretend that their addiction to baby toys is communist praxis.
 
Said that, fucking spare me with the "disingenuous weasles"talk, were similiar accusations raised against a company or a person Robert doesn't like, say, like Tesla and Elon Musk, then I would love to see Robert going in apologetic sounding takes as such "Well, yeah this is bad on Tesla, but it is a widespread problem in ALL automobilistic industry", yeah?

I know I've ranted at length about how Bob is intellectually dishonest to a degree that inspires rage, but it's still pretty breathtaking to see it in real time. From literally claiming he's a mind reader when it comes to discerning someone's true motives online ... to bitching out someone who dares "lie" about Bob's motives.

I'd say he has no self-awareness, but that's pretty much a given, and besides, at this point it feels like a deliberate, slimy choice.
 
Last edited:
^ Agree.

Bob is like, "IM AN EXPERT ON PEOPLE AND MOVIES," - Which is kinda funny considering he has never had sex, annoys everyone except like three diehard spergs on Twitter who I think might consider Bob their only friend because he PM'ed "Thanks" one time to them, and constantly is called a fat retard who should neck himself.

While the movies expertise, the dude just reviews capeshit, the lowest of the low.

Now, if Bob was like, "IM AN EXPERT ON DIABETES AND EATING AN ENTIRE COSTO CAKE IN ONE SITTING!!" I would buy that and listen to his sage advice on such matters.
 
This fake-ignorance is just dishonest. Yes, Disney is the problem, because Disney is a huge chunk of the industry. If someone brought me statistics saying that 30-40% of the entire VFX industry was Disney and it's subsidiaries, I'd buy it. Disney is, if not THE biggest VFX customer, the most widely-known of the very big customers. Using an article that talks about a trend to criticize a very big contributor towards that trend makes perfect sense, especially given the specific people interviewed in the actual article are talking about working at Marvel! It's just that criticism of Disney and the MCU are verboten because Bob et al are colossal manchildren and they want to pretend that their addiction to baby toys is communist praxis.
The people calling Sean stupid in his tweet thread point out that every single problem Sean pretends to care about is actually addressed in the article Sean believes is a hit piece against Disney's Marvel. Here's a fellow troon calling Sean out.
1659019878846.png
They are not the only one but I feel this gives a pretty good synopsis on how Sean is a dum dum. Bob and his loyal subjects also failed to read the article and instead focus on how a trans woman was attacked for being trans and not because Sean is a dum dum.
I know I've ranted at length about how Bob is intellectually dishonest to a degree that inspires rage, but it's still pretty breathtaking to see it in real time. From literally claiming he's a mind reader when it comes to discerning someone's true motives online ... to bitching out someone who dares "lie" about Bob's motives.

I'd say he has no self-awareness, but that's pretty much a given, and besides, at this point it feels like a deliberate, slimy choice.
Time for me to put on my tinfoil eyepatch and say that even Bob believes that the MCU, the thing he's more or less centered his life around for over a decade now, is creatively bankrupt at this point. Here are three things he retweeted back to back to back.
1659019773960.png

Top:
Multiverse of Madness was a more desperate No Way Home. No Way Home was 'member berries distilled. MoM didn't have the luxury of having 20 years of movies for it to dip into for viewers to get a nice serotonin hit. Instead it send Strange to a different Universe where The illuminati is a real and public thing, waste a cameo from John Krasinski as Mr. Fantastic, and introduce THE Patrick Stewart as Professor X in his yellow hover wheelchair accompanied by a soft horn version of the X-Men animated series theme song. Listen in to 5 Mexicans clap when they see it.
Shoot that 'member berry juice right into my veins. Don't attempt to make me engaged with the story or make a story that I haven't seen over and over again since 2008. Don't surprise me with anything other than flashing lights!

Middle:
The comic creators have gotten paid by selling their ideas and making them into comics. I think it was something like one issue of the Demon Hunter manga outsold all of Marvel comics in one month. Modern day Marvel comics is an absolute mess of drivel and wokeness that no one buys.
1659021334044.png
However I do really, really want them to put this kind of idiocy on the silver screen. I'm hoping that they follow Riri Williams' story to a T because that will be a glorious dumpster fire and will cause more morons to loudly cry that comic writers need more of a cut from the movies, which you will notice are not comics.

Bottom:
Rando - "Hey isn't it weird that this gigantic monstrosity came about because of a tentpole movie and is never acknowledged by anyone?"
Alleged comedian - "LOL influencers am I right?
Bob - "heh that'll show the nonbelievers I mean unthinkers."

Maybe I'm just being biased. I do have to be reminded that Shang-Chi actually exists. I cannot see these tweets as anything other than non sequiturs created by cope.
 
I know I've ranted at length about how Bob is intellectually dishonest to a degree that inspires rage, but it's still pretty breathtaking to see it in real time. From literally claiming he's a mind reader when it comes to discerning someone's true motives online ... to bitching out someone who dares "lie" about Bob's motives.

I'd say he has no self-awareness, but that's pretty much a given, and besides, at this point it feels like a deliberate, slimy choice.
Lardo Retardo's self-awareness is the same zero as his IQ and his sex partner count.
 
Top:
Multiverse of Madness was a more desperate No Way Home. No Way Home was 'member berries distilled. MoM didn't have the luxury of having 20 years of movies for it to dip into for viewers to get a nice serotonin hit. Instead it send Strange to a different Universe where The illuminati is a real and public thing, waste a cameo from John Krasinski as Mr. Fantastic, and introduce THE Patrick Stewart as Professor X in his yellow hover wheelchair accompanied by a soft horn version of the X-Men animated series theme song. Listen in to 5 Mexicans clap when they see it.
Shoot that 'member berry juice right into my veins. Don't attempt to make me engaged with the story or make a story that I haven't seen over and over again since 2008. Don't surprise me with anything other than flashing lights!
Hold on, they bring in Sir Patrick for the memberberries, but then don't even do so in a way that references the actual fucking movies he was in?

Glad I skipped out on this one.
 
Time for me to put on my tinfoil eyepatch and say that even Bob believes that the MCU, the thing he's more or less centered his life around for over a decade now, is creatively bankrupt at this point. Here are three things he retweeted back to back to back.
I don't think it's much of a conspiracy. You'll notice if you look at posts from other fans of those movies and even Bob himself that they really want an in-universe reboot story to bring back the older characters just for the sake of building up to it again on an endless loop. So a new Tony Stark and Steve Rogers by 2025 at this rate. That to me seems to imply they're unhappy with things but either don't actually know it yet or are actively trying to deny that part of themselves.

Hold on, they bring in Sir Patrick for the memberberries, but then don't even do so in a way that references the actual fucking movies he was in?

Glad I skipped out on this one.
He's also dead along with the rest of the cameo characters within three minutes of screentime iirc. You'd have no clue he was even in it if you went to the bathroom for a second. The state of these things are worse than people would think they are.
 
Hold on, they bring in Sir Patrick for the memberberries, but then don't even do so in a way that references the actual fucking movies he was in?

Glad I skipped out on this one.
Nobody cares about the wheel chair with the big X's for the big wheels movies that ended with a pretty bad one. Everybody cares about references to the animated show they watched as kids and now own on blu-ray and have erected a shrine for.
He's also dead along with the rest of the cameo characters within three minutes of screentime iirc. You'd have no clue he was even in it if you went to the bathroom for a second. The state of these things are worse than people would think they are.
Wanda comes in and kills ALL of them in what I want to say is 5-8 minutes of them all coming on the screen, ending the most splendidly pointless fan service scene in any of the MCU movies. They exist purely to jangle keys in front of you because they have almost zero bearing on the story or the MCU at large because all of the Illuminati is erased from existence in the fight scene after they're introduced. The only thing they do is tell Strange that it is HE that is the actual bad guy and all the statues heralding him as the true hero of Earth are just a lie to give the people a hero to rally around. It was a stupid, stupid misdirect but here's these things you recognize so please be happy and ignore everything else.
 
You know what is funny about the whole Disney buttfucking FX artists and Robert's and his manlet troon take on it? They aren't wrong.

Yeah, it ain't just Disney doing this, it is a common standard practice in the "industry" and yes, I think Robert is right when he calls out that a lot of people harping on Disney after these articles dropped are not doing this out of concern for the artists, but because Disney is the biggest game in town and yes, also because a lot of people don't like Disney for their progressive soy-bitch pandering.

Said that, fucking spare me with the "disingenuous weasles"talk, were similiar accusations raised against a company or a person Robert doesn't like, say, like Tesla and Elon Musk, then I would love to see Robert going in apologetic sounding takes as such "Well, yeah this is bad on Tesla, but it is a widespread problem in ALL automobilistic industry", yeah?

No, of course not, Robert would go on never ending rant about Musk is the worst person walking on this green earth and for whatever jsutifications he might give, we all know it is because Musk doesn't quite share the "good guys" views on his twitter politics.

So no Robert, go fuck yourself. Your talks about nuance and looking at the bigger problem only apply when it is for your convenience, and you only have this stance when it affects your weird tribal politics.

And no, nobody buys this shit "I have no skin in this game, yes, Disney is bad" pre-emptive lampshading shit you pull Robert. You only say that because you know how pathetic it is to go to bat for the mouse, but you still do so because the people you don't like do like to bash Disney, and you can't break free from this stupid culture wars shit, when you look a pathetic weasel trying to squeek a excuse on why it ain't just a "Disney problem" and people giving you shit for that.

Don't even bother I say Robert, people already pegged you for a mark, might as well live it.
Bob's mad because Ryan George already called attention to this issue a year ago:

AND he did it in a way that especially stings: via video essay.
 
Time for me to put on my tinfoil eyepatch and say that even Bob believes that the MCU, the thing he's more or less centered his life around for over a decade now, is creatively bankrupt at this point.
Of course he does, deep down, but he won't admit it to himself, for the reason you've suggested. He's spent so much time and energy and effort defending MCU slop online, calling it the greatest contribution to Western culture since Homer, etc etc, that he just can't admit to himself his spent all his time defending garbage
The comic creators have gotten paid by selling their ideas and making them into comics
Yeah, I've got hard disagree with you on this and agree with the middle tweet.

The comics creators get paid pittance even compared to the movie screenwriters for their contributions despite the fact that they created most of this stuff, all these multi-billion dollar films are based on their work

Chuck Dixon (Batman writer, co-created Bane, also wrote The Punisher) has talked about this. He says that the screenwriters and actors and the directors all have these big unions and they all get paid residuals anytime a film or television show they've been involved with airs on television or gets re-exhibited theatrically or whatever. Comic creators don't get any of that. At best they might get royalties if a character they created shows up in a film or a TV show, or a video game, or if they make toys out of them if Marvel or DC see fit to give them royalties, and what they're paid is a drop in the bucket compared to what most of these properties actually bring in and is rarely if ever commensurate with what the creator actually contributed.

Biggest examples are Siegel and Schuster, who created Superman one of, if not the, biggest superheroes of the 20th century and were living in poverty by the time the 1978 movie came out. Of course, Neal Adams convinced DC to give them a 'created by' credit and a lifetime pension but it was still pittance compared to what Superman is actually worth

Another example is how they treated Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. Jack Kirby, not Stan Lee, basically created the Marvel Universe and Steve Ditko more-or-less completely created Spider-Man. Stan Lee was all like 'Oh I came up with the idea' but he didn't, Jack Kirby did. Spider-Man was like 95% Ditko, 4% Jack Kirby and 1% Stan Lee. And who got paid the most out of those three people? Stan Lee.

I get that all of the preceding was probably not how you interpreted that tweet, but still. The twattertard makes a fair point.
 
Yeah, I've got hard disagree with you on this and agree with the middle tweet.

The comics creators get paid pittance even compared to the movie screenwriters for their contributions despite the fact that they created most of this stuff, all these multi-billion dollar films are based on their work

Chuck Dixon (Batman writer, co-created Bane, also wrote The Punisher) has talked about this. He says that the screenwriters and actors and the directors all have these big unions and they all get paid residuals anytime a film or television show they've been involved with airs on television or gets re-exhibited theatrically or whatever. Comic creators don't get any of that. At best they might get royalties if a character they created shows up in a film or a TV show, or a video game, or if they make toys out of them if Marvel or DC see fit to give them royalties, and what they're paid is a drop in the bucket compared to what most of these properties actually bring in and is rarely if ever commensurate with what the creator actually contributed.

Biggest examples are Siegel and Schuster, who created Superman one of, if not the, biggest superheroes of the 20th century and were living in poverty by the time the 1978 movie came out. Of course, Neal Adams convinced DC to give them a 'created by' credit and a lifetime pension but it was still pittance compared to what Superman is actually worth

Another example is how they treated Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. Jack Kirby, not Stan Lee, basically created the Marvel Universe and Steve Ditko more-or-less completely created Spider-Man. Stan Lee was all like 'Oh I came up with the idea' but he didn't, Jack Kirby did. Spider-Man was like 95% Ditko, 4% Jack Kirby and 1% Stan Lee. And who got paid the most out of those three people? Stan Lee.

I get that all of the preceding was probably not how you interpreted that tweet, but still. The twattertard makes a fair point.
That is part of what led to the creation of the Image comics crew is that at the comic height of the 80s and 90s, Marvel (especially) was making money hand over fist and the creators of all this were getting almost none of it.

Say what you will about him, but there's several stories that Jim Shooter when he worked at Marvel did try to be fair to the talent (at least comparatively) and tried to do better when he went on to create Valiant comics.
 
Say what you will about him, but there's several stories that Jim Shooter when he worked at Marvel did try to be fair to the talent (at least comparatively) and tried to do better when he went on to create Valiant comics.
Jim Shooter was honestly the best editor at Marvel Comics. Most of the criticisms I've seen of him seem to hinge around him bristling a lot of the big egos of the Marvel talent (John Byrne being the worst offender). But he was a smart, savvy guy, knew the business and the kind of comics Marvel were putting out around that time are reflective of his high standards.
 
Yeah, I've got hard disagree with you on this and agree with the middle tweet.

The comics creators get paid pittance even compared to the movie screenwriters for their contributions despite the fact that they created most of this stuff, all these multi-billion dollar films are based on their work

Chuck Dixon (Batman writer, co-created Bane, also wrote The Punisher) has talked about this. He says that the screenwriters and actors and the directors all have these big unions and they all get paid residuals anytime a film or television show they've been involved with airs on television or gets re-exhibited theatrically or whatever. Comic creators don't get any of that. At best they might get royalties if a character they created shows up in a film or a TV show, or a video game, or if they make toys out of them if Marvel or DC see fit to give them royalties, and what they're paid is a drop in the bucket compared to what most of these properties actually bring in and is rarely if ever commensurate with what the creator actually contributed.

Biggest examples are Siegel and Schuster, who created Superman one of, if not the, biggest superheroes of the 20th century and were living in poverty by the time the 1978 movie came out. Of course, Neal Adams convinced DC to give them a 'created by' credit and a lifetime pension but it was still pittance compared to what Superman is actually worth

Another example is how they treated Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. Jack Kirby, not Stan Lee, basically created the Marvel Universe and Steve Ditko more-or-less completely created Spider-Man. Stan Lee was all like 'Oh I came up with the idea' but he didn't, Jack Kirby did. Spider-Man was like 95% Ditko, 4% Jack Kirby and 1% Stan Lee. And who got paid the most out of those three people? Stan Lee.

I get that all of the preceding was probably not how you interpreted that tweet, but still. The twattertard makes a fair point.
Excellent point. I kneel and I have to agree with you. I will respectably push back just a bit and suggest that Adam is not referring to any of the OGs and is more lamenting about the state of affairs for people like Bendis or that Make Mine Milkshake chick. At least, as you correctly pointed out, that's how I was interpreting it based on both Bob retweeting it and the guy's feed.
 
Excellent point. I kneel and I have to agree with you. I will respectably push back just a bit and suggest that Adam is not referring to any of the OGs and is more lamenting about the state of affairs for people like Bendis or that Make Mine Milkshake chick. At least, as you correctly pointed out, that's how I was interpreting it based on both Bob retweeting it and the guy's feed.
Well, one of the ways the Big Two worm out of paying creators royalties is if they created a 'derivative character'. So, I think Gerry Conway said DC don't pay him for use of Power Girl because she's derivative of Supergirl.

And that is like 100% of these woke creators outputs. Spider-Gwen, Miles Morales, Gwenpool, Chinese Hulk, Black Batman, none of these creators have had a single original idea of their own. Hell Bendis' best work, or at least his most popular work, was Ultimate Spider-Man, where he was 90% of the time just re-interpreting other people's characters (chiefly Ditko and Romita's)

So if you consider that the old pros aren't getting what they deserve for basically building Marvel and DC's stable, these new non-pros aren't even getting what they don't deserve for basically just race or gender swapping other people's characters
 
Nobody cares about the wheel chair with the big X's for the big wheels movies that ended with a pretty bad one. Everybody cares about references to the animated show they watched as kids and now own on blu-ray and have erected a shrine for.
Christ, I can't stand consoomers. Yeah, the 90's X-Men cartoon was awesome and definitely groundbreaking for American animation and pop culture, but the fucking MCU pretty much owes it's very existence to the success of the original Bryan Singer X-Men films. Does no one appreciate that? What the hell is wrong with my generation and the one that followed?
He's also dead along with the rest of the cameo characters within three minutes of screentime iirc. You'd have no clue he was even in it if you went to the bathroom for a second. The state of these things are worse than people would think they are.
Wanda comes in and kills ALL of them in what I want to say is 5-8 minutes of them all coming on the screen, ending the most splendidly pointless fan service scene in any of the MCU movies. They exist purely to jangle keys in front of you because they have almost zero bearing on the story or the MCU at large because all of the Illuminati is erased from existence in the fight scene after they're introduced. The only thing they do is tell Strange that it is HE that is the actual bad guy and all the statues heralding him as the true hero of Earth are just a lie to give the people a hero to rally around. It was a stupid, stupid misdirect but here's these things you recognize so please be happy and ignore everything else.
Now I'm really glad that I didn't see this film. Why even bother? The chance to finally cross over the MCU with the Singer X-Men and other non-Disney Marvel casts was given when Iger bought Fox and they had the chance to make use of it via "The Multiverse ™️ ." Fans new and old alike would've loved it, but this is all they do? Did Sam Raimi pull a Rian Johnson? Was he trolling the audience? Is he a secret asshole?
 
Last edited:
Christ, I can't stand consoomers. Yeah, the 90's X-Men cartoon was awesome and definitely groundbreaking for American animation and pop culture, but the fucking MCU pretty much owes it's very existence to the success of the original Bryan Singer X-Men films. Does no one appreciate that? What the hell is wrong my generation and the one that followed?
I mean really it owes its existence to Blade
Did Sam Raimi pull a Rian Johnson? Was he trolling the audience? Is he a secret asshole?
I doubt Raimi had much control over the product
 
I mean really it owes its existence to Blade
Disagree. Blade might've been the first, but most people who went to see it had no idea it was based on a Marvel comic book - and one that is pretty obscure in the large scheme of things.

You watch the first few X-Men films and you'll see they're basically a dry run for the MCU in terms of their visual style, costume design, action set pieces, and how they adapt the characters and the comic stories to film by "grounding them" and pulling back on the more fantastical elements. Only thing they didn't really have was the quippyness, though we still did get plenty of sarcastic humor with Hugh Jackman.
 
Disagree. Blade might've been the first, but most people who went to see it had no idea it was based on a Marvel comic book - and one that is pretty obscure in the large scheme of things.
That may be but Blade was a huge success. Without the commercial success of Blade, studios would not have taken a chance on bigger properties like X-Men or Spider-Man because they would not have viewed them as commercially viable.

You have to consider the landscape at the time. Batman & Robin had come out and stunk up the place and Superman Lives was in development hell after Superman IV had likewise stunk up the place. You also had other superhero films fail in the forms of Spawn, Steel, Captain America, The Punisher with Dolph Lundgren. It seems hard to imagine now but comic book films weren't a sure thing in the late 1990s and if even Warner Bros, who'd had massive success with Tim Burton's Batman and the Richard Donner/Christopher Reeve Superman films, could have a bomb with Batman and Robin and couldn't even get another Superman off the ground, then what chance did Marvel, who'd never really made a big budget blockbuster film, have with adapting their biggest properties to screen?

Blade answered a lot of those questions
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back