Sexy mutant for X-men 3?

[warlord]

First I'm 17 so it may be a generational thing. But I happen to know alot about comics and lets face it guys Angel the vampire is a hell of alot more mainstream then Angel the superhero.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

First I'm 17 so it may be a generational thing. But I happen to know alot about comics and lets face it guys Angel the vampire is a hell of alot more mainstream then Angel the superhero.

But Angel the superhero was first...and better.

 

[vulcan_idic]

First I'm 17 so it may be a generational thing. But I happen to know alot about comics and lets face it guys Angel the vampire is a hell of alot more mainstream then Angel the superhero.

I'd have to say so. I'm 27 now and while I didn't start reading comics until late in college (a best friend - and Marvel fan - got me hooked) I find my thoughts are the other way around. The first time I saw Angel (at the behest of another college friend - I'd never been into the whole vampire thing) I went into it expecting to see Warren Worthing III flying around. I didn't know his name was Warren Worthing III back then, but that pop culture reference had a deeper hold on my cultural awareness than that vampiric-type guy.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

First I'm 17 so it may be a generational thing. But I happen to know alot about comics and lets face it guys Angel the vampire is a hell of alot more mainstream then Angel the superhero.

In your age bracket and in your humble opinion, yes. I could agree with that.

 

[takyris]

I'm 29 and read the comics and watched the show. "Archangel" clearly comes through as my blue-skinned razor-feather-flinging buddy, but "Angel" still gives me a momentary "Why do the want a vampire who... oh, duh" the first time I read it in a thread. Of course, that's likely because I read when he was Archangel -- it was only when I went back to read older issues that I got to see him as angel, and then wing-spiked-nobody, and then Archangel. I knew the story from flashbacks, of course, but Archangel was the name that clicked for me, not Angel.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Right. But if it's one Desert Eagle shot as opposed to 3 or 4 full seconds of absorbing machine gun fire, you think the one full Desert Eagle shot is going to knock a target back further than 3 or 4 seconds of being hit by, um, XX rounds per second from the machine gun?

I don't recall the scene in question, but I do know that when you shoot a machine gun at someone, very, very few of the bullets actually hit what you're aiming at. Machine guns are devastating when fired into a dense formation of charging soldiers. Against a single target, you're far better off firing a burst or single round.

In the scene in question, was the advancing ubervamp being hit with every bullet fired by the machine gun? If so, I'd take more issue with that unreality, rather than the lack of knockback.

And I thought Blade 2 was fantastic exactly because of the action sequences. I tend not to compare one sequence against another, so I didn't notice the discrepancy you describe. What I did notice was that most of the fighting was very well choreographed and hardly any shot was reused, unlike a Steven Seagal movie, where you can see the same footage re-inserted in a fight sequence several times.

 

[takyris]

I don't recall the scene in question, but I do know that when you shoot a machine gun at someone, very, very few of the bullets actually hit what you're aiming at. Machine guns are devastating when fired into a dense formation of charging soldiers. Against a single target, you're far better off firing a burst or single round.

In the scene in question, was the advancing ubervamp being hit with every bullet fired by the machine gun? If so, I'd take more issue with that unreality, rather than the lack of knockback.

Yep. It was walking forward, and there were an absurd number of bullet-impact squibs going off on its chest, but it wasn't getting knocked back. But the pistol shot WAS knocking it back.

Might not have been a machine gun, though. Might have been, y'know, a vamp... uh, thing.

And I thought Blade 2 was fantastic exactly because of the action sequences. I tend not to compare one sequence against another, so I didn't notice the discrepancy you describe. What I did notice was that most of the fighting was very well choreographed and hardly any shot was reused, unlike a Steven Seagal movie, where you can see the same footage re-inserted in a fight sequence several times.

I'll agree that choreography wasn't reused, and their camera angles were good -- they didn't have to fake things out for a stunt double to take over for Snipes. But the "this guy can dodge anything in this fight but gets hit like a chump in this other fight" thing really bugged me. Honestly, it would have bugged me less in a movie that wasn't ABOUT the fights. Pirates of the Carribean? I don't care if the fights are a) unrealistic and b) different from each other in different scenes (although as I remember, they did a good job in that one of establishing the rules of combat in that movie and then sticking with them), because it wasn't about the fights. It was about Johnny Depp chewing the scenery and making you not realize what a corny movie it is most of the time because he's just so incredibly wacky.

But Blade 2 was not a movie I watched for its sterling performances, with the action an occasional little jolt. Blade 2 was all about the fights. And if it's all about the fights, it darn well better get the fights right.

(But I'm a fight snob, so I'm gonna be a hard sell, there.)

 

[Captain Tagon]

Oddly enough, I'm 21 and only just got big into comics over the last two years. My only real X-Men exposure when I was young was a little of the old X-Men cartoon. Even with that though, even to this day when I first hear someone mention the show Angel I think of the X-Man.

 

[Taren Seeker]

I found the CGI fighting one of the more objectionable things in Blade 2.

Couple that with the "Space Marine" vamp crew, and the inconsistent strength and lack of coolness of the villains...gets a "meh" from me.

The Vamp crew could have been really cool, but they just came off as trying TOO hard to be a badass reproduction of the Aliens Space Marines. Honestly, I expected to see one of those cheesy comic book panel shots of the "new team" with narrative boxes next to each guy stating his name. Seemed like every other issue in the 90's had a panel like that

 

[Enkhidu]

Reveal:[sblock]As you can tell you have multiple copies of the same character… Anyhow DC cleaned up their universes by killing them all off minus the original and bringing over some of the characters they wanted from the others. (This happened in the Zero Hour series, lots of no names died, but it explains while the members of the JSA, the predecessor of the JLA, are still young and what not.
[/sblock]

[sblock]Actually, I think that it was the Crisis of Infinite Earths that did that one.[/sblock]