>>99692842>shut your fat mouth and don't reply to me again, because you've lostWell, shit. I guess he's got a point there, guys.
>half of the villainsLess than half. Being the opposite of the protagonist is true of the first Thor, first Captain America, first Guardians of the Galaxy and, uh... huh. Guess I was wrong. It's less than a third. Neat.
Also, good job on not actually knowing two lines from Die hard. I'll bet you money I know exactly which one line you remember, too.
You've also yet to say in what WAY the MCU films are less adventurous, other than to simply say 'they aren't'. I'll point out that, before the MCU revolution, comic book movies were dangerous territory, rarely attempted, and almost universally panned. Investing this much money into a genre that has almost universally failed in the past is, in fact, adventurous by its very definition. The Raimi Spider man films and the Nolan Batman films were the only really successful comic movies in recent memory, and only the first two Raimi films were actually successful.
You keep repeating that the films are 'poorly written'. Some are, but no more or less than a significant chunk of other blockbusters. "Puny god." is no less memorable than "WELCOME TO EARF" in the quips department, certainly.
The problem is that you seem to think that a position is an argument. This is not the case. You have stated your position numerous times, and presented little or no argument for that position. I, and at least one other, have presented our positions and the arguments that support them. You do not understand discussion or debate, you are simply stating your point of view as though your presentation of it were support enough.
