You notice how I made most of the threads on here? Weird.
But yeah, talk about any kind of comic book movies, from Spider-Man to Scott Pilgrim, from the Christopher Reeve Superman movies to Snyder's Superman project.
For starters, Thor just came out, and I wrote about it here (http://skyfireaboveicebelow.tumblr.com/post/5248422139/thor). Was good and now I really can't wait for Captain America.
I still need to get a chance to catch Thor in theaters.
As for comic book movies in general, I'm really looking forward to X-Men: First Class more than I am any other upcoming superhero film, though Captain America looks interesting as well.
Overall this has exploded into its own genre of film in the past decade and already has its classics and great films as well as plenty of its duds. The best of them can treat the source material with enough respect and accuracy while also successfully adapting the characters, stories, and themes to seem at least somewhat plausible in live-action on a big screen, which is something that's really hard to do since its not easy to take a guy dressed in a cape very seriously unless handled extremely well and effectively.
My favorite movies in the genre so far include the first 2 X-men films and The Dark Knight, with movies like Iron Man and Tim Burton's Batman (honestly, I don't give a shit what anyone says about it, because it still holds up its entertainment value for me, personally) being ones that I relatively enjoy but don't come off as being quite as memorable in the long-run.
I also have to admit to being one of those people who didn't really get the massive hate for Spider-Man 3 (I get why people didn't like it, but like the NC said, its not like the other 2 films were devoid of completely stupid moments, and in the long run the film had some pretty strong points that I would argue for, personally).
The worst of these films (not counting the extremely cheese-grade low budget films from the 90's, like Spawn and Captain America, and even films that came out long before that) seem to be devoid of any real sense of characterization and just lack the expert skill of directing and acting to make the film flow together properly and to make audiences actually care about anything that's happening to any of the characters.
Yeah, I know people have their Wolverines and Spider-Man 3s as their worst, but really part of why I feel that this is such a vast over-reaction is because there are FAR worse movies in the genre out there that many less people seem to pick on. I mean, what about stuff like The Fantastic Four films, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Catwoman, or Ghost Rider? Those films are downright horrible. I mean I can understand hating the other films to some extent, but calling them the worst when those other films I just mentioned so much as exist just baffles me, personally.
Uh oh Spiderman 3 is that bad? That's almost at the top of my Netflix. I can't imagine it being worse than the universally despised Batman and Robin.
Last ones I saw from that genre were Kick Ass, and Iron Man 2.
I just got back from seeing Thor. It was good, overall (certainly a hell of a lot better than Iron Man 2, IMO), though there were some issues which I had with the film, but the most important thing is that it was enjoyable and done relatively well. They didn't make the movie as action-heavy as I had expected, which is a good thing since they made more of the film based on its story and characters, and the action scenes in the end meant a lot more because of that. And yeah, I have to say they really did a great job designing Asgard, even if it is really all just computer generated.
I have to say, though, I thought the trailers for this movie were complete crap. They didn't do a thing to get me excited or pumped up for the film, but the actual movie itself was actually a lot more entertaining than I had expected. I'd say that my favorite aspect of the film was how they handled Loki's character. I'm not sure how accurate or not it is to the comic books, but I found him to be the most interesting character in the film by far, and I actually liked this interpretation of him even more than the one in EMH.
Oh, BTW, I didn't really get that scene after the end credits. Anyone who saw the movie and that scene, and who knows more about the Marvel comic book Universe, care to elaborate on it for me?
I hope I helped you on AIM, man. :)
As for the trailers, they left me ambivalent. I couldn't get much of an impression out of them, but I thought for the longest time that the movie would take place mostly in Asgard. As much as I like the mythical world and thought it looked great in the movie, I do like the Earth parts a great deal as well, a lot more than I was expecting to, and think they found a good balance between Earth and Asgard in the film.
I am afraid if the movie is mostly going to be seen by hardcore fans and recent Avengers believers than a wider audience like the Iron Man movies. I couldn't get a couple of people to budge to see it with me, but did get enough to help it turn some kind of profit in. I don't think it'll make as much as them, but should turn in a profit.
Yeah, I was a bit surprised about that. While it didn't necessarily sell out, the evening show that I went to for Iron Man on the Friday that it released was pretty packed, and even the first Iron Man was really packed even though people didn't really know what to expect from that one. As for Thor, about a little more than half the theater was full, which would normally be understandable since its not entirely summer yet for most people, but then I remembered that it was still a Saturday, in which case I realized that this movie isn't going to be pulling in nearly as much profit as something like Iron Man or Spider-Man, but I'm sure it will still pull in a profit of some sort, nonetheless.
When I think about it, I blame the lackluster trailer for this movie not being as successful as it could have been. Also, I barely noticed any marketing for this movie on the whole. They had some car commercial that did a tie-in ad with the movie, but that's about all that I have seen for it.
This was the second midnight premiere I went to. The first was for The Dark Knight, which packed two theaters just fine. I'm not sure about the 3D one, but the 2D show for Thor that I went to was about half-full, which was a little disappointing.
And as for promotion for the movie, I still have my Loki and Thor Super Gulp cups from 7-11, which I keep along with my Whiplash Slurpee cup from last year. 8)
Ain't no way Spiderman 3 or Wolverine are the worst superhero movies out there. Not when crap like Elektra, Batman & Robin, or Steel exist.
I'm still pissed at Bryan Singer for making Superman Returns over X-Men 3. I don't even hate SR, but X2 was one of my favorite superhero films and I would love to have seen how he would have tackled the whole Phoenix idea. Now the franchise is busted, and instead of fixing it, Marvel seems to be tossing it aside for the Avengers and pumping out Wolverine movies.
I really hope First Class is good.
How is the Scott Pilgrim movie anyway? Is it faithful to the comic?
Mostly. It just condenses things to make it work as a film.
Quote from: Angus on May 17, 2011, 06:52:45 PM
How is the Scott Pilgrim movie anyway? Is it faithful to the comic?
Yes and no. It keeps a lot of the more important parts from the comics, like the fights and how Ramona's exes fit in, as well as pieces of dialogue, but they mess around with the story a lot to condense it into a 2 hour film. Some of it works out, others don't, like how certain character arcs, Ramona, Kim and Envy's in particular, or cut down or removed entirely, and the last few fights were cut down to just one encounter each.
As a movie, it works, but in comparison to the books, it's a fun adaptation but inferior.
So, uhh... what do you guys think of Ghost Rider? >_<
I ask because I happened to catch it on cable the other day... and let's just say, I'm a little more than surprised this is getting a sequel. Not a reboot, either; a full-on sequel, complete with Nic Cage and all.
Definitely not the worst comic book movie I've ever seen, though; I actually kinda *cough* enjoyed certain aspects of it, if we're being brutally honest here. Desen mentioned Steel, and I'm gonna have to give the "worst award" to that pile of crap. Never mind the hilariously bad script; I just can't believe Shaq even found more acting work after this. If I were a casting director, I wouldn't have come within ten feet of the guy. Screw his "mad hoopz skillz lol"; if you can't act, you can't act... and he can't act. Might as well stick to hocking Icy Hot products, if he wants to say in the spotlight.
Quote from: Kiddington on May 18, 2011, 10:13:10 PM
I ask because I happened to catch it on cable the other day... and let's just say, I'm a little more than surprised this is getting a sequel. Not a reboot, either; a full-on sequel, complete with Nic Cage and all.
Whoa, it is? Shows how out of the loop I've been.
I haven't seen Ghost Rider, since the movie didn't look promising and I wasn't a fan of the comics, but I know EK has and hates it to bits.
Quote from: Avaitor on May 18, 2011, 10:18:58 PM
Quote from: Kiddington on May 18, 2011, 10:13:10 PM
I ask because I happened to catch it on cable the other day... and let's just say, I'm a little more than surprised this is getting a sequel. Not a reboot, either; a full-on sequel, complete with Nic Cage and all.
Whoa, it is? Shows how out of the loop I've been.
Yep, it certainly is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Rider:_Spirit_of_Vengeance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Rider:_Spirit_of_Vengeance)
Five years down the line from the first, no less. Hollywood is a confusing beast; if there was money to milk here, you'd think this would have come back in 2009-2010 or something.
Nic Cage gets to be Ghost Rider while Brandon Routh is mostly likely ousted from his Superman role.
Hollywood really is confusing.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on May 07, 2011, 11:23:55 PM
I just got back from seeing Thor. It was good, overall (certainly a hell of a lot better than Iron Man 2, IMO), though there were some issues which I had with the film, but the most important thing is that it was enjoyable and done relatively well. They didn't make the movie as action-heavy as I had expected, which is a good thing since they made more of the film based on its story and characters, and the action scenes in the end meant a lot more because of that. And yeah, I have to say they really did a great job designing Asgard, even if it is really all just computer generated.
I have to say, though, I thought the trailers for this movie were complete crap. They didn't do a thing to get me excited or pumped up for the film, but the actual movie itself was actually a lot more entertaining than I had expected. I'd say that my favorite aspect of the film was how they handled Loki's character. I'm not sure how accurate or not it is to the comic books, but I found him to be the most interesting character in the film by far, and I actually liked this interpretation of him even more than the one in EMH.
Oh, BTW, I didn't really get that scene after the end credits. Anyone who saw the movie and that scene, and who knows more about the Marvel comic book Universe, care to elaborate on it for me?
Funny, the other person who said Thor was good said it was also better than Iron Man 2. And I also thought all the promos were shit. I'm interested to see how good Loki is in the movie. I've seen how good the character is here and there (mostly Hulk Vs Thor) and I think I know what to expect out of him done right.
It isn't really that hard to be better than Iron Man 2. It's far from the worst super hero movie ever made, but far from the best, either.
Iron Man 2's storyline was a trainwreck of epic proportions. Even I could do a better job than that.
Did I mention that X-Men: First Class looks stupid and the guy from Gossip Girl's writing can never be trusted yet?
It looks stupid or is stupid?
Saw the first half of the Scott Pilgrim movie last night. Liking the comic styling captions and visual fighting effects. Then again those names of Knives and Envy threw me a bit off, since they're associated more with those titles from Japan.
Well, I plan on seeing X-Men First Class this weekend (if I get the chance, to). So, if and when I see it, I'll be able to confirm for you all whether GSF's assumptions are right or not, whether its as stupid as the previous couple of X-Men films to be released, or it redeems the series at all to the level of the first 2 films.
As for me, I personally thought the trailers looked awesome. Coming from someone who feels that the trailers for all of the other big Superhero movies of this summer were completely stupid, this one actually excited me for some reason. The Thor trailers left me completely underwhelmed, the Green Lantern trailers are all absolutely garbage (and I won't be surprised one bit if the film turns out to suck), and I'm sorry but as great of a superhero as I'm sure that he is, and as hard as that trailer tried to make audiences take it seriously, I still find that Captain America looks completely ridiculous in live-action, and its honestly kind of hard to watch with a straight-face. Still, hopefully the film itself will prove me wrong, but I can't say that its trailer did anything to change my mind.
So yeah, after watching the trailer for First Class and the short preview clips for it, its honestly the only superhero film that I'm currently looking forward to. I do hope it turns out to be good, but it could also be lame since Bryan Singer isn't exactly the most perfect director that he can occasionally fuck up a movie or 2 (see: Superman Returns). Still, the previous so far have left me hopeful for this movie, honestly.
The reviews are very good for First Class, and it seems promising enough. I'm going to try to find time to see it, but who knows.
I'm seeing it this weekend, so I'm hoping for good stuff.
Hopefully Bryan Singer's input was heavy.
Did I mention that Ryan "Bad Acotr" Reynolds is the worst possible choice for Hal Jordan and that I'll watch the movie anyway since it's directed by Michael "Fucking" Campbell? There's no director I can trust more these days than Campbell. He's not my absolute favorite but close enough and Casino Royale alone blows away whatever Speilberg, Cameron and Peter Jackson has done recently. It's not even close. He rapes those guys recent work.
I noticed that reservations are available for the midnight premiere for Avengers now, so I was checking that out. The AMC at Downtown Disney is showing a Marvel movie marathon just before the premiere, with all the precursor movies. That sounds really cool, but also kind of excessive. If I went over to Downtown Disney for the premiere, I'd want to go around Downtown Disney before hand, not spend all day in the theater.
I am thinking of convincing my friends to go to that, but I'm not sure if they'll be down for it, since it's just as easy to stay in town and go to one of our local theaters.
The movie is coming out on the exact day that my semester ends. My last final itself is on May 3rd, I believe, but since its at 6:00 PM I probably won't get to go see the midnight premiere since it'll be too late for my dad to bring the car and for us to take the time to load up all of my stuff and drive back to New Jersey. :(
That said I can just see the movie on release day since I'll be going back on Friday morning and will have plenty of time left in the day after I unpack all of my stuff to go see the film. I also won't have to worry about reserving tickets like how I would for the midnight premiere.
I just finished watching Iron Man 2 for the first time since it was in theaters.
You know, it's still by far the weakest of the Marvel movies, and its flaws are as apparent as ever, but I enjoy it as much as ever. When it's funny, it's still hilarious. When the action is great, it's still great. Some of the sillier aspects, like Tony in the Grand Prix and the entire bit with DJ AM, could've easily been cut out or redone, but I still don't hate the film.
I don't know, it still felt too clustered and disorienting to me when I re-watched it. The action scenes were OK when they were there, but I felt like there were barely any and not really worth the build-up (I mean, come one, the final battle lasted all of 30 seconds and felt completely anti-climactic, especially when you compare it to how it was done in the first movie), and I didn't even find the humor to always work (it was really funny at times, but there were also a lot of times when it just didn't do anything for me, either). I do also feel that Black Widow felt way too forced into the story-line just for the sake of giving her character some exposure before The Avengers movie. She honestly would have been just as fine with a small cameo akin to what Hawkeye got in Thor. Personally I think I would have enjoyed the film much better if it had completely cut out the Tony dying sub-plot and the tie-ins with SHIELD, and instead just focused on the main conflict between Tony Stark and Whiplash as well as the government and military trying to get him to turn over his Iron Man property and technology to them for study and mass production. Those 2 plots alone would have been more than enough to sustain a full movie and could both be interesting while having plenty of room for humor and character development. I felt that everything else just dragged the movie down, personally, but that's just my opinion on it.
Yeah, you could've easily cut out most of Natasha's role as Tony and Pepper's assistant, and just introduce her shortly before she suits up as Black Widow and kicks ass alongside Coulson. And as much as I love the line "Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to step out of the donut", you can also completely remove Nick Fury's first appearance and only keep in his ending scene.
There's a lot wrong with the movie, I won't argue, but I don't think it's as poorly executed as you say.
Well, for all I criticize the movie, I don't actually hate it, but I just can't bring myself to like it, either. I think we can all agree that the first movie is far superior, and that Iron Man 3 would do better to look at what that movie did right and make sure to avoid the things that Iron Man 2 did wrong. We still have the potential for a truly great sequel in this film series.
Well there's always the possibility that IM3 can also suck, especially since it will be the first film to follow after the Avengers, which will give it a LOT to own up to. But I'm probably being way too cynical, since we have a good year until it comes out.
So, speaking of flawed super hero movies that some of us may like despite their criticisms, I'd like to point out once again that I'm one of the 5 people on Earth who likes Spider-Man 3, and honestly no matter how much people explain it to me I still don't fully get the hate for this movie. I can understand why fans of the comic books would hate it, but honestly it makes no sense to me how anyone who enjoyed the first 2 films would hate on the 3rd one since that one was just as silly and had just as many problems as those films. I mean, they are all pretty campy films if you look back on them, but for me its all in good fun. I don't see how SM3 stands out as being that much worse than the first 2 movies. If anything, I'd argue that SM2 is the one that's the most ripe with stupid problems.
I don't really like any of the Spider-Man movies anymore tbh. They all have cool action scenes, though.
What I dislike about SM 3 is the stupid romance subplot shit, which is equally bad across all three films, but there's a lot more of it in the third one iirc. Some scenes were downright embarrassing to watch IMO and the movie as a whole just puts me to sleep... though I'd argue that SM 2 is actually worse in that regard. I don't have ADD or anything, but I really cannot make it through all of 2 in one sitting. It's so goddamn boring.
I like the SM movies more for Sam Raimi's classic cheesy-ness. Also, I think that the Bruce Cambell cameos are way cooler than any Stan Lee cameo. :thumbup:
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on May 29, 2012, 12:42:14 AM
I like the SM movies more for Sam Raimi's classic cheesy-ness.
Yeah, now that I'm older and have watched most of Raimi's output, I've really started to appreciate the cheese in SM 1 & 3 more. It's hilarious!
QuoteAlso, I think that the Bruce Cambell cameos are way cooler than any Stan Lee cameo. :thumbup:
HELL YEAH BOYEE
My main beef with the Spider-Man movies is the one aspect of them that should have been cheesy, Spidey's dialogue and personality, was done completely straight and dull as shit. I don't think Peter had one good one-liner throughout the entire trilogy. I'd forgive this if it wasn't for the fact that Tobey Mcguire can't even pull off drama well enough to make the character's pathos come out accurately, and just made the entire character a wishy-washy emo turd. If you want to know why the bad elements of SM3 get elevated so high, EK, it's because of this.
Anyway, I'm watching The Incredible Hulk now, for the first time since I saw it in theaters 4 years ago. It's too soon for me to comment yet, since I'm only about 10 minutes in, but I did just get to the Stan Lee cameo.
I will say that I recently saw a list of 10 overlooked super hero movies, and the Ang Lee film made the list, since even despite "the disappointing final scene", the 2008 film "basically did the same thing, only 10 times weaker". Uh, no. The reason people hate the 2003 film is because Ang Lee is a wannabe Kubrick who decided to wait an entire fucking hour before he had Bruce turn into the Hulk, and spent way too much time on family drama bullshit as opposed to Hulk smashing. TIH isn't perfect itself, but at least Hulk actually appears substantially more.
Quote from: Brak's Dad on June 01, 2012, 10:22:16 PM
My main beef with the Spider-Man movies is the one aspect of them that should have been cheesy, Spidey's dialogue and personality, was done completely straight and dull as shit. I don't think Peter had one good one-liner throughout the entire trilogy. I'd forgive this if it wasn't for the fact that Tobey Mcguire can't even pull off drama well enough to make the character's pathos come out accurately, and just made the entire character a wishy-washy emo turd. If you want to know why the bad elements of SM3 get elevated so high, EK, it's because of this.
See, I completely disagree with this notion, myself. That so-called emo scene only took up about 15 minutes of SM3. He didn't act that way for the entire trilogy. As for the dialogue, I thought it was suitably cheesy. There was a ton of corn-ball dialogue that I got a laugh out of, though I do agree that Tobey Maguire himself never had a good classic Spider-Man one-liner to say, but I'd say that's more the fault of the writers than his own fault. The bad elements of SM3 getting elevated so high is something that I consider to be completely over-blown, personally. Like I said, I can understand why comic book fans such as yourself would hate it, but can you really argue that people who liked the first 2 films should really be complaining about the 3rd one when both of those films also had pretty much all of the same problems, themselves? At any rate, I find the movies to be entertaining and I don't consider Tobey Mcguire to be a bad actor like you and Foggle do (I've seen him in stuff I liked, like Pleasantville and Seabiscuit), though I do think that he wasn't a great Peter Parker. Either way, I still got a ton of entertainment value out of the movies, since they have a campy comic book feel to them that I like and also because they honestly have pretty kick-ass action scenes (and if anything, SM3 is the best in that department, as its action scenes hold up well even against the most recent superhero movies).
So, yeah, its fine that everyone else hates on the 3rd movie in particular, but everyone has films that they enjoy despite the back-lash, and personally I stopped giving a shit about what anyone else says about the movie. As flawed as it is, I like it, and I still think it has plenty of good qualities to make it an enjoyable movie.
QuoteAnyway, I'm watching The Incredible Hulk now, for the first time since I saw it in theaters 4 years ago. It's too soon for me to comment yet, since I'm only about 10 minutes in, but I did just get to the Stan Lee cameo.
I will say that I recently saw a list of 10 overlooked super hero movies, and the Ang Lee film made the list, since even despite "the disappointing final scene", the 2008 film "basically did the same thing, only 10 times weaker". Uh, no. The reason people hate the 2003 film is because Ang Lee is a wannabe Kubrick who decided to wait an entire fucking hour before he had Bruce turn into the Hulk, and spent way too much time on family drama bullshit as opposed to Hulk smashing. TIH isn't perfect itself, but at least Hulk actually appears substantially more.
I think Ang Lee was trying to make the story really psychological and deep, but it ended up becoming a slow and somewhat pretentious mess. The thing is, its a comic book movie, and its a comic book movie about The Hulk of all characters, so nobody wants to see it for a deep analysis of Bruce Banner's psyche and a slow plot that pretty much goes nowhere. I'll be frank: I'll see a Hulk movie if I want to see total chaos on screen and have fun watching it (though with more dignity than a Michael Bay flick, of course). The Ang Lee film wasn't overlooked because of a "disappointing final scene" or whatever those people think is the reason. It was overlooked because it was a boring film and didn't even feel like it was about The Hulk or even related to The Hulk for more than half of the movie.
You know, I was thinking of doing short/mini reviews of all of the live-action Marvel movies that I have seen thus far (which is pretty much a lot of them). I haven't seen that old Captain America movie from the 90's or any of their early, more obscure ones (that existed before they could actually produce movies with a decent budget and any actual talented writers, actors, and directors of any kind), but I'm pretty sure that I have seen just about every Marvel movie to have come out in theaters since the first X-Men in 2000, with the exception of The Punisher movies and the 2nd Ghost Rider movie that came out this year.
Tobey was great in Pleasantville! Very good movie. Haven't really liked him in anything else, though.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2012, 12:08:11 AMAs for the dialogue, I thought it was suitably cheesy. There was a ton of corn-ball dialogue that I got a laugh out of, though I do agree that Tobey Maguire himself never had a good classic Spider-Man one-liner to say, but I'd say that's more the fault of the writers than his own fault.
Yeah, the actual dialogue in the franchise as a whole has some solid one-liners, but just not from Spidey. That's what I meant.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2012, 12:08:11 AMLike I said, I can understand why comic book fans such as yourself would hate it, but can you really argue that people who liked the first 2 films should really be complaining about the 3rd one when both of those films also had pretty much all of the same problems, themselves?
I'll admit that for as many problems as SM3 has, the first 2 also has a lot of problems to own up to. Besides the forced drama, at least IMO, the first's special effects have really dated themselves in comparison to later movies, including the next two, and 2 is just a bore. There's still some great stuff in the films, like some of the humor, J.K. Simmons as Jamison in general, and Harry's development throughout, but I think if anything, 3 just made people realize that the franchise just isn't that good to begin with. Like I said there are some really cool parts in the films, but the more I think about it, the more I'm interested in seeing how The Amazing Spider-Man tackles Spidey.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2012, 12:08:11 AMI think Ang Lee was trying to make the story really psychological and deep, but it ended up becoming a slow and somewhat pretentious mess. The thing is, its a comic book movie, and its a comic book movie about The Hulk of all characters, so nobody wants to see it for a deep analysis of Bruce Banner's psyche and a slow plot that pretty much goes nowhere. I'll be frank: I'll see a Hulk movie if I want to see total chaos on screen and have fun watching it (though with more dignity than a Michael Bay flick, of course). The Ang Lee film wasn't overlooked because of a "disappointing final scene" or whatever those people think is the reason. It was overlooked because it was a boring film and didn't even feel like it was about The Hulk or even related to The Hulk for more than half of the movie.
I think Ang Lee wanted to make a film about a psychologically messed up family at the same time that he was hired to make The Hulk, so for whatever reason he decided to combine the two ideas, and this is what we got.
When I think back on it, I think the film actually would've been better if Bruce's dad didn't turn into Absorbing Man, and the rest of the film just focused on Bruce Banner's character arc. I don't know if it'd be a LOT better, but that part of the film really just had no purpose to exist.
Anyway, I just finished The Incredible Hulk, and really, it holds up a lot better than I remembered. The only thing I wasn't crazy on was Liv Tyler, and that's only because her voice was a little too squeaky for me at this time at night. Otherwise, she's a fine Betty Ross. The few times that Banner turned into the Hulk were deservedly awesome and the story worked quite well.
I don't think I'm going to move it up my "Road to Avengers" list, however, if only because the 4 I have above it are just that good, but it's a close 5th.
The Incredible Hulk is a good movie. Its just that all of the Avengers-related movies (except for Iron Man 2) are good by default, and TIH just happens to be the weakest of those films. Even then, its still a solid superhero flick in its own right.
Anyway, here's (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/iron_man/news/1925280/weekly_ketchup_iron_man_3_villain_officially_revealed/) some more info on Iron Man 3.
Looking good.
Two very big pieces of news were revealed for the Avengers canon today-
One (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=61031) and two (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=61563).
Thoughts?
Quote from: Brak's Dad on June 14, 2012, 12:11:43 PM
two (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=61563).
Cool, glad I waited, then. :joy:
Quote from: Foggle on June 14, 2012, 12:14:05 PM
Quote from: Brak's Dad on June 14, 2012, 12:11:43 PM
two (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=61563).
Cool, glad I waited, then. :joy:
Yep, it gives you a chance to catch up, if true.
BTW, Thor is now on Netflix, along with Iron Man 2, for those who have it.
Sweet, I've been waiting for a chance to re-watch this movie since it came out. Now if we could just get Captain America on Netflix as well, I'd be set.
Also, I'll say it now, Foggle- you will HATE Kat Dennings in this movie. Well, you probably already do hate her, but she is by far the worst part of Thor.
A Guardians of the Galaxy film has been confirmed. (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=62584)
Not surprising, really. Seems like the perfect introduction for Thanos.
The official slate:
Iron Man 3 (May 3, 2013)
Thor: The Dark World (November 8, 2013)
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (April 4, 2014)
Guardians of the Galaxy (August 1, 2014)
So, Avaitor, do those subtitles for Thor and Captain America give you a good enough idea of what arcs each respective sequel will adapt from the comics?
Not really, no.
Oh, Ant Man's happening too. Edgar Wright showed some footage from it. I don't think a date is planned though.
Actually, the title does make it look like they'll adapt Brubaker's Winter Soldier arc.
So it does. I'm unfamiliar with it, being fairly recent and all, but seeing as this does bring Bucky back in some way, I'm not surprised.
On my birthday, Amazing Spider-Man came out so my brother he came to visit took me and a friend we haven't seen in years until that day to the movie. It was decent. It was kind of like them trying hard to not do everything Spider-Man 1 did (Green Goblin, wrestling, etc.) Kind of made me appreciate that movie more, which I don't even like. Anyway, it was good for a setup of a trilogy or whatever and I loved it when Doc Connors showed flashes of intelligence when he fought, like when he mixed those chemicals together and made them into an explosive to throw at Peter. Also, whenever he wore the lab coat in lizard form. They did make it understandable why he couldn't just wear it all the time. No way that thing would fit.
The day after my brother's birthday, we and our cousin and baby brother went to go see The Avengers. My first time seeing it, his second. It was pretty slow until the end but still pretty good. I did love the fact that Loki was the main villain. His actor does a great job of portraying him, just like he did in Thor and all signs point to him coming back yet again. A comic book movie that's smart enough to not kill off a major character at the first chance it gets? Brilliant? Also, can't remember the last time I've seen a villain crossover in a live action superhero flick. I was extremely surprised at who was shown after the credits. Don't see how the heroes have a chance with their lineup. Anyway, since it would be extremely underwhelming to have Ultron be the main villain in Avengers 2 now, I'd love to see him in Iron Man 3 and then have Vision come over from that film and have him be in Avengers 2 afterwards.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on May 29, 2012, 12:13:47 AM
So, speaking of flawed super hero movies that some of us may like despite their criticisms, I'd like to point out once again that I'm one of the 5 people on Earth who likes Spider-Man 3, and honestly no matter how much people explain it to me I still don't fully get the hate for this movie. I can understand why fans of the comic books would hate it, but honestly it makes no sense to me how anyone who enjoyed the first 2 films would hate on the 3rd one since that one was just as silly and had just as many problems as those films. I mean, they are all pretty campy films if you look back on them, but for me its all in good fun. I don't see how SM3 stands out as being that much worse than the first 2 movies. If anything, I'd argue that SM2 is the one that's the most ripe with stupid problems.
Linkin Peter Parker makes Spider-Man 3 factually shit.
Quote from: Avaitor on June 02, 2012, 02:58:03 PM
Anyway, here's (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/iron_man/news/1925280/weekly_ketchup_iron_man_3_villain_officially_revealed/) some more info on Iron Man 3.
Looking good.
Iron Patriot? :shit:
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 15, 2012, 03:33:40 AM
Linkin Peter Parker makes Spider-Man 3 factually shit.
The fact that all of your opinions are factually shit makes anything you say irrelevant. :sly:
I TRIED SO HARD
AND GOT SO FAR
IN THE END
MJ DOESN'T EVEN MATTERRRRRRRR
This is bad comedy. Call me when they announce an Aaron Stack movie.
Well to be serious again, these are RT's top 50 comic book movies (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/marvels_the_avengers/news/1925548/best_comix_countdown_2012/).
Do you agree with #1? Because the more I think about it, it really is as close to perfect as there is for comic book movies.
Oldboy at #31. I call shenanigans.
And Avengers? Eh, I'm starting to agree with chdr in that it's basically superhero porn for neckbeards and preteen boys to jack off to.
Chdr- who thinks Problem Solverz is a great work of art. ;) But in my opinion, it's too early to call it the best superhero film ever. While it may well be, let it sit a while and let the hype die down. Then we can decide if Whedon > Cameron. :P
I'm glad to see the original Superman rank so high, it really is a great movie.
Wow, Persepolis is pretty low for a movie with 97%. That's another great one.
This is one of those lists with a bunch of choices that straight up don't make sense. For instance, what the hell is Superman Returns doing in the top 30? I thought people hated that movie. Also, why is Batman Returns ahead of Batman 1989? I even like Returns, but I know for a fact that a lot of people don't, and even though I like it most people in general would agree that the 1989 film was far better and should probably be placed higher on the list, at that. Also, its WAY too soon to be ranking films like Spider-Man 3 or The Avengers (and especially to rank the latter as the best comic book movie of all time). I mean, yeah, they would both probably belong on this list, but they only just came out this summer, so its not like anyone could be certain where they should rank until at least a year has passed and they can view the films without any major hype behind them and really judge them for what they are. Also, while I LOVE Avengers, I think people have gotten way too out of hand in saying that it surpasses The Dark Knight. Take out the novelty of having 4 major super-heroes team up for the first time ever on the big-screen, stand back, and analyze the movie. I think you'd find that while its a definitely a highly entertaining flick, it doesn't have all that much depth to it. Loki's motives come down to little more than just wanting power, which is obviously carried over from his detest of being snubbed the right to being the ruler of Asgard in favor of his brother, Thor. As for the heroes, the one who has the deepest conflict is Captain America, who must struggle to keep up with futuristic (respective to him) world that he has been cast into, and its not like this movie has a lot of time to explore that concept. Coming in 2nd is Bruce Banner, who has to find a way to control his rage and make The Hulk into something useful that can be used against the alien forces that are trying to invade Earth. Its surprisingly well done for a movie that has so many other characters to focus on, but its still not handled with the same amount of care that could be afforded by a film that really has more time to focus on fewer characters.
Now, compare all of that to The Dark Knight, where the characters are full of depth, The Joker is much more threatening of a villain respective to film (as in, he manages to put an entire city in peril without the use of a powerful invading alien army at his command), Batman has no superpowers or even teammates to help him out (unless you count Alfred and Lucius Fox) so he instead has to rely on his own skills and wits with some technology to back him up. Also, Bruce Wayne just has way more problems to deal with than any of the heroes in Avengers even had alone in their own movies, which keeps things interesting since it feels like the odds are always stacked against him.
Don't get me wrong, I really do like The Avengers. Its probably one of my top 5 favorite comic book films, but I fully admit that it is because its a damn entertaining popcorn flick. Even with all of the hype behind it, I never saw it as something on the level of The Dark Knight in terms of intricate plots and character complexity.
I don't know about you, but the more I watch TDK, the less Heath Ledger's performance wows me. It actually kind of irks me now and not in a good way. It's indeed a more complex film than Avengers, but I wouldn't call it the best either.
As for Avengers, there isn't much to it, but is it fun? I think it's just a blast and isn't as padded as TDK, despite having the same length. It is too soon to rank it so high, but the film still has a lot more going for it than against it- a great script, fun action, near-perfect representation of 70 year's worth of comic mythology, and a sensational cast.
Oldboy not in the top 10, no Ichi The Killer at all, Spider-Man 2 and 3 on the list, Over The Hedge on the list, Iron Man 2 on the list...
:whuh: :whuh: :whuh: :whuh:
Quote from: Avaitor on July 15, 2012, 02:18:24 PM
I don't know about you, but the more I watch TDK, the less Heath Ledger's performance wows me. It actually kind of irks me now and not in a good way. It's indeed a more complex film than Avengers, but I wouldn't call it the best either.
That's just the way you feel then. Which is fine, but the fact of the matter is that most people still love Ledger's performance, myself included. I still see no problems with it, personally. Its his own portrayal of The Joker and I find that it works very well for the film and the tone that it goes for. That, and even if his performance did have problem, I'd still say he makes a better villain than Loki in The Avengers. In fact when I was talking about the film to my uncle the other day (someone who actually grew up with comics when he was a kid), he pointed out something interesting that I hadn't caught onto before but which I do think rings some truth now that I think about it. In the 2nd half of The Avengers, Loki is really no longer all that threatening, and even becomes a bit comical. All of a sudden he doesn't seem so intimidating anymore despite having an entire army at his command, and he doesn't seem to be giving the heroes any serious trouble as they constantly have the edge over him. I mean, its still a really fun 2nd half of the movie, but when I stop to think about it, I do agree with my uncle that it feels like the odds are pretty much in the favor of the heroes. The movie tries to remedy that by having a nuclear missile thrown the heroes' way, but that plot point doesn't last long and in fact is turned around in a way that helps them in the end. I just feel like it kind of ruins the overall impact of the movie if things end up seeming a bit too easy for the heroes, but I guess that was supposed to be the point of them teaming up and working together. Still, at no point in the film did I ever feel like the heroes were even close to losing, which kind of bothers me a little bit when I think about it.
QuoteAs for Avengers, there isn't much to it, but is it fun? I think it's just a blast and isn't as padded as TDK, despite having the same length. It is too soon to rank it so high, but the film still has a lot more going for it than against it- a great script, fun action, near-perfect representation of 70 year's worth of comic mythology, and a sensational cast.
I don't really see how TDK was padded. Literally every moment of the film something important was happening. On the contrary, I say that for the most part it uses its time very wisely, and not a single minute is wasted on something pointless or that doesn't either contribute to the plot or characterization for one of the cast.
I do agree that The Avengers has a lot going for it, and I don't want it to seem like I'm all out against the film now. I agree that it has great writing, acting, directing, and so forth, and that it is a ton of fun. I just feel that when you stop to analyze it, the film is kind of shallow in comparison to something like TDK, which I still feel accomplishes good depth without sacrificing any entertainment value, as I can say for certain that each time I watched that film I was constantly kept interested and wanting to see what happened next. The same goes for The Avengers, but its just that I feel that there's more to TDK that I would personally rank it as the better film.
Quote from: Foggle on July 15, 2012, 02:41:39 PM
Oldboy not in the top 10, no Ichi The Killer at all, Spider-Man 2 and 3 on the list, Over The Hedge on the list, Iron Man 2 on the list...
:whuh: :whuh: :whuh: :whuh:
No Cemetery Man either! Though I know I'm probably the only person on the planet who thinks that movie is a masterpiece.
Quote from: Foggle on July 15, 2012, 02:54:54 PM
Quote from: Foggle on July 15, 2012, 02:41:39 PM
Oldboy not in the top 10, no Ichi The Killer at all, Spider-Man 2 and 3 on the list, Over The Hedge on the list, Iron Man 2 on the list...
:whuh: :whuh: :whuh: :whuh:
No Cemetery Man either! Though I know I'm probably the only person on the planet who thinks that movie is a masterpiece.
It's your favorite, right?
*snickers at Avaitor saying TDK is padded*
I also think The Avengers has nothing on Batman Begins. BB had great emphasis on what Batman is all about (at least what the movie version of Batman is all about, which is still great). When it comes to what the movie version of The Avengers is about, "Hey, let's put some high risk characters together for the greater good or some shit." There's no comparison. They spent most of the movie hating each other and fumbling around. I really like The Avengers, but Batman Begins always goes somewhere with what's happening onscreen, just like TDK. There's no waiting for the good part and even pre-Batman Bruce is entertaining to watch.
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 15, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
It's your favorite, right?
Not quite, it's in my top 5 though.
Quote from: Foggle on July 15, 2012, 02:54:54 PM
Quote from: Foggle on July 15, 2012, 02:41:39 PM
Oldboy not in the top 10, no Ichi The Killer at all, Spider-Man 2 and 3 on the list, Over The Hedge on the list, Iron Man 2 on the list...
:whuh: :whuh: :whuh: :whuh:
No Cemetery Man either! Though I know I'm probably the only person on the planet who thinks that movie is a masterpiece.
I didn't even know that was an adaptation.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 15, 2012, 03:54:32 PM
I didn't even know that was an adaptation.
Kinda sorta. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylan_Dog#Dellamorte_Dellamore
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 15, 2012, 02:51:42 PM
In the 2nd half of The Avengers, Loki is really no longer all that threatening, and even becomes a bit comical. All of a sudden he doesn't seem so intimidating anymore despite having an entire army at his command, and he doesn't seem to be giving the heroes any serious trouble as they constantly have the edge over him. I mean, its still a really fun 2nd half of the movie, but when I stop to think about it, I do agree with my uncle that it feels like the odds are pretty much in the favor of the heroes. The movie tries to remedy that by having a nuclear missile thrown the heroes' way, but that plot point doesn't last long and in fact is turned around in a way that helps them in the end. I just feel like it kind of ruins the overall impact of the movie if things end up seeming a bit too easy for the heroes, but I guess that was supposed to be the point of them teaming up and working together. Still, at no point in the film did I ever feel like the heroes were even close to losing, which kind of bothers me a little bit when I think about it.
Damn, I didn't even think about that. I'd like to think that Loki being inactive was just him being cocky about his superiority, since he is just a cocky person in general. Not to mention that Loki was never much of a fighter in the first place. He never really much in the climax of Thor either. But it is still a weak point now that you mention it.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 15, 2012, 02:51:42 PM
I don't really see how TDK was padded. Literally every moment of the film something important was happening. On the contrary, I say that for the most part it uses its time very wisely, and not a single minute is wasted on something pointless or that doesn't either contribute to the plot or characterization for one of the cast.
Well, for one thing, the money trading part in the beginning didn't really need to happen, with the wimpish Asian guy. You could've just kept in the scene where the Joker walks into the crime boss's meeting and got a hit ordered on him, kept some of the scenes with Bruce but left out his trip to Hong Kong, and cut straight to the Joker faking his death.
I thought there was more, but now that I think back on the movie, I'm not so sure what else I'd cut out.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 15, 2012, 05:10:28 PM
Damn, I didn't even think about that. I'd like to think that Loki being inactive was just him being cocky about his superiority, since he is just a cocky person in general. Not to mention that Loki was never much of a fighter in the first place. He never really much in the climax of Thor either. But it is still a weak point now that you mention it.
I actually really liked Loki in Thor. His development into a villain was my favorite aspect of that movie, personally. I thought he was living up to his development in The Avengers as well, until the 2nd half in which he becomes much less of a threat. I do still think that he's a great villain, overall, but yeah, he didn't really do nearly as much as he could have in The Avengers. That said, I still have high hopes for him having a lot of interesting further development and moments as a villain in the next Thor movie.
QuoteWell, for one thing, the money trading part in the beginning didn't really need to happen, with the wimpish Asian guy. You could've just kept in the scene where the Joker walks into the crime boss's meeting and got a hit ordered on him, kept some of the scenes with Bruce but left out his trip to Hong Kong, and cut straight to the Joker faking his death.
Well, perhaps some of those scenes weren't completely necessary, or could have been done differently, but IMO they were all done well, and they all still progress the plot forward in some small way, at the very least. At any rate, maybe the movie is padded and I'm just not seeing it, but for me what makes it work so well is how fast-paced it is. On that note, I think that the movies is really good about constantly moving things forward without wasting any time, yet at the same time it doesn't shy away from slowing things down at a moment when a character is having an emotional moment, or to just have a little bit of comic relief every now and then.
QuoteI thought there was more, but now that I think back on the movie, I'm not so sure what else I'd cut out.
I kind of like it the way it is, so I don't think I'd change anything about it, myself. The same goes for The Avengers, though, which as a matter of fact already had a lot cut out of it before it finally ran in theaters, but honestly, while I am genuinely interested in seeing the extra 35-minutes that were initially removed from the film, I do think I like the original theatrical release just the way it is. Obviously Joss Whedon cut those scenes out for a reason and I think he made a good decision, as the film moves at a consistent pace without ever feeling too fast or too padded.
Well with Thor 2, Loki's going to play a major role but won't be the main villain. I think that's a good call, as he can still have plenty of development but let someone else in Thor's rich rogues gallery take charge instead.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 15, 2012, 05:49:40 PM
Well with Thor 2, Loki's going to play a major role but won't be the main villain. I think that's a good call, as he can still have plenty of development but let someone else in Thor's rich rogues gallery take charge instead.
Perhaps it'll be something along the lines of X2, where Loki ends up begrudgingly working together with Thor against a greater threat to them both (much like how Magneto temporarily works together with Xavier in X2, though still has his own motives and agenda to attend to in the process). I think that'll make for a very interesting character dynamic between the 2 brothers, and that sort of plot has a lot of potential behind it. Its possible, too, since even though I haven't read the comics I've heard that Thor and Loki have worked together before in some good stories, unless I've heard wrong.
I think they might be saving Thor and Loki to team up for if and when they bring out Surtur. I'd rather they save that arc for the third and not have Loki side with Thor in the sequel. I think they might need the time in Thor 2 to resolve the turmoil from the Avengers.
But who knows, I could be wrong and thee could be enough time for them to wrap things up and team up together if needed.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 15, 2012, 05:10:28 PM
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 15, 2012, 02:51:42 PM
In the 2nd half of The Avengers, Loki is really no longer all that threatening, and even becomes a bit comical. All of a sudden he doesn't seem so intimidating anymore despite having an entire army at his command, and he doesn't seem to be giving the heroes any serious trouble as they constantly have the edge over him. I mean, its still a really fun 2nd half of the movie, but when I stop to think about it, I do agree with my uncle that it feels like the odds are pretty much in the favor of the heroes. The movie tries to remedy that by having a nuclear missile thrown the heroes' way, but that plot point doesn't last long and in fact is turned around in a way that helps them in the end. I just feel like it kind of ruins the overall impact of the movie if things end up seeming a bit too easy for the heroes, but I guess that was supposed to be the point of them teaming up and working together. Still, at no point in the film did I ever feel like the heroes were even close to losing, which kind of bothers me a little bit when I think about it.
Damn, I didn't even think about that. I'd like to think that Loki being inactive was just him being cocky about his superiority, since he is just a cocky person in general. Not to mention that Loki was never much of a fighter in the first place. He never really much in the climax of Thor either. But it is still a weak point now that you mention it.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 15, 2012, 02:51:42 PM
I don't really see how TDK was padded. Literally every moment of the film something important was happening. On the contrary, I say that for the most part it uses its time very wisely, and not a single minute is wasted on something pointless or that doesn't either contribute to the plot or characterization for one of the cast.
Well, for one thing, the money trading part in the beginning didn't really need to happen, with the wimpish Asian guy. You could've just kept in the scene where the Joker walks into the crime boss's meeting and got a hit ordered on him, kept some of the scenes with Bruce but left out his trip to Hong Kong, and cut straight to the Joker faking his death.
I thought there was more, but now that I think back on the movie, I'm not so sure what else I'd cut out.
That part was there to give Lucius more screentime and to set up the cell phone technology. I thought it was really stupid for Bruce to go to Hong Kong as himself and then as Batman later at night though. Too much of a chance of someone getting suspicious since Batman and Wayne are two of the most famous people from Gotham.
I always thought Road To Perdition was overlooked. Honestly, I think Hanks being nominated for Castaway and not this was a bit of a shame.
I keep on forgetting about Lone Wolf And Cub. In the back of my head, I tried to figure out what movie series escaped me but I then remembered. I'd put the two I saw ahead of The Avengers as well.
Oh, this was just announced- Hawkeye will be in Captain America 2. No word on Black Widow appearing in any of the flicks before Avengers 2.
Saw Amazing Spider-Man tonight. Loved it. Way better than Raimi's films IMO.
I'm curious to what you thought of the origin story compared to Raimi's first film. I can guess that this one was more accurate than Raimi's, but I found my own pros and cons for each.
The origin story in Raimi's film is a bit more rushed, but it also has the benefit of getting to the meat of the story much quicker. I like how in this new one they take the time to build up Peter's character quite a bit before he's Spider-Man, but on the downside I felt like they took way too long to tell his origin as Spider-Man and felt that the movie was moving a bit too slowly until he finally....you know, becomes Spider-Man.
As for the Uncle Ben's death thing (this really shouldn't be a spoiler to anyone), I like how Peter is actually there to see it in this movie, but honestly I felt like it was actually a bit more effective in Raimi's movie if only because Peter actually had a lot to feel guilty about. He had been completely selfish and was miss-using his abilities to win money. In this reboot, its true that he had a reason to feel guilty since he let that guy go after robbing the store, but his reasons for being pissed off and storming out on his Uncle in the first place didn't seem as selfish as they were just him having trouble dealing with some personal issues. Either way, I honestly liked the way both films handled that part of the story, but I think that's one area where I actually like the way Raimi did it better, whether it was more accurate or not.
On the whole, though, this is definitely a better movie than any of Raimi's Spider-Man movies. I still like those, though (well, except for 2, maybe, which I still don't get why its so well-liked by so many people), and I have to admit that those are what got me into Spider-Man in the first place.
Anyways, I was just making a few comparisons between the 2002 Spider-Man and this movie just because its interesting to do so.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 18, 2012, 11:58:21 PM
I'm curious to what you thought of the origin story compared to Raimi's first film. I can guess that this one was more accurate than Raimi's, but I found my own pros and cons for each.
Raimi's is actually quite a bit more accurate to the original comics iirc.
QuoteThe origin story in Raimi's film is a bit more rushed, but it also has the benefit of getting to the meat of the story much quicker. I like how in this new one they take the time to build up Peter's character quite a bit before he's Spider-Man, but on the downside I felt like they took way too long to tell his origin as Spider-Man and felt that the movie was moving a bit too slowly until he finally....you know, becomes Spider-Man.
As for the Uncle Ben's death thing (this really shouldn't be a spoiler to anyone), I like how Peter is actually there to see it in this movie, but honestly I felt like it was actually a bit more effective in Raimi's movie if only because Peter actually had a lot to feel guilty about. He had been completely selfish and was miss-using his abilities to win money. In this reboot, its true that he had a reason to feel guilty since he let that guy go after robbing the store, but his reasons for being pissed off and storming out on his Uncle in the first place didn't seem as selfish as they were just him having trouble dealing with some personal issues. Either way, I honestly liked the way both films handled that part of the story, but I think that's one area where I actually like the way Raimi did it better, whether it was more accurate or not.
I pretty much agree with you completely here, though I do think I preferred the way it was handled in this new one, if only slightly. But that's only because you get to see more of and learn more about Uncle Ben, so I was actually pretty sad when he died.
QuoteOn the whole, though, this is definitely a better movie than any of Raimi's Spider-Man movies. I still like those, though (well, except for 2, maybe, which I still don't get why its so well-liked by so many people), and I have to admit that those are what got me into Spider-Man in the first place.
Yep, those are what got me into Spider-Man too! I still like the first Raimi movie, though. I think. I kind of flip-flop on that one. Either way, I much prefer SSM to any of the films. >_>
The trailer for Man of Steel... why does it look like they're remaking Forrest Gump?
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 21, 2012, 02:44:11 PM
The trailer for Man of Steel... why does it look like they're remaking Forrest Gump?
That's insulting to Forrest Gump. That movie was actually good. This movie looks like it'll actually manage to make Superman more boring than ever before. It also doesn't help that its being directed by Zack Snyder. I haven't liked a single movie that he's ever done.
Yeah, Zack Snyder's filmography leaves a lot to be desired:
Dawn of the Dead- Passable, if completely unremarkable remake of the Romero classic.
300- Awful adaptation of an awful graphic novel.
Watchmen- Mediocre adaptation of a perfect graphic novel. Well, he did the best he or really anyone could, but in all honesty, it shouldn't have been filmed to begin with. You're only going to lose so many little subtleties on screen and end up rehasing what Alan Moore perfected.
Legend of the Guardians- Boring and uninvested.
Sucker Punch-... the less said about it, the better.
Well, at least it'll be better than those planned Superman Lives or Flyby ideas.
When I saw the teaser for Superman movie, I actually thought it was a trailer for a sports movie along the lines of Remember the Titans or Money Ball. If it wasn't for that DC logo, I would have assumed otherwise. I will say, the only thing I do enjoy in a Zack Snyder Movie is the cinematography. Which is what I thought 300, Watchmen, & Sucker Punch excelled at.
I don't even think that. Movies done entirely in green screen are a trend that need to die, IMO.
Don't care about Sucker Punch, haven't seen it anyway. Watchmen was pretty good though, plus this was written by Goyer and Nolan is the producer so I think he would have been able to keep Snyder in check. The Comic-Con trailer is much, much better than the teaser so I'm excited. :thumbup:
I still want a Death Of Superman adaption. I don't really see anything else enticing me.
In order to make a movie like that meaningful, though, they'd actually have to succeed at getting the mainstream public to even give a shit about Superman in the first place. The only way that's possible is to actually make a really successful Superman film in the modern age. Yes, the 1978 Superman movie was a hit at the time it came out, but that's also long forgotten from the mainstream moviegoers since it just doesn't have much appeal to people who like the more modern superhero movie adaptations.
Random news for the movies-
-Along with Hawkeye, Black Widow will play a major role in Captain America 2. Build-up towards Avengers 2 and possibly a Budapest movie? We'll see
-Chris Eccleston, aka the Ninth Doctor, will be the main villain in Thor 2
-Possibly the most exciting news of all- the X-Men: First Class sequel will be a Days of Future Past film
I'm still waiting for news on The Boys movie.
X-Men: First Class is getting a sequel? SWEET! ;D
The crazy thing is, the timeframe that the original DOFP took place in was 2013, which is, obviously, next year. I wonder how they'll handle that in this movie.
Easy. Just make it an alternate, bad future, and Xavier has to fix it so it becomes normal.
One thing I was thinking was that the First Class-era X-Men could travel to this timeline and meet up with Stewart and McKellen-era X-Men, and hopefully find a way to fix what they fucked up with The Last Stand.
You know, I'm not sure if it was confirmed one way or the other or not at all, but does the First Class movie even take place in the same movie-canon as the other X-Men films. I mean, yeah, we got that Wolverine cameo from Hugh Jackman who played him in the other X-Men films, but that alone doesn't really confirm anything. I hadn't really thought about it much until I saw people arguing online that it couldn't be part of the same film canon. I've seen examples such as how certain story-line elements don't fit together or add-up if you try to place these films in the same story-line canon. I don't care to get into too much detail about it, myself, but it does leave me curious as to what Marvel has to officially say about the matter.
Also, off-note from what I just wrote, I just want to continue to go on record as saying that I found Last Stand to be the worse of two evils. I mean, I know Wolverine was bad but at least it had good action scenes and I could sort of enjoy it as a guilty pleasure. The Last Stand, on the other hand, is criminal of being completely underwhelming and boring, having incredibly bad writing, and also fucking up a trilogy that the first 2 films did a great job (IMO) setting up for a much better deserved conclusion than what we got with The Last Stand.
Yeah, First Class seems like it can go either way as a prequel or a reboot, depending on how Fox and Singer want it to go. There are enough little inconsistencies to make it seem like it's more of a new take than an origin story to the original movie trilogy.
For one thing, I don't think Mystique is that old. Although I'm not that well-versed in her lore, and Black Widow is quite older than she looks.
Hmm, Days Of The Future Past.
So while we're on the subject of Batman films, how would you guys rank the movies? Include whichever ones you've seen. As for me:
1. The Dark Knight Rises (one of my all-time favorites, for now anyway)
2. The Dark Knight (amazing performances and everything else, but it didn't give me as much of an erection as Rises did)
3. Batman Returns (this film is absolutely brilliant in its surreal zaniness)
4. Batman: The Movie (fuck off, this movie and its corresponding TV show are HILARIOUS)
5. Batman (dat Nicholson)
6. Batman Begins (definitely fantastic, but I can't say that I prefer it to any of the above)
7. Batman & Robin (it's terrible, but much like The Room, it's a lot of fun to watch with friends)
8. Batman Forever (this one is just bad)
9. The Death Of Batman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUAXIMoZuBM)
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 12:38:56 AM
So while we're on the subject of Batman films, how would you guys rank the movies? Include whichever ones you've seen. As for me:
1. The Dark Knight Rises (one of my all-time favorites, for now anyway)
2. The Dark Knight (amazing performances and everything else, but it didn't give me as much of an erection as Rises did)
3. Batman Returns (this film is absolutely brilliant in its surreal zaniness)
4. Batman: The Movie (fuck off, this movie and its corresponding TV show are HILARIOUS)
5. Batman (dat Nicholson)
6. Batman Begins (definitely fantastic, but I can't say that I prefer it to any of the above)
7. Batman & Robin (it's terrible, but much like The Room, it's a lot of fun to watch with friends)
8. Batman Forever (this one is just bad)
9. The Death Of Batman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUAXIMoZuBM)
What about Holy Musical B@man?
Hmm... 5.5 for that one. I still need to finish watching Act 2. Maybe I'll do that tomorrow.
Oh, and
8.5. Catwoman (lol)
For me its:
1. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
2. The Dark Knight
3. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker
4. Batman (1989)
5. The Dark Knight Rises
6. Batman Begins
7. Batman: Year One
8. Batman Returns
9. Batman: Under the Red Hood
10. Batman: Sub-Zero
11. Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman
12. Batman Forever
13. Batman and Robin
I've never seen the Adam West Batman movie, so I have no comment on that one.
Anyways, I consider everything up to #6 on my list to be genuinely good movies, while #7 is a guilty pleasure of mine. As for #'s 8-11, I just don't like any of them, personally.
And being that this is the comic book movie thread, here are my top 10 favorite superhero movies (that were actually adapted from some comic book source material, so I'm not counting Batman Beyond in this specific list) in general:
1. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
2. The Dark Knight
3. The Avengers
4. Captain America: The First Avenger
5. X2: X-Men United
6. X-Men: First Class
7. Iron Man
8. Batman (1989)
9. The Dark Knight Rises
10. Thor
Honorable Mentions: The first 2 Superman movies, the first X-Men movie, Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies (even though I'm the only one here who likes them, especially if you count the 3rd one)
Guilty Pleasures: Batman Returns, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (none of them are good movies, especially the latter 2, and oddly enough I never liked BR or FF2 first time I watched either of them, but re-runs of both as well as Wolverine between various movie channels has somehow gotten me to grow oddly fond of them over time, despite how much they suck)
Oh, if we're including animated movies, then Mask of the Phantasm would be my number 1 as well, probably. Definitely in my top 3, at least. It's been forever since I've seen any of the others, though I do remember not liking Mystery of the Batwoman much.
I still say that Batman Returns is a legitimately good movie; as a really weird dark comedy, it's fantastic. The Adam West film is also genuinely good IMO, since it sets out to be a parody of Batman and succeeds almost perfectly.
I still need to watch Rises and rewatch the Burton movies.
Right now, I'd put MOTP and ROTJ at my top 2, with TDK just under them.
For me those 3 movies are pretty interchangeable. I considered tying BB with MOTP at one point, but I wanted to rank a definitive best, and then I was going to put BB ad the #2 spot but for whatever reason I convinced myself to give that spot to TDK and keep BB and #3, but either way, all 3 are top-calibur Batman films, IMO. There is a huge jump in quality between #4 on my list (which is still really good, IMO) and the top 3 that I have ranked up there.
And if I had to do my top 10 favorite comic book movies atm, I'd probably go with
1- The Avengers (yeah, yeah, still on a high)
2- Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
3- X2: X-Men United
4- Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
5- The Dark Knight
Eh, I'll just do a top 5 for now.
Well, if we were ranking comic book movies instead of just superhero movies, my list would be slightly different, but admittedly it'd still comprise mostly of superhero flicks.
Also, Avaitor's post reminds me that I still need to finish reading Scott Pilgrim and also watch the movie.
1. Oldboy
2. Persepolis
3. The Dark Knight
4. Adventures of Tintin
5. Scott Pilgrim vs the World
1. Cemetery Man
2. Oldboy
3. Ichi The Killer
4. The Dark Knight Rises
5. Kick-Ass
1. The Dark Knight
2. Mask Of The Phantasm
3. Return Of The Joker
4. Batman Begins
5. Batman
6. The Dark Knight Rises
7. Freeze animated movie (haven't seen it all)
8. Batman/Superman TAS movie
9. Mystery Of Batwoman
And I don't really remember any of the old Batman sequels.
Quote from: gunswordfist on August 29, 2012, 02:43:23 PM
8. Batman/Superman TAS movie
I would have ranked that but the reason I didn't is because technically it isn't a movie. Its officially recorded as a 3-parter for season 2 of Superman: TAS (even though it obviously has higher production values than the rest of the show and was originally released in a DTV movie format before airing in individual episodes on TV). That said, its still a technicality which is why I couldn't rank it. If I could, though, I'd say that it'd be right in-between TDKR and Batman Begins, for me.
BTW, I just updated my list with the DTV Batman movies: Year One and Under the Red Hood. I totally forgot that I've seen either of them (which is kind of because I found both to be entertaining but ultimately kind of forgettable), which is why I didn't initially rank them. I consider Batman: Year One to be kind of interesting (though I haven't read the original comic which I'm sure is miles better) but way too short to reach its full potential. As for Under the Red Hood, its really not that interesting (I would have been more interested in seeing a movie leading up to the death of Robin rather than one about his resurrection), but I still ranked it ahead of Sub-Zero and Mystery of the Batwoman because it at least had good animation and great action scenes (IMO).
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on August 29, 2012, 03:08:11 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on August 29, 2012, 02:43:23 PM
8. Batman/Superman TAS movie
I would have ranked that but the reason I didn't is because technically it isn't a movie. Its officially recorded as a 3-parter for season 2 of Superman: TAS (even though it obviously has higher production values than the rest of the show and was originally released in a DTV movie format before airing in individual episodes on TV). That said, its still a technicality which is why I couldn't rank it. If I could, though, I'd say that it'd be right in-between TDKR and Batman Begins, for me.
I kind of had a feeling it was something like that. It was alright but pretty typical of what you expect a 'fun' Batman/Superman animated adventure to be like. I haven't seen any of the modern animated Batman films (Gotham Knights doesn't count and even then I only like 2 or 3 of the shorts.)
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on August 29, 2012, 03:17:25 PM
BTW, I just updated my list with the DTV Batman movies: Year One and Under the Red Hood. I totally forgot that I've seen either of them (which is kind of because I found both to be entertaining but ultimately kind of forgettable), which is why I didn't initially rank them. I consider Batman: Year One to be kind of interesting (though I haven't read the original comic which I'm sure is miles better) but way too short to reach its full potential. As for Under the Red Hood, its really not that interesting (I would have been more interested in seeing a movie leading up to the death of Robin rather than one about his resurrection), but I still ranked it ahead of Sub-Zero and Mystery of the Batwoman because it at least had good animation and great action scenes (IMO).
Year One is really short. I think like slightly longer than The Killing Joke so it would make sense for it to not be that long because at the end of the comic I personally got the feeling 'Ummm, is there going to be something after this? ???'
Year One was slightly under and hour long. I guess the comic must have been short. It was still a good story, but I suppose I felt that there could have been more to it.
Yeah, I wouldn't add movies like Persepolis in here, for weird reasons. I was trying to stick to super hero stuff mostly, but Scott Pilgrim makes the cut since the movie just screams "comic book" in every regard.
But what makes the difference between superhero movies and regular films that happen to be adapted from comics?
Eh, I don't know, I just don't feel like ranking any non-super hero comics into this list. Probably because it'd take a lot longer to think of other movies I like that are based off of comics or graphic novels, and whether or not I should count manga.
1. Mask Of The Phantasm
2. Avengers
3. X2
4. The Dark Knight
5. 20th Century Boys / Captain America (Depends on what I'm looking for)
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 04:43:48 PM
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Holy shit, I'm not alone in the world! :happytime: :happytime: :happytime:
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 04:43:48 PM
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Holy shit, I'm not alone in the world! :happytime: :happytime: :happytime:
*grabs the flaming pitchfork*
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:09:38 PM
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 04:43:48 PM
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Holy shit, I'm not alone in the world! :happytime: :happytime: :happytime:
*grabs the flaming pitchfork*
If it makes you feel any better, my friend was obsessed with it for a while. :sweat:
Quote from: Avaitor on August 29, 2012, 04:01:25 PM
Eh, I don't know, I just don't feel like ranking any non-super hero comics into this list. Probably because it'd take a lot longer to think of other movies I like that are based off of comics or graphic novels, and whether or not I should count manga.
And Lone Wolf And Cub would be #1.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 05:16:37 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:09:38 PM
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 04:43:48 PM
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Holy shit, I'm not alone in the world! :happytime: :happytime: :happytime:
*grabs the flaming pitchfork*
If it makes you feel any better, my friend was obsessed with it for a while. :sweat:
EVERYONE at my high school was obsessed with it.
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 05:16:37 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:09:38 PM
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 04:43:48 PM
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Holy shit, I'm not alone in the world! :happytime: :happytime: :happytime:
*grabs the flaming pitchfork*
If it makes you feel any better, my friend was obsessed with it for a while. :sweat:
EVERYONE at my high school was obsessed with it.
And everyone at my high school was obsessed with The Notebook.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:23:58 PM
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 05:16:37 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:09:38 PM
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 29, 2012, 04:43:48 PM
Still not big on Scott Pilgrim. Probably won't ever be.
Holy shit, I'm not alone in the world! :happytime: :happytime: :happytime:
*grabs the flaming pitchfork*
If it makes you feel any better, my friend was obsessed with it for a while. :sweat:
EVERYONE at my high school was obsessed with it.
And everyone at my high school was obsessed with The Notebook.
That was middle school shit here. :P
I've only ever read the first 2 volumes of the comic for Scott Pilgrim. I thought it was pretty good.
Oh wait, would TMNT count?
Because if so, I still really like the first movie.
I still don't understand how anyone who enjoys video games, comics and nerd culture in general can't love Scott Pilgrim. It's one of the few pieces of work where pop culture references make the whole thing, and don't detract from anything.
The only way I can say it is that it just doesn't resonate or connect with me on any level. I thought it was cute at first, but once I got to reading the last book I just didn't really care anymore.
Still it isn't as bad as when Adventureland came out and Old Guy went around saying it would appeal to "Our Generation"... the film sucked.
I liked Adventureland. :(
Quote from: Avaitor on August 29, 2012, 05:46:49 PM
I still don't understand how anyone who enjoys video games, comics and nerd culture in general can't love Scott Pilgrim. It's one of the few pieces of work where pop culture references make the whole thing, and don't detract from anything.
Because I didn't find it funny, I didn't like the characters, and I didn't find the story or action engaging. :P
Quote from: Avaitor on August 29, 2012, 05:46:49 PM
I still don't understand how anyone who enjoys video games, comics and nerd culture in general can't love Scott Pilgrim. It's one of the few pieces of work where pop culture references make the whole thing, and don't detract from anything.
Some of the people on your site are stupid.
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:53:43 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on August 29, 2012, 05:46:49 PM
I still don't understand how anyone who enjoys video games, comics and nerd culture in general can't love Scott Pilgrim. It's one of the few pieces of work where pop culture references make the whole thing, and don't detract from anything.
Because I didn't find it funny, I didn't like the characters, and I didn't find the story or action engaging. :P
Not even Wallace?
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:53:29 PM
I liked Adventureland. :(
I dunno, I just sat there and watched the film and... it ended. I didn't really get anything out of it. I sort of felt the same way about the Royal Tenenbaums... and I KNOW someone here loves that film so I won't go any further. :P
Quote from: gunswordfist on August 29, 2012, 05:54:09 PM
Some of the people on your site are stupid.
Yes, anyone who prefers Batman Begins to The Dark Knight Rises must be mentally handicapped in some way. :awesome:
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:54:43 PM
Not even Wallace?
Well, I didn't find the movie to be
devoid of humor or excitement. I'd give it a solid 6/10 all told. If Wallace is who I think he is, he had some pretty great moments.
Well I know you're talking about me with Royal Tenenbaums, and honestly, that's how I feel about Rushmore. That had some good ideas, but when you look back on it, it totally meant nothing.
With TRT, I'll admit that it's not everyone's cup of tea, and it wasn't much of a favorite on my first viewing either, but I think it tackles all of Anderson's daddy issues very well with the Tenenbaum kids.
Quote from: Foggle on August 29, 2012, 05:57:47 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2012, 05:54:43 PM
Not even Wallace?
Well, I didn't find the movie to be devoid of humor or excitement. I'd give it a solid 6/10 all told. If Wallace is who I think he is, he had some pretty great moments.
Wallace is the gay guy, and honestly, as much as I enjoy the SP movie, there are really only 2 characters and performances who really impressed me in it. Wallace was indeed one, and Scott's sister Stacy was surprisingly the other.
There really is a LOT of problems in the film, which is what happens when you try to condense a 6-book graphic novel series into less than 2 hours. At least give the GNs a chance though, since the movie cuts out a lot of development and most of its best references.
Official release date for Ant-Man, as of now- November 6, 2015
A long way's away, but at least we have a date now.
It's here! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2CzoSeClcw0)
Shit just got real...
A lot of people are reminded of the trailer for TDKR here, and I can see where they're coming from.
It does look quite promising though. I'm totally hoping for a 180 over Iron Man 2 here.
It certainly looks like it'll have a different tone than IM2 did.
Theory time! OK, comicvine spotted a Captain America tattoo (a blue and red shield with an A in the middle) on the back of The Mandarin's neck when he is about to put on his hood in the trailer. My theory is Capt. is in the movie, The Mandarin defeats him, thinks he is dead and puts on a tattoo to show off that he got that 'kill'. Think Mr. Zsasz and his tallies marks on his body...or a better example than that. :D
I haven't been disappointed by any of the Iron Man movies so far, but the Dark Knight Rises vibe I got from the trailer concerns me. I hope this film isn't too dark. One of the things I liked about the Iron Man movies is that (so far) they haven't crossed into grimdark territory. I understand Tony's been through a lot, but I hope he doesn't lose his trademark cockiness and ego, and the movie doesn't lose its' trademark humor. If I want to see grimdark, I'll watch a Batman movie.
It's possible that we got the darkest material of the movie in this film, and the rest of the film is similar in tone to the first two Iron Man movies, with only some extra darkness to shake things up.
That, or since RDJ has stated before that he thinks that he might be too old to continue playing the role, they might just go all out in here in case this is his last solo Iron Man movie.
Quote from: Silverstar on October 25, 2012, 10:17:36 AM
I haven't been disappointed by any of the Iron Man movies so far, but the Dark Knight Rises vibe I got from the trailer concerns me. I hope this film isn't too dark. One of the things I liked about the Iron Man movies is that (so far) they haven't crossed into grimdark territory. I understand Tony's been through a lot, but I hope he doesn't lose his trademark cockiness and ego, and the movie doesn't lose its' trademark humor. If I want to see grimdark, I'll watch a Batman movie.
From what I hear about the comics, Tony Stark goes through some real dark times that makes DKR look like a zoo field trip. If it focuses on Tony's character while still sneaking in some humor, then I won't mind.
Not to come off as politically correct, but I can't help but feel irked that they cast a white actor (albeit, Ben Kingsley) as the Mandarin instead of just casting an Asian actor and giving the Mandarin an actual name.
I was thinking that.
Well Kingsley did pull off a damn fine Gandhi.
Quote from: Avaitor on October 27, 2012, 11:11:01 AM
Well Kingsley did pull off a damn fine Gandhi.
Still, they couldn't bother to call Ken Watanabe or something?
Stan Lee just confirmed a Doctor Strange movie, and mentioned that Black Panther and Inhumans are being worked on as well.
Awesome.
I'm sort of surprised Runaways hasn't been made yet.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on November 02, 2012, 02:45:27 PM
I'm sort of surprised Runaways hasn't been made yet.
There was a casting sheet circulating around, but nothing beyond that.
I think right now Marvel wants to put their top priority into getting movies based off of Lee creations on the ground, so they can add cameos of him in to at least their first ones. After that, they'll likely branch out into more recent characters.
Quote from: Avaitor on November 02, 2012, 03:00:55 PM
I think right now Marvel wants to put their top priority into getting movies based off of Lee creations on the ground, so they can add cameos of him in to at least their first ones. After that, they'll likely branch out into more recent characters.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgoodcomics.comicbookresources.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F03%2FJack-Kirby.jpg&hash=f4d257e07c57266a512db715f997e91d90f3de40)
Blahblahblah yeah okay.
What? I'm excited for the upcoming Devil Dinosaur movie.
Guess who's returning in Days of Future Past?
Wolverine?
Professor Xavier?
Jean Grey?
Mystique?
????
Honestly, I have no idea which characters are even supposed to be in the original story, and I don't have a clue which character appearances in the movie qualify as a return, so I don't even know where to begin....
Oh, I should've said actors.
Because Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen have been confirmed to appear in the flick.
I'm still not even sure if this is a reboot anymore.
Still not as weird as the rumor that JGL will be Batman in the JL flick.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on November 27, 2012, 08:33:19 PM
Still not as weird as the rumor that JGL will be Batman in the JL flick.
That rumor's been officially debunked. (http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/news/a441430/joseph-gordon-levitt-justice-league-batman-rumors-entirely-false.html)
Good thing too, I say. Keep the JL movie separate from the Nolanverse. The Nolan films were too grounded to include the likes of super aliens, sea kings, space cops and goddesses; I'd hate to see the other heroes remade into special agents with power-granting cyber-suits or something. Plus, a lot of fans wouldn't take well to the Batman in the JL movie not being Bruce Wayne. The Nolan trilogy is done with; let it rest.
Ugh, Jamie Foxxx is really going to be Electro?????????????????????????????????????????
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 04, 2012, 10:48:14 AM
Ugh, Jamie Foxxx is really going to be Electro?????????????????????????????????????????
That's certainly an interesting casting choice. He's also Lynch in the upcoming Kane & Lynch movie... which is happening, for some reason.
If Michael Mann is directing it then I'll watch it anyway.
Marvel's already planning for Phase 3. Ant-Man and Dr. Strange are confirmed to be a part of it
Guess that means Avengers 3 will have Ultron, huh?
I just hope the Ant Man movie is good. Pym needs more love.
I know Ultron is supposed to be very powerful but going from Thanos to him? :whuh: I still hope they put Vision and Ultron in an Iron Man movie.
Quote from: Avaitor on November 27, 2012, 08:23:42 PM
Oh, I should've said actors.
Because Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen have been confirmed to appear in the flick.
And now Halle Berry is back as Storm.
This is looking to be increasingly more epic as the news comes along.
Don Payne, the writer of both Thor movies, died. (http://www.avclub.com/articles/rip-don-payne-writer-for-the-simpsons-thor,95667/)
That was unexpected, but nevertheless tragic. I wonder if he completed his final draft for the second one before he died.
The Wolverine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEbzZP-_Ssc) finally gets a full trailer.
You know, even though the last Wolverine movie sucked, I say fuck it. I'm honestly still hyped as hell to see this movie. I mean, I like the fact that they actually make Wolverine vulnerable for this story, which is a great way to make him seem less overpowered. I also just love the idea of Wolverine kicking ass in Japan. What can I say, I'm a sucker for this sort of stuff, so its hard not to entertain me as long as it has some decent action and good characters.
I've seen a lot of comic book movies over the years. Some good, some bad. Let's consider:
The 1966 "Batman" movie I'd seen on TV a few times, but never in its entirety. After seeing the TV show in syndication through about a dozen cycles or so over 40+ years, it doesn't really wear well, and I don't think the movie does, either.
I've seen every Batman movie since. "Batman Forever" & "Batman & Robin" were painful to watch. The former has some good lines from Val Kilmer & Jim Carrey but little else. Tommy Lee Jones was just the wrong choice to play a camped-up "Harvey Two-Face", and Joel Schumacher was equally wrong on a zillion counts to replace Tim Burton. 'Nuff said there. "Batman & Robin" would be the worst DC movie of all time that I've seen except "Green Lantern" took the title 2 years ago. I have not seen the abomination of a "Catwoman" movie, nor do I want the DVD. What I do know is that some jabroni decided to copy Tim Burton's origin of Catwoman from "Batman Returns", but sub out Selina Kyle for someone named Patience Phillips (Halle Berry). Not. A. Good. Idea.
I've seen "Superman 2" and "Superman Returns" in theatres. One is great. The other aspires to be so, and fails miserably. Brandon Routh rebounded nicely OBTW last year with the lacrosse movie, "Broken Arrows", which apparently few saw. Had to get that in there. I saw "Supergirl" with Helen Slater & Faye Dunaway. Did Akiva Goldsman take writing lessons from the jabronis that wrote this? Ewwwww.
My DC movie ratings (movies I've seen-ONLY):
1. The Dark Knight.
2. Batman Begins.
3. The Dark Knight Rises.
4. Superman 2.
5. Batman (1989)
6. Batman Returns.
7. Superman Returns.
8. Batman Forever.
9. Batman & Robin.
10. Green Lantern.
Have not seen: Catwoman, Constantine, Red, The Losers (have the latter 2 on DVD), Jonah Hex.
I must be in the minority of people who saw "Daredevil" and thought Ben Affleck was OK. Of course, considering his now-wife, Jennifer Garner, played Elektra, well, he had to step up the game, don't ya think? "Elektra" gets spun off into her own movie, and it tanks. Why? A nice plot badly written & executed. I disagreed with the choice of the late Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin, and wanted to know who the jabroni writer was who thought this idea up. Must've been the same dweeb who thought it'd be cool to cast Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent in Tim Burton's 2 Bat-movies, or to pick Jamie Foxx to be Electro in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2". You know what they say if it ain't broken.........!
Screw political correctness. I get the whole concept of creative license, but this is taking things to an extreme.
"Fantastic Four" was serviceable, but tying Dr. Doom's origin to the FF was way past wrong. Haven't seen the sequel, though I have it on DVD for now. I guess they still have to figure it out. Have seen both Hulk movies, and of course Ed Norton was a better pick over Eric Bana, and then Mark Ruffalo (Avengers) blows them both away. I've seen both Iron Man movies, and will see #3, but have passed on the two Ghost Rider films. I have seen "Howard the Duck", and Marvel has to go some before they make a worse movie.
Y'know what I wanna see? ScarJo in a solo Black Widow movie.
My Marvel movie ratings:
1. Avengers.
2. Incredible Hulk.
3. Iron Man.
4. Spider-Man.
5. Iron Man 2.
6. Spider-Man 3.
7. Spider-Man 2.
8. X-Men.
9. X2: X-Men United.
10. X3: The Last Stand.
11. Daredevil.
12. X-Men Origins: Wolverine.
13. Captain America.
14. Elektra.
15. Thor.
16. Fantastic Four.
17. The Amazing Spider-Man.
18. Howard the Duck.
Have not seen: Blade 1 & 2, Ghost Rider 1 & 2, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (though I have it on DVD).
FWIW, the Men in Black series doesn't count on Marvel's side, since it was not originally from Marvel (they bought Malibu and thus bought MiB). Saw the first two, and decided against #3 because the 2nd film bit.
You know, I've probably seen Men In Black like 20 something times since it came but I've never seen the sequel even once. So weird.
Thor underneath Elektra, X3 and Iron Man 2? Whoa.
I was a bit weirded about Captain America under Origins, personally.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 29, 2013, 09:21:22 PM
You know, I've probably seen Men In Black like 20 something times since it came but I've never seen the sequel even once. So weird.
As for as the 2nd movie goes....you're not missing much. Trust me on this one?
I haven't even bothered to watch the 3rd film, myself.
As far as the Marvel movies go, for me, the ones that I like are:
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. The Avengers
3. X2: X-Men United
4. Iron Man
5. X-Men: First Class
6. Thor
7. X-Men
8. Spider-Man
9. The Incredible Hulk
10. The Amazing Spider-Man
11. Spider-Man 3
12. Spider-Man 2
Those are all what I consider to be the best Marvel movies that I have seen (and aside from the Blade movies which I have not see any of, I think I've seen mostly every other Marvel movie out there that was released within the past 15 years or so), granted that not all of them are necessarily great movies, but I consider each of them to be genuinely good to some degree. Stuff like The Hulk, Dare Devil, and Iron Man 2 qualify as movies that I don't necessarily hate, but certainly don't care for, either. Stuff like X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer are what I consider to be guilty pleasures of mine, even though they are terrible movies. And stuff like X-Men 3, the first Fantastic Four movie, and both of the Ghost Rider movies are ones which I consider to be just plain shit.
I could get behind that list. Despite the intense vitriol behind Spider-Man 3 I've never actually hated it. It just really should not have shoved Venom into it.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 29, 2013, 10:51:11 PM
As far as the Marvel movies go, for me, the ones that I like are:
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. The Avengers
3. X2: X-Men United
4. Iron Man
5. X-Men: First Class
6. Thor
7. X-Men
8. Spider-Man
9. The Incredible Hulk
10. The Amazing Spider-Man
11. Spider-Man 3
12. Spider-Man 2
I like this list. :)
Thanks! :thumbup:
The bottom half of those movies all have their flaws, but I still did really enjoy them a lot, nonetheless.
Also, while I love The Avengers, I just find that Captain America seems to be the Marvel movie that appeals to me the most, so far. It has likable characters, a good story, and I can re-watch it numerous times without getting tired of it. This also cemented Captain America as my favorite Avenger out of the Marvel movie-verse.
Quote from: Foggle on March 30, 2013, 08:12:59 AM
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 29, 2013, 10:51:11 PM
As far as the Marvel movies go, for me, the ones that I like are:
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. The Avengers
3. X2: X-Men United
4. Iron Man
5. X-Men: First Class
6. Thor
7. X-Men
8. Spider-Man
9. The Incredible Hulk
10. The Amazing Spider-Man
11. Spider-Man 3
12. Spider-Man 2
I like this list. :)
As do I. :)
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 30, 2013, 01:17:03 PM
Also, while I love The Avengers, I just find that Captain America seems to be the Marvel movie that appeals to me the most, so far. It has likable characters, a good story, and I can re-watch it numerous times without getting tired of it. This also cemented Captain America as my favorite Avenger out of the Marvel movie-verse.
Pretty much this. I really need to get the rest of my family to watch it. I have a feeling they'll love it too.
Lmao at Spider-Man 2 being below 3.
In other need, yay at GSP being a villain in Captain America 2.
I'm calling it. The character Ben Kingsley plays in IM3 will actually be a decoy Mandarin.
The press release for Captain America 2 has been announced. Besides the basics, such as Bucky returning, here is what we now know about it:
-Fury (duh, Black Widow and Maria Hill are showing up in this one
-Peggy will play a part in this one as well
-The Falcon indeed will appear
-Robert Redford will play a senior executive of S.H.I.E.L.D.
-This is the movie's bad guy:
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.comicvine.com%2Fuploads%2Foriginal%2F1%2F11352%2F428389-morebatroc.jpg&hash=87a9dcbf7c7c0c2136fdf6801a2817f96e500a32)
Quote from: Avaitor on April 08, 2013, 06:39:44 PM
-Fury (duh, Black Widow and Maria Hill are showing up in this one
I'm just praying that the use of SHIELD in this movie is nothing like how it was in Iron Man 2, where it was clear that Nicky Fury and Black Widow were just shoehorned into the plot after the initial story was written. Really, the movie could have worked just fine without their inclusion, and the plot would have barely changed, if at all. If SHIELD is going to be in this movie, then I'n hoping that they have been properly integrated into the main plot from the get-go. Also I hope this movie is actually....you know, good. That always helps, too. :thumbup:
Quote-Peggy will play a part in this one as well
I pretty much expected this after seeing that deleted scene from The Avengers.
They should just make a movie for Black Widow and/or Hawkeye so we can see more of them before Avengers 2, instead of just shoehorning them into the other hero's movies. Thy aren't as big of a deal in the comics as Cap, Iron Man or Thor, but I think movieverse fans are interested enough in the characters to see their own movies.
I'm really eager for Cap 2. I totally hope they nail it as well as they did the original.
Iron Man 3 I'm a bit iffy on. I liked 2 when it came out, but man it didn't last on repeat viewings.
Yeah. To be fair, though, after having done some research on it (though, I could've just read up on crappy sources), I don't really think it was Jon Favreau's fault (or at least not all his fault). From what I have come to understand, the script initially didn't have so many tie-in scenes with SHIELD, but then Marvel kind of had them shoehorned into the movie to create more build-up for The Avengers, and I feel that it needlessly dragged down the pacing of the film and made the whole experience feel rather confusing and disorienting. There just wasn't enough time given to the actual characters we cared about, like Tony Stark....the main fucking character of the movie. And don't even get me started on how incredibly underdeveloped the villain was. I feel like if the story had just focused on the revenge plot and maybe kept in the sub-plot of Tony slowly dying, it would have worked fine. But there were a lot of needless SHIELD bits that threw the movie off-track, and it forced in yet another sub-plot involving Black Widow helping out Tony....even though she did stuff that could have easily been written for some other character that had nothing to do with SHIELD. Overall, it just felt like one big mess.
Really, you didn't need any of the SHIELD stuff, since so little of what happened in Iron Man 2 shows up in Avengers, just passing references to Fury initially nixing the initiative. You could've just introduced Black Widow in with the scene where she and Happy took care of shit, and that would have been enough. She'd still have more screentime than Hawkeye did in Thor.
Iron Man 2 just comes out as prep for Avengers that doesn't actually prep you at all.
Exactly. None of the SHIELD stuff had anything to do with the main plot (or if it did, it could've easily been replaced with something else), but there was a TON of SHIELD stuff in the movie. And therein lies the problem. You have a ton of pointless scenes that take up a lot of precious time that could have been used for further developing the main story and characters. Thankfully, though, I think Marvel has learned their lesson from that debacle, and I'm pretty sure Iron Man 3 will once again be a much more focused experience that actually moves its plot along and doesn't waste time trying to tie into the next Avengers movie. And, as Avaitor already pointed out, IM2 barely even tied into The Avengers at all, even with all of those pointless SHIELD scenes included.
Hell, even the Incredible Hulk factored more into the movie than iM2 did, and they didn't even keep the same actor for Banner.
That and stuff like the party scene were just flat-out boring and added forced conflict. Yes, Tony's a cocky fool, we get it and we've gotten it since the original movie- but hey we have to give the army a suit of armor somehow, right? I'm also going to say though I like Don Cheadle as an actor, he really didn't fit in as War Machine.
About the only things I liked was Tony's relationship with his dad and the final action sequence. Nothing else hooked me at all.
I liked the action scenes, the weird one at the party with DJ AM aside, as well as the Disney references, right down to the fact that Justin Hammer was an obvious spoof on Katzenberg here, but otherwise, I have the least amount of use for the movie out of the other Phase 1 films.
I do have to say that the first action sequence at the racetrack was a bit silly. Tony really shouldn't have had such a hard time like he did. Otherwise, yeah it's probably my least favorite film of the bunch as well.
Did anyone else notice how that racetrack scene also pulled a "Michael Bay" style camera work, with Happy and Pepper screaming a lot and the camera zooming into close-ups of their faces and shaking around a lot? Yeah, that really annoyed the fuck out of me.
Yeah, GSP is going to be Batroc The Leaper. I have Captain America DVR'd so I need to get around to watching that.
Quote from: Avaitor on April 08, 2013, 07:13:16 PM
They should just make a movie for Black Widow and/or Hawkeye so we can see more of them before Avengers 2, instead of just shoehorning them into the other hero's movies. Thy aren't as big of a deal in the comics as Cap, Iron Man or Thor, but I think movieverse fans are interested enough in the characters to see their own movies.
I can't say I agree. I wouldn't want to see a movie about the least interesting Avengers.
Perhaps a movie starring both Black Widow and Hawkeye together, but I'm not sure if either one of them is strong enough a character to carry an entire movie on his/her own. Both of them seem to work best in a group/team dynamic.
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 09, 2013, 09:20:00 AM
Quote from: Avaitor on April 08, 2013, 07:13:16 PM
They should just make a movie for Black Widow and/or Hawkeye so we can see more of them before Avengers 2, instead of just shoehorning them into the other hero's movies. Thy aren't as big of a deal in the comics as Cap, Iron Man or Thor, but I think movieverse fans are interested enough in the characters to see their own movies.
I can't say I agree. I wouldn't want to see a movie about the least interesting Avengers.
Well it's easy to call them the least interesting when they haven't had much time of their own to develop.
Quote from: Goldstar on April 09, 2013, 10:33:52 AM
Perhaps a movie starring both Black Widow and Hawkeye together, but I'm not sure if either one of them is strong enough a character to carry an entire movie on his/her own. Both of them seem to work best in a group/team dynamic.
I do agree with Black Widow, but Hawkeye has some pretty solid solo stories. His 80's miniseries is a good one, for example, and I've heard good things about his new series. I'd hope that the people behind the movies would be able to give us something unique with the two either together or on their own.
Quote from: Goldstar on April 09, 2013, 10:33:52 AM
Perhaps a movie starring both Black Widow and Hawkeye together, but I'm not sure if either one of them is strong enough a character to carry an entire movie on his/her own. Both of them seem to work best in a group/team dynamic.
Oh God, them working alone is even worse.
Avaitor, that's part of the reason why the movie wouldn't say.
And Hawkeye is a mentor in his latest comic book series, right?
I still haven't read the new series (I did download the first issue during Marvel's #1 push a month or two ago, though), but he has kind of been one for a while in the comicverse.
I actually thought Black Widow and Hawkeye were pretty cool in The Avengers (I liked them a lot a lot more than I thought I would, same deal with Cap, both in his own movie as well as Avengers) but a solo movie starring one or both of them would be a hard sell, since, superficial as this sounds, those guys don't have any cool super powers; no super-tech like Iron Man, not even enhanced peak human abilities like Cap. A movie starring them would basically be a standard spy action flick. (I imagine that this is the same problem that the upcoming Agents of SHIELD series will face, unless some well-known Marvel heroes are slated to appear.) A Hawkeye/Widow flick could probably benefit from a bunch of fancy SHIELD tech and weapons, an appearance by Sam Jackson as Nick Fury and a really kick-ass villain, just not one of the mystical or uber-metahuman variety, since that would require super-powered characters' assistance.
I watched Captain America today. Pretty good movie. Now I've seen all of The Avengers' movies.
This is Loki from the Thor 2 trailer.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Fe404b1a325922d2ef1f1445671fc485b%2Ftumblr_mlojam9uWi1r38rp9o1_500.jpg&hash=ef3620c2edea7d7efc7cccf200ee329df6f5b4bc)
This is Tommy Wiseau
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_A-vEhdbqGcc%2FTGsq_XDwTuI%2FAAAAAAAAAL8%2FDysaWn7cdSE%2Fs1600%2Fr%2B-%2Bjohnny%2Bsmile.png&hash=f4d3897584b12e6785037e22cc2d67eaea534e9e)
See a difference? I do not.
"I did not use the Tesseract to carry out my evil plans. Its not true. Its bullshit! I did not use the Tessaract to carry out my evil plans! I did NOOOT! Oh hi brother (Thor). Anyway, how's your sexlife?"
Iron Man 3's currently at 100%. We still have more than a week to go, but this is a good sign regardless.
Quote from: Avaitor on April 23, 2013, 05:55:21 PM
Iron Man 3's currently at 100%. We still have more than a week to go, but this is a good sign regardless.
This is asking a lot, but I'll shoot anyway. How does that stack with 2's reaction?
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on April 23, 2013, 05:56:27 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on April 23, 2013, 05:55:21 PM
Iron Man 3's currently at 100%. We still have more than a week to go, but this is a good sign regardless.
This is asking a lot, but I'll shoot anyway. How does that stack with 2's reaction?
It's too early to say, but I do remember the negative reviews coming in sooner at this point. And I don't think that Avengers had its first negative review until a couple of days before it came out, so there's that, too.
So, we now officially have a trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p7rocHEecE) up for Thor: The Dark World. It looks like most of the movie will take place between Asgard and maybe one of the other nine realms (or portions of multiple realms), with a minimal portion taking place on Earth. I'm totally down with that if its the case (it would also be a good explanation for why none of the Avengers could fight alongside Thor in this movie, and vice versa for their own respective movies).
Thor: The Dark World looks good, but I was kind of hoping we wouldn't be seeing Loki again this time around. Tom Hiddleston does a great job portraying the character, but after 2 films I was hoping the filmmakers would put him on the shelf for a bit. I've always found heroes who fight the same villain(s) all the time to be kind of lame. But otherwise it looks great.
Also, Sif is back. Cool. I remember thinking Jamie Alexander was pretty hot in the first movie.
I thought that Loki wasn't going to be the main villain in Thor 2. I haven't seen the trailer, so is this no longer true?
Sigh...
Spoiler
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.superrobotmayhem.com%2Fimages%2Fcomic-book-movies%2Fthor%2Fchristopher-eccleston-as-melekith%2Fpictures-of-christopher-eccleston-as-malekith-in-thor-2_1405.jpg&hash=9371734a4545e1a61f680b2e351962d6fdf2b939)
Quote from: Silverstar on April 24, 2013, 07:26:46 AM
Thor: The Dark World looks good, but I was kind of hoping we wouldn't be seeing Loki again this time around. Tom Hiddleston does a great job portraying the character, but after 2 films I was hoping the filmmakers would put him on the shelf for a bit. I've always found heroes who fight the same villain(s) all the time to be kind of lame. But otherwise it looks great.
To be fair, the trailer doesn't indicate that he'll be the main villain of the movie. It just implies that he will have a temporary alliance with Thor (though Thor is wise enough to know that Loki will try to betray him the first chance he gets, to which Thor threatens to kill him when that happens). Now, I haven't read any Thor comics, so maybe he's the main villain of whatever arc they are adapting, but based on the trailer I sincerely doubt that's the case. I get the feeling that he and Thor will begrudgingly team up for the sake of fighting a common enemy, very much like how Magneto and company temporarily allied themselves with the X-Men in X2, all the while with Magneto having his own motives in mind for after they accomplished their task. I can very much see Loki playing that kind of role in this movie, and quite frankly, I'd be interested to see it. I'm personally glad to have Loki in this movie. I'm not burned out on his character because to me, his character is so entertaining to watch, and IMO he's easily the most interesting villain to have come out of the Marvel Movie Universe so far, and also my favorite aspect of the original Thor film.
Loki should be here so he can pay for his actions in Avengers, at least. Whether he should do much more is another story.
I watched X-Men First Class for the first time yesterday.
What stood out to me the most is Magneto. He had the best comic book villain origin I've ever seen.
That coin throw the head scene was shocking. I thought that was something R rated movies would have trouble getting away with and expected it to turn into a quick offscreen death.
I liked how showed only did bad things to other mutants when he thought he had to.
Good lord at Emma being in this movie at all (see X-Men Origins Wolverine) or Cyclops LITTLE brother being on the team before him. Too many plot holes, inconsistencies, etc. etc. I have no problem with Mystique being Xavier's foster sister since they barely talked to each other in the other movies.
Lastly, Magneto cracking Emma's diamond form with freaking bed metal is the dumbest part of the entire movie and 'Mutant and proud' is one of the worst lines ever.
You have to keep in mind that this is an adaptation and it takes liberties with the source material. For instance, the part about Cyclops's brother being on the team isn't necessarily a plot-hole as far as the movie goes. I've seen the movie 3 times, myself, and I haven't seen any indication in the movie itself that Havoc is Scott's younger brother. In the comics he is, obviously, but in the movie it could just be that they decided to include him in the roster and mess with his origin to make him unrelated to Scott. It wouldn't be the first time that a Marvel movie adaptation has pulled something like that.
His last name is Summers so I am sure Alex is still supposed to be related to him. I can accept him being his older brother though.
Iron Man 3 is currently at 92%, and the few negative reviews seem to come from people who are biased against super hero movies in the first place.
In other words, this is a good sign.
The local theater close to my college is screening the movie a few hours earlier than its supposed to release (9:00 PM on May 2nd is the show-time listed, whereas the movie technically opens on May 3rd; additionally there's also a 3D show at 9:15 PM on the same night). A group of friends and myself have already purchased tickets online for the 2D showing of the movie, which is perfectly timed on the same night that I finish my finals, so I can go into the movie with a very rewarding feeling. Either way, I'll be getting to see the movie as soon as I possibly can for once, so I'll let you guys know what I think after I see it. :thumbup:
Sweet!
My uncle and I are hoping to go to the midnight premiere on Thursday. If he can't, then I'll have to try on that Friday or wait about a week to see it, since I'm going to be out of town for the weekend and have finals all next week. So yeah.
You know, being that I actually read the Extremis story-line from the comic (and the only Iron Man story that I have ever read in my life), I wonder just how much this movie differs from that, since it seems to just take bits and pieces of that story and intermix it with other elements of other Iron Man stories. As for me, I'm perfectly fine with that since the original story was hardly enough material to support an entire film adaptation, anyways. I'm just curious to see what elements of the story actually got adapted onto the big-screen, and what elements they changed or altered from it.
If I recall correctly, the first film took bits from the storyline as well, so I'm sure they miss around with the story enough to make it stand out.
As of now, Iron Man 3 is at 85% on RT. Below the first and Avengers, but still higher than 2. Not bad.
I'm probably going to see it on Saturday, but it looks good from what footage I've seen so far.
The consensus so far is that its better than Iron Man 2 by miles, but the opinions are very mixed on whether its better, worse, or as good as the first movie. As far as I'm concerned, you could stop at the part where its confirmed to be a much better film than Iron Man 2, and that'd be enough to get me to go see this film. And I am going to see this film! Tonight! :thumbup:
Yeah, the reviews are kind of mixed overall, but the general consensus is that it's better than IM2 for sure. That's good enough for me.
But honestly, even if it was worse, I'd probably see it anyway. I'm that much of a sucker.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rockymusic.org%2Fimg%2Fpriscilla%2FPriscilla-AliceSpringsShowL.png&hash=c81d15d041b5ca3b655ec0e76c33bdc108616f76)
You are now aware that Red Skull, General Zod, and Aldrich Killian used to be musical drag queens.
Hmm... (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/X-Men-Days-Future-Past-Adds-Evan-Peters-Quicksilver-37721.html)
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 24, 2013, 09:30:28 PM
Lastly, Magneto cracking Emma's diamond form with freaking bed metal is the dumbest part of the entire movie
My parents worked in the jewelry business, and diamond is very brittle... much easier to crack, even with brass than most think.
Having seen Iron Man 3 & Man of Steel (and Wolverine is next on the to-do list), well, I've posted my opinions in each talkback thread.
Anyway, I'd rate MoS ahead of Superman 3 & 4 & Returns, but just below Superman 2 (which it was trying to emulate). Terence Stamp was a more definitive Zod to me, no matter what the rest of you think.
Out of the six Superman movies, I've only seen 3 in the theatres. I've seen all 4 Spider-Man movies and all 7 Bat-movies since 1989. However, don't expect me to be returning for Amazing Spider-Man 2 next year, as last year's film didn't resonate as well.
So I think that, if I were to make a top 10 list of my favorite superhero movies, it'd go like this.
1. The Dark Knight
2. Spider-Man 2
3. Iron Man 3
4. Iron Man
5. Superman
6. Batman Begins
7. The Avengers
8. The Dark Knight Rises
9. Spider-Man
10. Captain America: The First Avenger
Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises are two movies I like about equally. I put Begins above it simply because I've liked it for years and have rewatched it plenty, and I still love it as much as always. The Dark Knight Rises, while great, is only a year old and I haven't seen it since it was in theaters. So I don't feel right about putting it anywhere but lower than Begins, at least until I know it has the same lasting value.
Cool list. Here are my favorite superhero movies:
1. Kick-Ass
2. The Dark Knight
3. X2
4. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
5. Batman Returns
6. The Dark Knight Rises
7. Iron Man
8. Batman: The Movie
That's it.
Quote from: Foggle on July 18, 2013, 12:32:03 PM
Cool list. Here are my favorite superhero movies:
1. Kick-Ass
2. The Dark Knight
3. X2
4. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
5. Batman Returns
6. The Dark Knight Rises
7. Iron Man
8. Batman: The Movie
That's it.
Mask of the Phantasm is awesome but I didn't think to include animated films on my list. If I did then it would definitely be there.
Also, an honorable mention for my list goes to Superman II, specifically the Donner's Cut, which almost made this list but I cut it for Captain America instead. Superman II has some excellent story ideas, but it ended to just being less enjoyable than the original.
Avengers and Persepolis would tie for #1. That's all I can think of.
Edit: make that a threeway tie with Mask of the Phantasm.
Quote from: Foggle on July 18, 2013, 12:32:03 PM
Cool list. Here are my favorite superhero movies:
1. Kick-Ass
2. The Dark Knight
3. X2
4. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
5. Batman Returns
6. The Dark Knight Rises
7. Iron Man
8. Batman: The Movie
That's it.
I just noticed that The Dark Knight Rises has plummeted from #1 to #6 on your list.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 19, 2013, 11:34:31 AM
I just noticed that The Dark Knight Rises has plummeted from #1 to #6 on your list.
I think it was #3 before, actually.
Quote from: Foggle on July 19, 2013, 11:43:27 AM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 19, 2013, 11:34:31 AM
I just noticed that The Dark Knight Rises has plummeted from #1 to #6 on your list.
I think it was #3 before, actually.
I thought I remembered you once saying you like it more than The Dark Knight. :P
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 19, 2013, 11:46:57 AM
I thought I remembered you once saying you like it more than The Dark Knight. :P
That was before I rewatched The Dark Knight. I believe I said something to the extent of "I might actually like it more, but I'll have to rewatch TDK before I know." Also, it still wouldn't have surpassed Kick-Ass for me. ;)
Speaking of Kick-Ass, the sequel comes out next month. Hopefully its good, or at least better than the comic which its based off of, as I hear that the source material is a steaming pile of turd, even worse than the first comic (though, that didn't stop the first movie from being as good as it was). Also, it looks like Kick-Ass 2 isn't going to take itself entirely seriously, which is probably for the best.
I just hope they don't reference MySpace again, like the first movie did despite being set in 2010.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 19, 2013, 01:28:23 PM
Speaking of Kick-Ass, the sequel comes out next month. Hopefully its good, or at least better than the comic which its based off of, as I hear that the source material is a steaming pile of turd, even worse than the first comic (though, that didn't stop the first movie from being as good as it was). Also, it looks like Kick-Ass 2 isn't going to take itself entirely seriously, which is probably for the best.
I'm a bit hesitant because the new writer/director hasn't proven himself, but he
was hand-picked by Vaughn, and the red-band trailer - while not great - is a lot less awful than the first movie's were. Also, they'd have to deliberately
try to make it worse than the comic.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 19, 2013, 02:29:44 PM
I just hope they don't reference MySpace again, like the first movie did despite being set in 2010.
To be fair, the comic is older than that, and I'm pretty sure the script was written in 07/08.
Quote from: Foggle on July 19, 2013, 03:26:08 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on July 19, 2013, 02:29:44 PM
I just hope they don't reference MySpace again, like the first movie did despite being set in 2010.
To be fair, the comic is older than that, and I'm pretty sure the script was written in 07/08.
That's true, but they could've easily replaced it with Facebook while shooting.
I don't know why that bugs me so much, but it does. The movie's still pretty good, though.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2F1a8599a5e2a9e1dfab2f7e83f5dbc197%2Ftumblr_mq9kgdR5Vx1qzwr9xo1_500.jpg&hash=307ca02d32d2b0cf3c4e0b5340e7e5a02536e241)
So yeah, Karen Gillan is gonna be Nebula.
Even though The Avengers is still great, I feel like it is slightly a novelty film. You sit down in the movie theater and have some orgasms over these superheroes coming together and simply being awesome with little competition from the enemy. It was initially my favorite Marvel movie canon film. But having gone back to them again, I find Iron Man to be the movie with more rewatch value.
Don't get me wrong, I still think Avengers is great. Just not one of my absolute top favorite superhero movies at this point.
That's the problem with all of you lesser people. You let initial expectations fool you greatly into what you think is the greatest thing ever until you re-watch it. But, not everyone can be as smart as I am. :sly:
No, but seriously, I think Avengers is great, and I liked it just as much as the first time I saw it upon re-watching it recently, but it was never my favorite superhero movie, nor was it even my favorite Marvel movie, for that matter. I was always calling BS on people saying it was better than The Dark Knight. I mean, I know its opinion, but one film clearly has more going on with its story and characters than the other and is generally better written and structured. Also, I think that Captain America is the best of the Avengers line of films. I liked it much better than even Iron Man, which I like a lot, but I find it to be just a tad bit overrated.
Avengers isn't perfect, but honestly, what movie is? It's just a lot of fun.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 21, 2013, 08:53:44 PM
Avengers isn't perfect, but honestly, what movie is? It's just a lot of fun.
I agree, but that's always what I saw it as. I just didn't agree with the people who were saying that it was the best superhero film ever, but that's just my personal opinion, anyways. Though, as far as really fun movies go, I still find that Captain America nails things on that front as well. I don't know what it is, but despite him being the least popular Avenger by far (at least as far as the movies go), he's honestly the most appealing hero and general character to me. He was also my favorite character in The Avengers, and even in the AEMH animated series.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2013, 07:47:56 PM
That's the problem with all of you lesser people. You let initial expectations fool you greatly into what you think is the greatest thing ever until you re-watch it. But, not everyone can be as smart as I am. :sly:
No, but seriously, I think Avengers is great, and I liked it just as much as the first time I saw it upon re-watching it recently, but it was never my favorite superhero movie, nor was it even my favorite Marvel movie, for that matter. I was always calling BS on people saying it was better than The Dark Knight. I mean, I know its opinion, but one film clearly has more going on with its story and characters than the other and is generally better written and structured. Also, I think that Captain America is the best of the Avengers line of films. I liked it much better than even Iron Man, which I like a lot, but I find it to be just a tad bit overrated.
I didn't get my hopes up too high. I just think the novelty of seeing these superheroes together is something that isn't replicated in rewatches, at least not quite to the same extent as that first time seeing it. And it was never my favorite superhero movie over The Dark Knight, you lesser person. :thinkin:
Still, The Avengers is my third favorite in the Marvel movie canon, and Captain America is my fourth favorite. My top two is a tie between Iron Man and Iron Man 3, which was a big surprise and way better than Iron Man 2.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 21, 2013, 08:53:44 PM
Avengers isn't perfect, but honestly, what movie is? It's just a lot of fun.
I agree. I don't mean to sound like I am bashing Avengers. It was one of my favorite films to hit theaters last year. It's a very fun movie, but for me, The Dark Knight and Iron Man just have more to offer in story.
I really need to rewatch Captain America. I've only seen it once, but the movie just clicked really well for me, as it clearl did for many of you.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 21, 2013, 10:42:19 PM
Still, The Avengers is my third favorite in the Marvel movie canon, and Captain America is my fourth favorite. My top two is a tie between Iron Man and Iron Man 3, which was a big surprise and way better than Iron Man 2.
I need to re-watch Iron Man 3 before I can rank it anywhere. My basis of saying that the Iron Man movies are a bit overrated, though, is because I feel that aside from Robert Downey Jr.'s stellar performance as Tony Stark....there honestly really isn't too much more to these movies if you really think about it. The villains are OK, but ultimately forgettable, the action scenes are far from the best I've seen in a superhero film, and the other characters are entertaining but also ultimately all fall under the shadow of Robert Downey Jr.'s performance, which is both a credit to him as well as a weakness to the films as a whole, for me.
I really liked Captain America because you get to see a full character arc with Steve Rogers, the other characters are memorable (even the doctor who dies early on), and while Red Skull isn't exactly the most memorable villain, I feel that he comes off as really entertaining as the insanely egotistical leader of Hydra who is just the perfect guy to get his ass kicked by the Captain. I also think that this movie has a heart to it that the other Avengers line of movies aside from The Avengers itself sort of lack. Also, while Robert Downey Jr. is clearly a better actor than Chris Evans, I still have to give Evans credit for doing a great job in his own right as the Captain, and on that end I find Captain America to be a much more likable character than Tony Stark/Iron Man (at least as far as the films go). I'm aware that Stark is supposed to come off as being sort of a douche, but I still prefer my characters genuinely likable yet simultaneously bad-ass when they need to be.
But guysss, the Marvel movies are clearly pieces of establishment propaganda coldly calculated to get the most money out of the fanboy and manchild demographic by making movies that aren't deep enough for my unique and totally not conceited psyche! >:(
So... Ultron. Yeah. Would've appreciated Thanos, but meh.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 22, 2013, 05:31:49 AMSo... Ultron. Yeah. Would've appreciated Thanos, but meh.
According to the guys behind the MCU, Thanos is too big a Bad to show up so soon. He has to be gradually built up to. They're saving him for
Avengers 3, I believe.
It's going to be weird having an Ultron story without Hank Pym, not that I'm a huge Henry Pym fan, but he is Ultron's creator. My guess is the filmmakers will make Ultron a creation of S.H.I.E.L.D. or Stark Indsutries.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2013, 11:50:31 PM
I really liked Captain America because you get to see a full character arc with Steve Rogers, the other characters are memorable (even the doctor who dies early on), and while Red Skull isn't exactly the most memorable villain, I feel that he comes off as really entertaining as the insanely egotistical leader of Hydra who is just the perfect guy to get his ass kicked by the Captain. I also think that this movie has a heart to it that the other Avengers line of movies aside from The Avengers itself sort of lack. Also, while Robert Downey Jr. is clearly a better actor than Chris Evans, I still have to give Evans credit for doing a great job in his own right as the Captain, and on that end I find Captain America to be a much more likable character than Tony Stark/Iron Man (at least as far as the films go). I'm aware that Stark is supposed to come off as being sort of a douche, but I still prefer my characters genuinely likable yet simultaneously bad-ass when they need to be.
This is pretty why I think Captain America is the best Marvel movie, and possibly the best comic movie.
Quote from: Silverstar on July 22, 2013, 07:36:45 AM
Ultron story without Hank Pym
I anyone needs me, I'll be in the angry dome.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2013, 11:50:31 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 21, 2013, 10:42:19 PM
Still, The Avengers is my third favorite in the Marvel movie canon, and Captain America is my fourth favorite. My top two is a tie between Iron Man and Iron Man 3, which was a big surprise and way better than Iron Man 2.
I need to re-watch Iron Man 3 before I can rank it anywhere. My basis of saying that the Iron Man movies are a bit overrated, though, is because I feel that aside from Robert Downey Jr.'s stellar performance as Tony Stark....there honestly really isn't too much more to these movies if you really think about it. The villains are OK, but ultimately forgettable, the action scenes are far from the best I've seen in a superhero film, and the other characters are entertaining but also ultimately all fall under the shadow of Robert Downey Jr.'s performance, which is both a credit to him as well as a weakness to the films as a whole, for me.
I really liked Captain America because you get to see a full character arc with Steve Rogers, the other characters are memorable (even the doctor who dies early on), and while Red Skull isn't exactly the most memorable villain, I feel that he comes off as really entertaining as the insanely egotistical leader of Hydra who is just the perfect guy to get his ass kicked by the Captain. I also think that this movie has a heart to it that the other Avengers line of movies aside from The Avengers itself sort of lack. Also, while Robert Downey Jr. is clearly a better actor than Chris Evans, I still have to give Evans credit for doing a great job in his own right as the Captain, and on that end I find Captain America to be a much more likable character than Tony Stark/Iron Man (at least as far as the films go). I'm aware that Starkd is supposed to come off as being sort of a douche, but I still prefer my characters genuinely likable yet simultaneously bad-ass when they need to be.
I can agree that Iron Man is very much Robert Downey's film. It's really his charisma that carries it, but I liked the story and other characters still. Captain America gets more development than tony does over three films, but I just really liked Tony's character.
Now the reason I liked Iron Man 3 so much is because I think it really pushed more storytelling into Iron Man. I also think it gave Robert Downey Jr. more room to show dramatic acting. And it didn't feel like it needed to resort to cheap crowd pleasers in the way Iron Man 2 did. I might kind of like it better than the first film.
I'm just happy at Age of Ultron isn't adapting the titular storyline at all.
I'm still not quite sure why they can't just have a reference to Hank Pym somewhere in there.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 22, 2013, 02:10:52 PM
I'm still not quite sure why they can't just have a reference to Hank Pym somewhere in there.
"So what happened to the guy who made this robot?"
"Got arrested for spousal abuse."
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 22, 2013, 02:15:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 22, 2013, 02:10:52 PM
I'm still not quite sure why they can't just have a reference to Hank Pym somewhere in there.
"So what happened to the guy who made this robot?"
"Got arrested for spousal abuse."
That's what I'm saying!
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 22, 2013, 02:10:52 PM
I'm still not quite sure why they can't just have a reference to Hank Pym somewhere in there.
Pym may be referenced somewhere in
Avengers 2, he's just not going to be featured in it. Though there is an Ant-Man film said to be in the works.
Also, according to the press release I read, Jeremy Renner (Hawkeye) is supposed to have a larger role in A2 to make up for his comparatively minimal screen time in the first movie.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 22, 2013, 02:16:17 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 22, 2013, 02:15:27 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 22, 2013, 02:10:52 PM
I'm still not quite sure why they can't just have a reference to Hank Pym somewhere in there.
"So what happened to the guy who made this robot?"
"Got arrested for spousal abuse."
That's what I'm saying!
Or something about shrinkage...
Really though, the whole reason Ultron is interesting is because of the of relationship he has with Pym.
But I'm not to mad about it. Whedon's done a great job so far, so excluding a less popular character that happens to be one of my favorites isn't something I'm going get to worked up about. At least I get Ant Man.
Ben Affleck.
Quote from: Avaitor on August 22, 2013, 11:13:47 PM
Ben Affleck.
Yup. Ben Affleck is going to be Batman in the upcoming
Man of Steel sequel. Of course, people on the interwebz are having their usual shit-fit about this: "Oh, he was Daredevil and that movie sucked!" "They need Christian Bale to pull this off!" etc., etc. For all the people whining about Bale, he said beforehand that he wasn't playing Batman anymore, and
The Dark Knight Rises effectively ended Bale's Batman, so those folks need to get over it. And yeah, Affleck played Daredevil, but he didn't write the thing, he just acted in it. Sure, the movie sucked, but it wasn't his fault. I don't exactly see Affleck as Batman, but consider this: Chris Evans annoyed a lot of people as the Human Torch, but he wowed a lot of people as Captain America. Sometimes the right script is all that's needed.
I think it's less of the fact that Bale isn't returning and more of the fact that Affleck has always been a questionable actor at best and is a bit old to start playing Batman now.
As someone who still feels no desire to see Man of Steel and honestly wasn't that pumped when I heard this news, I don't really care, but I see where the criticism is coming from.
I think WB wants an older, more seasoned Batman this time around, so an older actor like Affleck seems to be what they're looking for.
Me, I don't really care. I wasn't in love with Bale; he did a credible job as Bruce Wayne, but that Cookie Monster voice he assumed when he donned the cowl made it next to impossible to take him seriously in the role. Plus, Bale was the Nolanverse Batman, who'd be too grounded for something like Justice League.
As long as the guy they pick can act and looks convincing in the Bat-suit, I don't care who it is.
All I'll say for now is that I hated Ben Affleck as Daredevil.
Bryan Cranston is going to be Lex. Well now it has my curiosity.
But I will say that even though MOS didn't look that exciting to me, I do like how they skipped Luthor for now, instead of shoehorning him like every other Superman movie. It's a nice change of pace for a beginner.
As for Ben Affleck getting the role of Batman, I don't really have an opinion. I'll just see how it goes. Honestly, my worry has entirely to do with Zack Snyder having no talent. I think Man of Steel was a piece of garbage, and that doesn't give me high hopes for the future of this series. I'll probably go along and see the next movies being that my friends might want to see them, but I personally don't particularly care.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on August 26, 2013, 01:17:12 PM
I think Man of Steel was a piece of garbage
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 05, 2013, 12:08:35 AM
As for Man of Steel, it was........ good? Or at least, it was decent. The action was good. I felt like the story just came up short. None of the characters, aside from maybe Superman, got much development, neither did his relationship with Lois. I'll say it was probably entertaining enough that I'll keep up with this series.
Hey, Talon, anyone ever tell you that you change your mind a lot? :sly:
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on August 26, 2013, 04:12:20 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on August 26, 2013, 01:17:12 PM
I think Man of Steel was a piece of garbage
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 05, 2013, 12:08:35 AM
As for Man of Steel, it was........ good? Or at least, it was decent. The action was good. I felt like the story just came up short. None of the characters, aside from maybe Superman, got much development, neither did his relationship with Lois. I'll say it was probably entertaining enough that I'll keep up with this series.
Hey, Talon, anyone ever tell you that you change your mind a lot? :sly:
Remember when you said that during your first viewing of Iron Man 2, you tried to convince yourself that it was good, only to later realize that you thought it kind of sucked? I think that happened to me here with Man of Steel. :P
Who knows, tomorrow it might be a masterpiece. ;)
This will be my top 5 tomorrow.
1. Man of Steel
2. Catwoman
3. The Fantastic Four
4. Batman & Robin
5. Steel
Will Kick-Ass 2 be making that list anytime soon?
Also, where are Superman IV and Green Lantern? Clearly those are gems among comic book movies.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on August 26, 2013, 04:41:45 PM
Will Kick-Ass 2 be making that list anytime soon?
Also, where are Superman IV
Definitely Superman IV. And Supergirl, while we're at it. As for Kick-Ass 2, it shows promise for my top 10. I just need to see it first. ;D
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on August 26, 2013, 04:41:45 PMand Green Lantern?
Dude that movie sucks.
Bradley Cooper voicing Rocket Raccoon seems to be the next Ben Affleck, only on a much smaller scale, considering how insignificant his character is compared to bats.
Honestly, I think it's a good call. I know that he can pull off a decent gruff voice, and Silver Linings Playbook proved that he can add some depth to his persona as well. Cooper's not my first choice, but I'm down for it.
I see no problem with either of those casting choices, honestly.
Have fun. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hamvx0huBzs)
D'oh! Green Lantern's what I have checked out on Netflix at the moment. I guess I should watch that while folding laundry.
I'm skimming the reviews for Thor 2. The ranking is about the same as Iron Man 3's, which also makes it around the same as the first Thor's, and the overall verdict is that it's a solid, if not highly inventive, follow-up.
Who's going to see it this weekend?
I remember thinking the Thor and Cap sequels came out this summer.
I probably won't see it right away, but since just about everyone I know was blown away by the Avengers, it's probably a given that someone will ask me to go with them.
Though I do want to see it.
I know a lot of people who either loved, liked, or hated the first movie. Personally I liked it, though not nearly as much as Iron Man 1 or Captain America. I definitely want to see the sequel. I'm hoping to catch it this weekend.
Thor is actually my uncle's favorite super hero, while he and I usually end up going to all of these movies together. Convincing him to do the premiere with me wasn't hard.
So lately I have been hearing a complaint that I want to get you guys' thoughts on.
Did you ever think the Dark Knight trilogy has bad dialogue?
They had some clunky lines, Begins in particular, but not that much moreso than just about any other super hero movie.
Gal Gadot (from the Fast and Furious movies) has now been cast to play Wonder Woman in the upcoming Man of Steel sequel...or is it now Superman/Batman? Now that Wondy's in the mix, they might as call this movie Trinity.
Now, Flash is rumored to also be making a cameo in this. Man, WB really wants to catch up to The Avengers.
If this is true, then they are just rushing things WAY too much. The reason The Avengers was a hit was, aside from actually being a well-made movie, Marvel took the time to build up to it and hype it up by getting people invested in each of the main characters involved in the story. It took a while to get there, but by the time we did, most of us were already pretty invested in the MCU and for that reason it made the movie feel like a really big event. If DC just sticks a bunch of heroes into a big team-based movie without any build-up or prior exposure for any of those characters, then nobody will really have any reason to feel invested in them and the entire thing will just be a big mess of plot, even if they are using A-list heroes.
It also isn't giving us a good sign for Wondy's involvement in the franchise if she can't even maintain her own movie.
I know that I'm not WW's biggest fan, but we're killing for a movie of her own. Or a good female super hero movie, really. Marvel keeps on hinting at doing Ms. Marvel or giving Black Widow her own film, and they're still not delivering.
Meh, if their parts are small and imply that they will be getting their own movies than I see no reason to complain here. Now if this ends up being a full on Justice League movie, then yes, I'd freak out. Anyway, I just want to see the Flash get a good live action representation for once.
As long as Zack Snyder is in charge, I really don't expect this series to come close to the Avengers movie continuity.
Outside of Batman, DC's track record has been pretty awful as it is.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 04, 2013, 10:34:01 PM
Outside of Batman, DC's track record has been pretty awful as it is.
You mean as of recently, right?
Superman is one of my all time superhero movies. :P
I meant generally, but yeah Superman's first two (1.5?) movies are good.
I wonder how they'll add Green Lantern in, if they bring Ryan Reynolds back, go for John Stewart, or just drop him.
My hope for Hal getting the respect he deserves will die if Reynolds reprises that role. I hate that guy.
They're definitely not bringing Ryan Reynolds back. I recall an article months back saying that he wasn't interested in coming back and they weren't interested in bringing him back. As long as we don't get the CGI mask again, I don't care who plays him.
From what I've been reading and gathering, the JL roster is said to be consisting of the Trinity, Flash and a GL. WB still hasn't said which GL yet.
So I decided to rank the Marvel and DC live action movies. I did the lists separately, though. If I miss any movies on these lists, it was either because I never saw the movie (honestly, I have never bothered to take the time to watch Batman Forever or Batman & Robin), I forgot about it, or I was lazy.
1. Spider-Man 2
2. Iron Man 3
3. Iron Man
4. The Avengers
5. Spider-Man
6. Captain America: The First Avenger
7. Thor
8. The Incredible Hulk
9. Iron Man 2
10. Spider-Man 3
11. The Amazing Spider-Man
12. Hulk
13. The Fantastic Four
1. The Dark Knight
2. Superman
3. Batman Begins
4. The Dark Knight Rises
5. Superman II
6. Batman
7. Batman Returns
8. Batman: The Movie
9. Man of Steel
I tried ranking Steel because I love it and find it hilarious. But it's the type of movie that, since it's so legitimately bad, I can't properly rank it.
Unless I'm forgetting something, wow, DC's track record is indeed terrible outside Batman, Spark. The only other good movies they did were two Superman films. Not to mention, they even have some bad Batman movies, and don't even get me started on Man of Steel again.
I think my list would be mostly the same as before with just a few alterations, but I'll add IM3 and Thor 2 into it, now:
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. X2: X-Men United
3. The Avengers
4. X-Men: First Class
5. Iron Man
6. Spider-Man
7. The Amazing Spider-Man
8. X-Men
9. Iron Man 3
10. Thor: The Dark World
11. Thor
12. Spider-Man 3
13. Spider-Man 2
14. The Incredible Hulk
15. Dare Devil
16. The Wolverine
17.Iron Man 2
18. The Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
19. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
20. X-Men 3: Last Stand
21. The Fantastic Four
22. Ghost Rider
I know I'm probably leaving some stuff off, but I can't bother to even remember them right now.
Anyways....
#1-5: The embodiment of greatness
#6-8: Pretty good
#9-14: Really flawed but still decent, fun flicks
#15-18: Shit list
#19-21: Super shit list
#22: Steaming pile
I always thought that Iron Man 2 feels like a typical basic sequel, if that makes any sense. Like, it has certain things that worked in the first movie, but they also tried to bring in more cheap crowd pleasers, mainly more explosive action.
I don't dislike it, but it's certainly cheaper and far from the likes of the original.
That reminds me, I always found it funny that the franchise that started with Iron Man, a movie with a more "down to earth" tone, rooted in technological, militaristic stuff... now takes place in a universe with super powerful gods, various realms, aliens, and space whales. It's certainly not a flaw. I just find it interesting because it really doesn't seem like what they intended with the tone of the original Iron Man. :P
Quote from: Silverstar on December 05, 2013, 07:35:21 AM
They're definitely not bringing Ryan Reynolds back. I recall an article months back saying that he wasn't interested in coming back and they weren't interested in bringing him back. As long as we don't get the CGI mask again, I don't care who plays him.
From what I've been reading and gathering, the JL roster is said to be consisting of the Trinity, Flash and a GL. WB still hasn't said which GL yet.
I hope it's Hal. John Stewart is practically more popular with the general public thanks to Justice League and the only good thing Hal has ever really been in outside of the comics is a few recent animated movies. He needs his turn.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 05, 2013, 04:55:56 PM
I always thought that Iron Man 2 feels like a typical basic sequel, if that makes any sense. Like, it has certain things that worked in the first movie, but they also tried to bring in more cheap crowd pleasers, mainly more explosive action.
Did we watch the same movie? I saw hardly any explosive action (way less than the first movie, for sure), and I don't think any crowds were pleased with references to The Avengers being shoehorned into a movie that already had 3 or 4 unnecessary sub-plots going on.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 05, 2013, 06:12:00 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 05, 2013, 04:55:56 PM
I always thought that Iron Man 2 feels like a typical basic sequel, if that makes any sense. Like, it has certain things that worked in the first movie, but they also tried to bring in more cheap crowd pleasers, mainly more explosive action.
Did we watch the same movie? I saw hardly any explosive action (way less than the first movie, for sure), and I don't think any crowds were pleased with references to The Avengers being shoehorned into a movie that already had 3 or 4 unnecessary sub-plots going on.
I thought I remembered Iron Man 2 relying far more on action, with the Avengers references being nearly irrelevant and rather pointless (which is a flaw, but not big enough to ruin a film). Perhaps I just don't remember the movie well enough, but being that it's just not a good enough movie for me to want to rewatch it and check, I'll take your word for it. :P
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 05, 2013, 06:37:48 PM
I thought I remembered Iron Man 2 relying far more on action, with the Avengers references being nearly irrelevant and rather pointless (which is a flaw, but not big enough to ruin a film). Perhaps I just don't remember the movie well enough, but being that it's just not a good enough movie for me to want to rewatch it and check, I'll take your word for it. :P
Iron Man 2 has maybe 10 total minutes of action in its entire runtime, if not less. I was bored to tears during it.
Other than the beginning and the end, there isn't much action at all.
That would be fine if the story was good enough, but it really wasn't.
I mostly liked seeing how being Iron Man affects Tony Stark. It was a good angle that led to Iron Man 3 which was vastly superior.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_2
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 confirmed for next year.
This news really doesn't mean much to me. I didn't particularly care for the first movie, and I'm not sure if I'll even go to see this one. But I just thought I'd post it in case anyone was curious.
I still haven't seen the first one.
No interest.
It's one the most forgettable movies I have ever seen. I mean, Man of Steel was awful, but I at least remember some of it. And I honestly have more interest in seeing its sequel, if only because I'm slightly curious about how Batman and Wonder Woman will be.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 06, 2013, 11:14:33 PM
It's one the most forgettable movies I have ever seen. I mean, Man of Steel was awful, but I at least remember some of it. And I honestly have more interest in seeing its sequel, if only because I'm slightly curious about how Batman and Wonder Woman will be.
It's an OK movie, but I don't agree that it's forgettable, either. I honestly find it to be a better film than SM 2 and 3 (and I overall liked both of those movies).
You can watch your shitty MOS sequel, though. I happen to think the trailer to the 2nd movie looks pretty good, so I'll be checking it out. It might not be great but it at least has my interest for now. That said, I'm still most interested in seeing Captain America 2 and Days of Future Past (both of which look better than any of Marvel's output from this year).
Wait, the trailer for the Man of Steel sequel is already out? I'll have to look into that.
Also, E-K, I thought I remember you saying that Amazing Spider-Man is one of those movies you tend to forget even exists. :P
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 08, 2013, 10:56:32 AM
It's an OK movie, but I don't agree that it's forgettable, either. I honestly find it to be a better film than SM 2 and 3 (and I overall liked both of those movies).
Agreed. :thumbup:
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 08, 2013, 11:09:18 AM
Wait, the trailer for the Man of Steel sequel is already out? I'll have to look into that.
I was talking about TASM2 trailer.
QuoteAlso, E-K, I thought I remember you saying that Amazing Spider-Man is one of those movies you tend to forget even exists. :P
Talon, I remember you saying that Man of Steel was a good movie. :P
I'm still waiting for the Deadpool movie.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 08, 2013, 11:18:53 AM
Talon, I remember you saying that Man of Steel was a good movie. :P
I was probably still in the process of trying to articulate my opinion, either that or I was just being generous. But either way, we've already established that my opinions have the ability to change a lot. One of these days, I should make a thread for compiling a list of all my drastically changed opinions over the years. :D
Quote from: Foggle on December 08, 2013, 11:18:06 AM
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 08, 2013, 10:56:32 AM
It's an OK movie, but I don't agree that it's forgettable, either. I honestly find it to be a better film than SM 2 and 3 (and I overall liked both of those movies).
Agreed. :thumbup:
Thirded. :thumbup:
Yeah, I don't think I'll ever watch Man of Steel.
Now I want to.
I saw Man of Steel. I didn't hate it like a lot of people did, probably because I'm a big Superman and it would take a lot for me to truly hate something Supes-related, but at the same time, all the negative comments about MoS: it was too dark, it was joyless, the plot holes, how the narrative jumped around, the over-abundance of product placement, the massive collateral damage, I did agree with. I didn't hate MoS, but it wasn't what I was expecting or hoping for.
On that note, this upcoming sequel has me concerned. I get that WB is trying to rush Justice League into production, and I don't especially want to wait years to see it, but at the same time, they seem to be rushing things just a bit. They're already sticking Batman into this sequel rather than giving Big Blue another solo film which they could have redeemed themselves with after the first one, and now they've tossed Wonder Woman into the film as well; at first I read that WW's appearance was just going to be a cameo with her as Diana Prince, now they seem to be talking a full-blown appearance as Wondy in lieu of a WW solo movie, which burns my ass. Wonder Woman should get her own movie before she appears with the other heroes; Bats has had 8 live-action movies, Supes has had 6, but Wondy still has 0; the animated movie is the closest she's ever gotten to a solo movie or animated series.
Not only does it seem to be cramming too much into what's supposed to be the MoS sequel, but if they keep squeezing all of these additional characters into the mix (Flash was at one rumored to make a cameo appearance, but I haven't heard any follow-up to that), they might as well just call this movie Justice League.
I imagine Justice League will try really hard to one-up The Avengers and will just fail
They really need to get a new director. Under Zack Snyder, this series has no chance.
Even if Justice League does well, it's not going to top The Avengers. That movie was lightning in a bottle, box office numbers like that come along once, maybe twice in a decade or so. Even Avengers 2 won't one-up Avengers.
I'd just like to see Justice League please a majority of moviegoers and make a decent showing for itself. They at least have the advantage that Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman alone are far more iconic than most of Marvel's characters, even people who otherwise know or care jack squat about comic book superheroes know who they are. I'm not optimistic that JL will succeed, but I'm trying to remain hopeful.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 08, 2013, 04:53:16 PM
I imagine Justice League will try really hard to one-up The Avengers and will just fail
They really need to get a new director. Under Zack Snyder, this series has no chance.
You're misconceiving the problem, Talon. You can blame Zack Snyder for MOS, but the fact is that, aside from the Nolan Batman trilogy, DC has been churning out horrible movie adaptations for years now. What DC needs to do first of all is to stop trying to copy Marvel so desperately. They should first just focus on trying to establish their heroes by making solid solo movies for each of them. People will pay to see solo superhero movies as long as they're actually well-made. IF they want to do a JL movie that badly, and they are doing it to copy Marvel, then they at least should do it the right way. Marvel took time to build up an established Universe and characters to really make The Avengers feel like a big deal, and that's why it was successful. If DC wants to make an actual good JL movie, they must first actually make good movies leading up to it, and take their time with that process. No matter how desperately DC fans want to see their answer to The Avengers ASAP, the fact is that rushing into a JL movie is going to just lead to a really crappy flick.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 08, 2013, 05:51:48 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 08, 2013, 04:53:16 PM
I imagine Justice League will try really hard to one-up The Avengers and will just fail
They really need to get a new director. Under Zack Snyder, this series has no chance.
You're misconceiving the problem, Talon. You can blame Zack Snyder for MOS, but the fact is that, aside from the Nolan Batman trilogy, DC has been churning out horrible movie adaptations for years now. What DC needs to do first of all is to stop trying to copy Marvel so desperately. They should first just focus on trying to establish their heroes by making solid solo movies for each of them. People will pay to see solo superhero movies as long as they're actually well-made. IF they want to do a JL movie that badly, and they are doing it to copy Marvel, then they at least should do it the right way. Marvel took time to build up an established Universe and characters to really make The Avengers feel like a big deal, and that's why it was successful. If DC wants to make an actual good JL movie, they must first actually make good movies leading up to it, and take their time with that process. No matter how desperately DC fans want to see their answer to The Avengers ASAP, the fact is that rushing into a JL movie is going to just lead to a really crappy flick.
True. The problem here does go beyond Zack Snyder. I just tend to forget many movies as I haven't seen some of them (though I don't think I'm missing much by passing on Catwoman and that Green Lantern movie). In fact, I've lost track of them. But Zack Snyder will just hurt the chances of them getting out of that rut. They need to get some good directors on those DC movies and, as you say, make good solo movies to establish the heroes without rushing them.
If I remember correctly, another problem is that DC movies don't have as much creative control as some of the Marvel's. DC doesn't have an equivalent to Marvel Studios yet.
I don't really care if they make a JL movie or not. I just want them to make good solo movies for different characters.
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 05, 2013, 05:55:25 PM
I hope it's Hal. John Stewart is practically more popular with the general public thanks to Justice League and the only good thing Hal has ever really been in outside of the comics is a few recent animated movies. He needs his turn.
Agreed.
Really, as for this Justice League movie continuity, at the rate things are going, the only way I can see myself seeing the next movies is because one of my best friends is a comic book nut. I imagine a group of us will possibly just see it for the heck of it.
I think Kyle Rayner deserves it more than Hal, personally.
Quote from: ShadowGentleman on December 08, 2013, 06:29:16 PM
If I remember correctly, another problem is that DC movies don't have as much creative control as some of the Marvel's. DC doesn't have an equivalent to Marvel Studios yet.
That's the biggest issue. They need to get on the ball here and stop missing out on easy money.
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 05, 2013, 05:55:25 PM
I hope it's Hal. John Stewart is practically more popular with the general public thanks to Justice League and the only good thing Hal has ever really been in outside of the comics is a few recent animated movies. He needs his turn.
Agreed.
[/quote](https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.silkysteps.com%2Fforum%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2FJust_Cuz-%2528c%2529-handshake.gif&hash=8c8444b2299bfcfd7f80a12b29f7f6d2ff459243)
I would want them to do a Justice League movie if they could do a new Superman, Hal and Batman movie right and a Wonder Woman movie with a Diana as interesting as she was in the recent animated movie and a Flash as charismatic as Michael Rosenbaum Flash. Honestly I'd be more interested in that team then The Avengers under those circumstances but I am asking for a lot so don't expect to see that.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 08, 2013, 07:50:11 PM
I think Kyle Rayner deserves it more than Hal, personally.
Because he's gotten even less attention?
Ever since Hal was ret-conned from the dead, Kyle's got pushed aside pretty heavily. Not to say I would hate Hal being used, though.
The only time I really got to like seeing Kyle is his first appearance, Emerald Twilight. I've mostly just read him in Morrison's JLA run...which I hate and he had a small part in Superman Red Son. That's about it. I don't hate the character but I haven't been given too much of a reason to care for him.
I'd still go with John for GL if only cause we need more black super heroes on screen. Marvel's getting the Falcon for Cap 2 and hopefully the next Avengers as well, and there's also going to be the Luke Cage show coming, but we can always use a little more ethnicity in the movies.
Quote from: Avaitor on December 09, 2013, 07:56:27 AM
I'd still go with John for GL if only cause we need more black super heroes on screen. Marvel's getting the Falcon for Cap 2 and hopefully the next Avengers as well, and there's also going to be the Luke Cage show coming, but we can always use a little more ethnicity in the movies.
This.
I'm not a super-big John Stewart fan (unless we're talking about this guy):
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fe%2Fe7%2FDailyShowStewart.jpg&hash=d985b1bc7b07dcce6361d25ad9067941828b0537)
...but since it doesn't look like we'll be getting J'onn J'onzz, Cyborg or Vixen for this movie, I'd take John just for the sake of the team not being comprised solely of Caucasians.
They can sneak Cyborg in there just so I can get Hal. :D
By the way, this is a question directed at people who have a clear memory of Iron Man 3 (I haven't seen it since it was in theaters last summer). You know how Tony Stark had to spend the whole movie working with that weak, broken down suit?
I can't remember. Was there an explanation for why he didn't just call for one of those dozens of suits that appeared in the final fight sooner?
Communication was severed and down.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 09, 2013, 11:26:10 PM
Communication was severed and down.
Do you mean on the suit he was using? So he repaired it as the movie went on? I'm not doubting you. My memory of the movie just isn't perfect.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 09, 2013, 11:32:22 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 09, 2013, 11:26:10 PM
Communication was severed and down.
Do you mean on the suit he was using? So he repaired it as the movie went on? I'm not doubting you. My memory of the movie just isn't perfect.
Jarvis in general was severed. I also haven't seen it since the theater, but the bigger issue than the suit was that he lost all contact with Jarvis.
Got it. Thanks! I need to rewatch this movie. Before The Avengers came out last summer, my friends and I marathon'd the other movies in the Marvel movie canon in a single day and it was awesome. Would be cool to do again with Avengers, Iron Man 3, and Thor 2 out to add into the mix now, though we'd have to make that into a two-day event.
I'll probably rewatch it if and when it comes to Netflix, but I'll wait for the Phase 2 set before I buy IM3 and Thor 2.
Speaking of which, I still really need to get Phase 1. Especially since we got a Blu-Ray player which actually works.
Here's one thing I never got an explanation for (or maybe I just missed it). Remember how Tony had ALL of those Iron Man suits that were combat ready and could all be remote-controlled by Jarvus? Where the hell were those when his house was being attacked by helicopters and missiles?
So I was thinking about Superman and Superman II (The Donner Cut, which effectively has permenantly "replaced" Lester's version in my mind). I love both movies, but I think it's a bit of a shame for Superman II. The movie has some really good story ideas. But ultimately, it just isn't as good as the first movie. It's held back by the fact that, well, it's not complete. They had to use test footage (or whatever it is) because scenes Donner was filming couldn't get finished due to the director change. And it shows, a lot. Not to mention, because the Donner Cut had to work with footage from decades ago, and since not all that footage wasn't finished, they didn't have the freedom that's allowed when you're still in the process of making a movie with the actors ready. Still, it's better than Lester's version. And if Donner could've made the true Superman II that they envisioned back then, I have a feeling it would be better than the first movie.
Though there's still the matter of Donner's ending. I didn't love Lester's ending, but I hated the Donner ending of II. I figure what happened was that he couldn't film the ending of Superman II that he wanted, and he hated Lester's ending, so the only option he had was recycling footage from the first movie, but it cheapens the lore and that movie's ending. And it's messy.
Well, Man of Steel brought us one thing... Jonathan Kent's romantic subplot with a tornado:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEi8DQg6aZg
I couldn't stand Jonathan Kent in Man of Steel. Of all the bad characters in that movie, he was the worst. Every time he opened his mouth, he just sounded incredibly pretentious or downright contrived.
Captain America 2 isn't even out, but plans for a sequel to it and for Thor are already coming out. Besides the directors of Cap 2 being reported to return, we have writers for Thor 3 (http://variety.com/2014/film/news/marvel-taps-craig-kyle-to-co-write-thor-3-with-christopher-yost-1201076954/). And since I still miss EMH and generally liked his work on The Dark World, Yost is a good choice in my book.
He wrote both?
Quote from: gunswordfist on January 30, 2014, 06:15:58 PM
He wrote both?
Chris Yost? He wrote a draft or so of Thor 2 and was the head writer for Avengers: EMH.
Yep. Knew that name looked familiar.
GSP in Winter Soldier!
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1249.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh505%2Fwebeougher%2FColumn%2520Images%2FFact%2520or%2520Fiction%2F2014%2F02%2520-%2520February%2Fgspcaptainamerica2_zps7548d402.jpg&hash=b9ed431db011be990cc798bd5d42036d06fad64c)
Definitely my most anticipated movie. ;D
A Black Widow movie is getting closer to being made! (http://screencrush.com/black-widow-solo-movie/)
This made its world premiere last night. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTZ2Tp9yXyM)
When I first heard about this project (having no knowledge of the property other than the title), I thought it would be generic.
I was wrong, and now I wanna see it. :thumbup:
This movie looks like it could be pretty fun. I like the tounge-in-cheek tone that they are going with.
Yeah, it seems like they found a strong comedic tone for the movie, as to not alienate the less-hardcore MCU followers. I'm down.
The reason comic I read (from like 2010 or something like that) was basically an action comedy so it makes sense. I hate how Drax was casted though. I thought it was a fan trailer when it got to that part. Same goes for Zoe Saldana as Gamora. Come on now...
Well, casting professional wrestlers in almost any movie is usually a bad idea unless it's for a small role (the only exception being They Live, which is an awesome movie), or unless they just flat-out don't talk, but I suppose we'll have to see the movie to see if it works out.
...I want to rewatch They Live now.
It's official- Captain America 3 is happening, and it's competing with the Superman/Batman movie.
I know where my money's going. Sorry, DC.
The only way they are going to get my money on the future of this DC movie universe is if they get a new director.
Quote from: Avaitor on March 15, 2014, 01:42:39 PM
It's official- Captain America 3 is happening, and it's competing with the Superman/Batman movie.
I know where my money's going. Sorry, DC.
:thumbup:
Awesome, awesome news. I can't wait for Winter Soldier to come out. ;D
Quote from: Avaitor on March 15, 2014, 01:42:39 PM
I know where my money's going. Sorry, DC.
Seconded.
I, too, anticipate
Winter Soldier even more now. I thought the first
Captain America was good, but not great, so I'm hoping for this one to be an improvement.
Quote from: Cartoon X on March 15, 2014, 07:24:05 PMI thought the first Captain America was good, but not great, so I'm hoping for this one to be an improvement.
Your opinion is wrong. :anger:
You would really hate to hear how I feel about The Avengers, then. :D
What do you think about The Avengers, CX?
This I want to read.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lw7qn58NxG1qii6tmo1_500.gif&hash=222a28632a51abca4cb111dad9174fba59fd66cc)
Actually, while I really, really like The Avengers on a pure entertainment level, I feel that people somewhat overrate it on a level of writing, story, and character development, which is very predictable stuff, and while executed to great effect by a talented director like Joss Whedon, is not really on the level of the best of the genre like The Dark Knight. I mean, I do still adore that film, but also wholly admit that it's not really a masterpiece.
On the other hand, CA doesn't get enough credit. It touches on a classic element of golden-age superheroes that few films are willing to touch. I think it also proves that you can make a fun superhero movie with a genuinely good-hearted character without the need to try and make him pointlessly amoral, or make the story needlessly dark or gritty just because everyone else is doing it. It's why I don't buy any arguments that MOS had to go with the tone that it did. I feel that the first CA is proof that you can do otherwise. And on that note, it represents everything I love about superheroes in the first place.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 15, 2014, 08:13:17 PM
Actually, while I really, really like The Avengers on a pure entertainment level, I feel that people somewhat overrate it on a level of writing, story, and character development, which is very predictable stuff, and while executed to great effect by a talented director like Joss Whedon, is not really on the level of the best of the genre like The Dark Knight. I mean, I do still adore that film, but also wholly admit that it's not really a masterpiece.
On the other hand, CA doesn't get enough credit. It touches on a classic element of golden-age superheroes that few films are willing to touch. I think it also proves that you can make a fun superhero movie with a genuinely good-hearted character without the need to try and make him pointlessly amoral, or make the story needlessly dark or gritty just because everyone else is doing it. It's why I don't buy any arguments that MOS had to go with the tone that it did. I feel that the first CA is proof that you can do otherwise. And on that note, it represents everything I love about superheroes in the first place.
Agreed on both.
The Avengers is a great popcorn movie, but Captain America simply has more going for it on many levels. I didn't really like Iron Man 2 and Thor 2 was a good movie, neither had me as interested as Winter Soldier does because they just didn't have that little bit extra I enjoyed from CA.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 15, 2014, 08:18:50 PM
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 15, 2014, 08:13:17 PM
Actually, while I really, really like The Avengers on a pure entertainment level, I feel that people somewhat overrate it on a level of writing, story, and character development, which is very predictable stuff, and while executed to great effect by a talented director like Joss Whedon, is not really on the level of the best of the genre like The Dark Knight. I mean, I do still adore that film, but also wholly admit that it's not really a masterpiece.
On the other hand, CA doesn't get enough credit. It touches on a classic element of golden-age superheroes that few films are willing to touch. I think it also proves that you can make a fun superhero movie with a genuinely good-hearted character without the need to try and make him pointlessly amoral, or make the story needlessly dark or gritty just because everyone else is doing it. It's why I don't buy any arguments that MOS had to go with the tone that it did. I feel that the first CA is proof that you can do otherwise. And on that note, it represents everything I love about superheroes in the first place.
Agreed on both.
The Avengers is a great popcorn movie, but Captain America simply has more going for it on many levels. I didn't really like Iron Man 2 and Thor 2 was a good movie, neither had me as interested as Winter Soldier does because they just didn't have that little bit extra I enjoyed from CA.
I'll third all this.
I enjoyed The Avengers, but I can't say that I thought it was as amazing as other people did. It's a fun action film, but I didn't find it as interesting on a plot level, and while I like all the characters, only Bruce Banner/Hulk, Captain America, and Loki really had stand out moments for me (though Tony Stark/Iron Man and Nick Fury were fun as always). It just didn't really leave much of an impact on me when I finished it, unlike other people, it seems.
Keep in mind that I had not watched any of the previous MCU films before seeing it, so the impact of seeing those characters all together in a crossover film was non-existant for me. Also really didn't have any expectations for it since I am unfamiliar with Josh Whedon's (good) work and the Avengers in general (I hadn't seen EMH yet). Once I finish watching the pre-Avengers MCU films, I will watch The Avengers again and see if I like it better.
Also, I liked Captain America, I just don't find it to be what I consider a "great" film for me personally, which are films that I can watch over and over again and still find new things to appreciate. I do like how it was not annoyingly dark like DC superhero films are and it's actually my favorite movie of the MCU that I've seen. It has also been a while since I saw it last, and I enjoy Captain America much more as a character now thanks to EMH, so I maybe I'll like it better whenever I rewatch it, who knows. I want The Winter Soldier to be better than it's predecessor because I always hope sequels will be better than their predecessors (even though most of them aren't) and I really think the potential is there for Winter Solider to be a great film.
I don't really see why Captain America is great (just good to me) and I actually like Avengers more. For me it's:
Iron Man
Avengers
Captain America
Thor
The Incredible Hulk (I need to rewatch Hulk hence this ranking)/Thor 2
Iron Man 2
I've yet to see Iron Man 3 and the first Iron Man movie is what I might consider great, idk, it's been awhile with that one too.
1. Iron Man 3
2. Iron Man
3. The Avengers
4. Captain America
5. Thor
6. The Incredible Hulk
7. Iron Man 2
:thumbup: You have yet to see Thor 2?
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 16, 2014, 02:28:15 AM
:thumbup: You have yet to see Thor 2?
Yeah, I haven't seen Thor 2 yet. Also, looks like we have the same list with the exception of me including Iron Man 3.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 15, 2014, 08:13:17 PM
Actually, while I really, really like The Avengers on a pure entertainment level, I feel that people somewhat overrate it on a level of writing, story, and character development, which is very predictable stuff, and while executed to great effect by a talented director like Joss Whedon, is not really on the level of the best of the genre like The Dark Knight. I mean, I do still adore that film, but also wholly admit that it's not really a masterpiece.
Is there really anyone who says The Avengers is more than just a fun movie that brings together all these heroes to work off each other and fight a lot of monsters? I actually haven't heard anyone claim it has more than a basic story. Of course, that basic story worked, but I'd definitely agree that it's not on the level of The Dark Knight.
Yeah it is, hence the thumbs up. :) I hope I like Iron Man 3 that much as well.
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 16, 2014, 02:58:09 PM
Yeah it is, hence the thumbs up. :) I hope I like Iron Man 3 that much as well.
Most seem to agree that Iron Man 3 is much better than Iron Man 2, but probably not quite on the level of the first movie. So I might be a minority in maybe preferring Iron Man 3. I feel like Robert Downey Jr. was at his best in it, even more so than he was in the first movie.
I might have to watch them back to back to really see for myself. Any word on an Iron Man 4?
When it came out, everyone was claiming it was the greatest superhero film of all time. I have no idea how you missed that.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 16, 2014, 03:36:19 PM
When it came out, everyone was claiming it was the greatest superhero film of all time. I have no idea how you missed that.
I didn't miss that. And if people were ranting about The Avengers for having a particularly special story, then I wouldn't have missed that either. :P
GSF, I haven't heard anything on Iron Man 4.
Downey was signed for 3 Iron Man movies and 3 Avengers movies, if I recall correctly.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 16, 2014, 03:36:19 PM
When it came out, everyone was claiming it was the greatest superhero film of all time. I have no idea how you missed that.
And that Whedon was a better director than Cameron.
Based on one movie.
I don't even like James Cameron much as a person, but he has done far more than Avatar and it seemed people forgot that.
Didn't Whedon have a hand in Toy Story?
How do they forget Cameron's work on the first two Terminator movies and Aliens. :whuh:
Also, the fact that he apparently wants to make a Battle Angel Alita live-action movie makes him a-ok in my book (I haven't even read much of BAA, but I do know that it is a great series).
He also did True Lies which I always thought was a good one.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on March 17, 2014, 04:46:53 PM
Didn't Whedon have a hand in Toy Story?
He took one of the passes in writing the script.
I actually like Whedon, but no, just no. With the sole exception of Serenity, which I love and is really underrated, nothing that I've seen of Whedon's compares to either of the first 2 Terminator movies or Aliens, and yes, I even really like Titanic even if the whole romance plot is rather cliche. It still had solid acting and the directing was executed well on Cameron's part. Honestly, while I don't love Avatar, I though it was an OK film. Yes, it is cliche and has 1-dimensional characters, but nothing about it stood out as overtly terrible to me like people claim. It was just a mediocre sci-fi movie. It certainly didn't desrve any of the high-praise it got, but it's definitely not as bad as some haters make it out to be, either.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 16, 2014, 03:36:19 PM
When it came out, everyone was claiming it was the greatest superhero film of all time. I have no idea how you missed that.
And that Whedon was a better director than Cameron.
Based on one movie.
I don't even like James Cameron much as a person, but he has done far more than Avatar and it seemed people forgot that.
[/quote]Glass hand reasons?
If I were to rank the Marvel movies based on their waves of releases, I'd probably rate them as such:
Top
Captain America
The Avengers
High
Iron Man
Iron Man 3
Middle
Thor
Thor: The Dark World
Low
The Incredible Hulk
The Hulk
Bottom
Iron Man 2
I haven't seen either Hulk movies in ages, but from memories that would be what I would rate the "Wave" pictures.
Whedon talk, eh? Where's Avaitor... :sly:
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 17, 2014, 07:34:26 PM
Whedon talk, eh? Where's Avaitor... :sly:
Just watched tonight's HIMYM. Well, I never thought we'd see Zoey or the Blitz again.
But it's not fair to compare Whedon with Cameron anyway, when Whedon's film career is nowhere near as big as Cameron's. Not to mention how the 2 Terminators and Aliens are among the best action movies ever. I still don't have much use for Gone With the Wind on a boat or Dances with Smurfs, though. At the same time though, I can't say I'm in love with Cabin in the Woods, either (even though Joss only wrote that)
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 17, 2014, 07:31:04 PM
If I were to rank the Marvel movies based on their waves of releases, I'd probably rate them as such:
Top
Captain America
The Avengers
High
Iron Man
Iron Man 3
Middle
Thor
Thor: The Dark World
Low
The Incredible Hulk
The Hulk
Bottom
Iron Man 2
I haven't seen either Hulk movies in ages, but from memories that would be what I would rate the "Wave" pictures.
Wave?
Advertising lingo. Basically Avengers-related stuff.
I don't think the original Hulk is part of the MCU canon (at least not taking place in the same Universe as The Avengers line of films). As for the Incredible Hulk, I'd probably put that in middle-tier with both Thor films. The film wasn't great by any stretch, but it had fun action and was entertaining on the same level as the Thor films for me. Other than that, I agree with the rest of your list completely. I'm really hoping that Captian America: The Winter Soldier will be something to add to the top tier MCU movies.
If we're counting The Hulk, that's very bottom tier. And I'd put Thor 2 in top tier, personally.
I barely remember either Hulk movie, honestly.
I didn't know you liked Thor 2 so much, Avaitor. What did you enjoy so much about it compared to the original?
Great Tier
- Iron Man 3
- Iron Man
- The Avengers
Good Tier
- Captain America
- Thor
- The Incredible Hulk
Adequate Tier
- Iron Man 2
(If It Counts) Bad Tier
- Hulk
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 17, 2014, 08:20:44 PM
I didn't know you liked Thor 2 so much, Avaitor. What did you enjoy so much about it compared to the original?
Yeah, I really did. My only real problem with the movie is that Malekith's stuff got mostly cut out, and he didn't make for as promising of a villain as I was hoping. I haven't got the release yet so I can't see how the deleted scenes work out.
But I really got into Thor and Loki's storyline. It always interested me in the comics when they had to work together, even (especially?) if Loki has ulterior motives (and he usually does), which was also useful here since Hemsworth and Hiddleston have really grown in their roles since the first. I also appreciated that they cut the time away from earth, and focused on the Asgardian story more, which is what I was hoping would happen with the sequel since I saw the first. On top of that, it was probably the most fun I had in theaters since I saw Avengers.
I just learned this...
Quote"Evans recently made news when he said he plans a short break from acting after his Marvel run ends, but now, he tells Variety, he wants to retire from being in front of the camera," the article states. "'If I'm acting at all, it's going to be under Marvel contract, or I'm going to be directing,' he says. 'I can't see myself pursuing acting strictly outside of what I'm contractually obligated to do.'"
http://www.gamenguide.com/articles/10093/20140326/chris-evans-to-retire-after-captain-america-deal-is-up.htm
As long as he keeps being such a great Cap, I have no issues with his decision.
To me, it sounds like we will be losing him as Cap soon. :'(
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 26, 2014, 05:19:40 PM
To me, it sounds like we will be losing him as Cap soon. :'(
There's still two more Avenger movies and one more Cap movie to go. That's still a lot to look forward to! :)
The early reviews for Captain America: The Winter Soldier are very positive. While that could change as more reviews come out, many of the critics who have reviewed it so far note it as being one of the more thoughtful entries in the Avengers movie canon, forgoing lot's of spectacle and special effects for better story and characterization. Sounds like my kind of sequel. ;D
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 30, 2014, 12:59:09 AM
The early reviews for Captain America: The Winter Soldier are very positive. While that could change as more reviews come out, many of the critics who have reviewed it so far note it as being one of the more thoughtful entries in the Avengers movie canon, forgoing lot's of spectacle and special effects for better story and characterization. Sounds like my kind of sequel. ;D
:swoon: Now that's what I like to see! I can't wait to watch it.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on March 30, 2014, 12:59:09 AM
The early reviews for Captain America: The Winter Soldier are very positive. While that could change as more reviews come out, many of the critics who have reviewed it so far note it as being one of the more thoughtful entries in the Avengers movie canon, forgoing lot's of spectacle and special effects for better story and characterization. Sounds like my kind of sequel. ;D
Exactly what I was hoping for! Good to hear.
I have to admit, I was afraid for it being the next Iron Man 2, since they seem to be packing SO much in, but I'm glad that my fears are proving to be negative.
Update:
Top Tier:
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. Captain America: The Winter Soldier (basically tied with TFA, but I need to re-watch it at least once before I can rank it first)
3. The Avengers
4. Iron Man
Upper-Middle Tier (basically a tie, but I had to rank them, so this is what I came up with):
5. Thor
6. Iron Man 3
7. Thor: The Dark World
Middle Tier:
8. The Incredible Hulk
Shit Tier:
9. Iron Man 2
10. Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.
(Yes, I know that AOS is not a movie, but it's still part of the film canon, so I decided to rank it based on what's out so far. Since it's a show, there's always the chance that it could improve, but as of right now, I sincerely doubt it).
Overall, Marvel Studios has done quite well for themselves. Out of 9 feature-length films, only 1 of them is bad, which is actually a pretty amazing thing considering how much could go wrong with these movies. The Incredible Hulk is actually a pretty decent flick, IMO, but it does feel a bit lacking in comparison to the rest of the MCU. Everything else are all good to great films.
I wouldn't call Iron Man 2 shit per say, but I can't argue that it's easily the weakest of the films.
But of course, it seems like Marvel learned their lesson there, since they didn't fast track a quickie cash grab and pad it with unnecessary build-up to a later film just so "it all makes sense." Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 have issues, but they both feel more genuine than IM2 did, and it seems like they're rightfully mot rushing things for the next Thor and Cap movies, so I hope that it's a while until we get a film on that level.
And Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.? Unsalvageable for a good reason, and that rhymes with meff cobe.
I'm sure this is a very unpopular opinion....but I don't really care for the first Thor. I found it to be a rather straight-forward, and rather predictable super hero movie, and I didn't really find interest in any of the characters besides Loki (though Chris Hemsworth's performance as Thor is awesome, even if the character himself didn't do much for me in that movie). The one-day romance between Thor and Jane also kind of irritated me. I could guess what was going to happen throughout the entire movie, and I didn't find myself attached or invested in what was going on, so I found it a rather tedious viewing experience. Like, I don't hate it or anything, but somehow I just really didn't get much out of it.
I haven't seen Dark World yet, but I will watch it sometime since I do want to watch all the MCU movies before Avengers 2 comes out to appreciate that better. Still need to see the Iron Man trilogy...(though I'm guessing I should just skip 2)....
I agree that the romance was tacked on and badly done, but I enjoyed the rest of the movie. The conflict between Thor and Loki was done really well, IMO. On the one hand, I love Loki's back-story, and I can understand how he felt betrayed when he learned of his origin, being that he always felt (at least from his own perspective) that Odin preferred Thor to him, despite Loki clearly being the smarter of the two and the one best suited to succeed Odin as the King of Asgard (once again, in his mind). The problem is that for all of Loki's cunning, he was still to brazen and arrogant to really be a responsible leader. The interesting thing is that Thor basically had the exact same problem. It's just that through his journey, he learns to overcome his hubris, and instead learns to adopt humility. Loki on the other hand regresses, clearly deluding himself into a false superiority complex, and ends up going down a path that will only cause him to further suffer in the long run.
I also love the brief but very essential exchanges between the two brothers in the film. In the beginning, aside from Loki's mischief, the two of them do seem to get along to a degree. Granted that, it is more of an act coming from Loki, but it's still nice to see him on friendlier terms with his brother. When Thor is banished later on in the movie and Loki comes to visit him and lies about their parents to Thor, you can see that Thor still has complete trust in his brother, and at that point he has developed enough to accept his fate. At the end of the movie, even when Loki's plot has been revealed and Thor confronts and defeats him, he still shows compassion for his brother, and pleads with him to give up in his ploy. At this point he has come a long way since the beginning, and you can tell at this point that he now has a greater deal of respect for the title of King. He realizes that he cannot allow Loki to annihilate the Frost Giants based on the actions of a limited amount of their race. Furthermore, he has now gained a greater understanding of the responsibilities of a King, and what he formerly thought of as an entitlement, he now views as a complete commitment that he is not yet ready for.
That, to me, is the heart of the movie. As for the romance plot, I don't like it, but Jane Foster does at least serve as a catalyst for Thor's character development, and I felt that his character development, although predictable, is handled well. In that regard, a ton of the movies in the MCU are predictable, but what matters is the execution. We all knew where Avengers was going with the plot, but it was a great movie because it was a downright fun movie. If you try to view that or Thor in the same regards that you would try to view something as The Dark Knight or a more plot-heavy comic book film, then you're not going to get what you want, because that's not what any of these movies are about. They are, above all else, supposed to be fun (Captain America: The Winter Solider maybe being the one exception, which is a shit-ton of fun, but is also probably the most plot-driven MCU film to date).
Captain America: The First Avenger was the best in this regard, IMO, because the movie took advantage of its period time and was modeled like an old-fashioned adventure movie in many ways. Looking at it in that regard rather than a typical superhero movie, it's, IMO, a lot more entertaining than most of the other superhero movies that I've seen. That isn't to say that it didn't have genuinely good character moments, as it had that in spades. It just wasn't so hell-bent on trying to be super original or epic. Instead it was focused on presenting the back story of an American icon in a way that captured the feeling of his origin in the comics, and they did a splendid job of that. For instance, Captain America was originally created as WWII propaganda, and the movie cleverly mimics that with how Cap is first utilized in the film. Later on he comes into his own as a character, just like in the comics, and in the final encounter of the film we get to see him reach the status of the legend that he's known as.
Of course, I also went into these films after seeing season 1 of Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes, so having that extra back-story and exposure to the characters really helped me appreciate them and their specific themes more than if I had went into them blind.
That reminds me, I don't care for Thor's and Jane's relationship in the Thor movies. The short lived Thor First Avengers comics did an infinitely better job at making me give a damn.
Jane isn't the best written character in the movies, which is probably why her relationship with Thor comes off as kind of flat.
Natalie Portman tries her best, but the writers seem to have more fun writing for just about everyone else.
Guardians of the Galaxy poster.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fx.annihil.us%2Fu%2Fprod%2Fmarvel%2Fi%2Fmg%2F6%2Fb0%2F5375c397eef00.jpg&hash=34e27a1f31a0e19735a6f4e453aa4a2666abb487)
:sly:
Lmao, Vin Diesel is Groot? What horrible casting.
Considering that Groot only has one possible line ("I am Groot") I don't see how anyone could possibly fuck that up. If Vin Diesel could play The Iron Giant, he can do Groot. What baffles me instead is the casting of Dave Bautista in this movie. With the exception of Roddy Piper in They Live, I don't think I've ever seen a case where a professional wrestler being cast to act in a movie has ever turned out well.
Groot talked more than that in the comic I read. Anyway, yeah I was thinking it wasn't that bad after the post. It's just the coupling with Bautista and Zoe playing an alien post-Avatar memes just made me think it was immediately ridiculous though. I actually do like Diesel's voice actor (thanks for the Riddick games)
Honestly, this is the first MCU movie I've been legitimately excited for pre-release. :sweat:
Weirdo. :D I guess I should be excited myself since I did like the newer GotG comic I read that had everyone on this team, minus Gamora.
It looks like Indiana Jones meets Star Wars, so it's definitely something to be excited for.
I just noticed that it looks like he has two Plasma Rifles. :D
Another GotG trailer! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urhMLk4VOLA)
Well, it looks like I'm not the only one who liked DOFP: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=688057024594095&id=127127037353766&refid=17
It's doing better on RT than Winter Soldier is, so Im not surprised.
I don't really like to use RT as a measuring stick for anything, especially not the quality of a film, but it is hard to ignore how positive most of the ratings for this movie are.
It also brings up the interesting comparison of how this movie stacks up to Captain America 2, and honestly, it could go either way. Since I'm more of a fan of Cap as a character, my bias leads me to slightly prefer The Winter Soldier over this film, but if someone were to say otherwise, I wouldn't argue with them because honestly this film is on the same level of quality, and I don't say that lightly at all. Both of these movies are top-tier superhero films, IMO.
Man, even a Marvel movie NOT made by Marvel Studios is this great. I feel really bad for DC right now.
I saw it on Saturday.
I gotta say, it probably had the best ending I've ever seen in a superhero movie. Not to mention a specific character turn that made the whole story work (who had absolutely no knowledge of the future) and how just about every X-Man was in this movie (sans Nightcrawler and Gambit) which really ratcheted up the stakes and made the ending even better.
Also, I'm glad they got Bishop in the movie and am surprised that Blink was used, but as an Exiles fan was quite excited, for the future segments. The Exiles fan in me was hoping for Morph or Mimic to show up, but I guess that would have been a bit too greedy.
So what can I say? Bryan Singer shows once again why he is the perfect director for the X-Men. If X1 and X2 didn't show it, this proves it. Everything from the action sequences to the character moments to the general themes were so well done. About the only thing missing was that... no, actually that'll probably happen in the next movie. This works both as an excellent follow-up to First Class and a sequel to X3 while bettering the first while re-writing all the horrible mistakes of the latter.
Spoiler
When Jean appeared I was happy, but seeing Scott made me ecstatic. Now give him a chance to shine, Singer!
About the only questions I have left concern the post-credits scene.
Spoiler
Who will the horsemen be? There are so many choices they could use. Angel? Wolverine? Holocaust? Gambit? Mr. Sinister? All were horsemen in different versions of the comics
As for whether it beats Winter Soldier, it doesn't. They might both be superhero movies but that's where the similarity ends. Different ideas, themes, and plots. Personally, I'm just happy that within a few months. we got not only one but TWO excellent superhero movies that can claim to be among the best. I was getting burned out on the genre a bit, but these last two films certainly showed me how much juice they still have.
Yeah, it's really hard to compare this to Winter Soldier since both films are so different, but as superhero films, I honestly feel that they are practically equal in quality, which is saying a lot since I already LOVED Winter Soldier as it was. The fact that we got another Marvel superhero film on that level of quality just over a month later is amazing.
Speaking of "Amazing," TASM2 just got trounced by being sandwiched in between the releases of these 2 gems, didn't it? I even enjoyed that film, despite its faults, but it really does look all the weaker when you see how much better the efforts of Marvel Studios and FOX's outings were. Of course, even with TASM2, this has easily been a far better year for Marvel superhero flicks than last year was with the decent but not great IM3 and Thor 2, and the incredibly disappointing AOS spin-off TV series. If Guardians of the Galaxy turns out to be great (which is entirely possible based on the tone of the trailers), then this could even arguably be Marvel's best year for movies.
One thing I like is Marvel's usage of different genres to keep things fresh. Like Iron Man was Sci-Fi, Thor was Fantasy, and Captain America was old school adventure. Now we have Winter Soldier which is like a Bourne style flick, Guardians of the Galaxy which is comedy/sci-fi and Ant-Man which is supposed to be a heist style movie. They tend to mix it up.
As for AOS, the way they seemingly tried to go back on Winter Soldier's excellent ending only makes me want to have less to do with it.
So this happened. (http://screenrant.com/ant-man-edgar-wright-james-gunn-joss-whedon-reactions/)
Let's try a top 10:
1. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
2. Captain America: The First Avenger
3. Captain America: Winter Soldier
4. X-Men: Days Of Future Past
5. The Dark Knight
6. The Avengers
7. X2: X-Men United
8. X-Men: First Class
9. Iron Man
10. Superman: The Movie
I realize two of them are extremely new, and I have no idea where they will eventually fall, but they are too good to leave off entirely.
For me, it would be:
1. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker
2. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
3. Captain America: The First Avenger
4. The Dark Knight
5. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
6. X-Men: Days of Future Past
7. X2: X-Men United
8. The Avengers
9. Iron Man
10. X-Men: First Class
11. Wonder Woman (2009 animated film)
12. The Dark a Knight Returns Parts I & II
13. X-Men
14. Superman (1978)
15. Batman (1989)
I couldn't stop at just 10, so I extended it to 15.
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 15, 2014, 09:00:13 PM
I don't really see why Captain America is great (just good to me) and I actually like Avengers more. For me it's:
Iron Man
Avengers
Captain America
Thor
The Incredible Hulk (I need to rewatch Hulk hence this ranking)/Thor 2
Iron Man 2
I've yet to see Iron Man 3 and the first Iron Man movie is what I might consider great, idk, it's been awhile with that one too.
I'll just do a live action list for now:
The Dark Knight
Sin City
Batman Begins
300
Iron Man
Blade (need to rewatch, been awhile)
X-Men 1 and First Class (I have to rewatch both to separate them)
Avengers
Captain America
Thor
Amazing Spider-Man
X-Men The Last Stand
The Dark Knight Rises
Spider-Man 2
Spider-Man 1
V For Vendetta
Wolverine: X-Men Origins
The Incredible Hulk/Thor 2
X2
Spider-Man 3
Iron Man 2
Blade 2
Blade 3
Honestly, I need to rewatch every pre-2012 movie on this list for a proper ranking. I haven't seen the Batman films and Superman films since I was a kid so they won't be listed until I've seen them as an adult. I also have never seen Superman Returns, Man Of Steel, Iron Man 3, Winter Soldier or Days Of The Future Past.
I watched Man Of Steel and Iron Man 3 at a birthday party last week. I halfway watched them, especially Man Of Steel, so I don't have too much to say about them.
Favorite animated movies:
1. Batman Mask Of The Phantasm
2. The Return Of The Joker
3. Wonder Woman/Crisis On Two Earths
4. Justice League New Frontier - I wonder if CN censored this. It wasn't a blatant censor job like Doomsday and it was pretty hardcore. I might like it more if there was cut footage that I could see in an uncut version
5. Hulk Vs. Wolverine
6. Hellboy 1 and 2 (need to rewatch, especially since I think I missed some parts from both. I remember them both rocking though)
7. Ultimate Avengers 1 and 2 (I forget which one I liked more. They were both about average though so no rush to rewatch)
8. Green Lantern First Flight (Probably got censored to death on CN. Need to rewatch either way)
9. Superman/Doomsday
10. Hulk Vs Thor
11. Planet Hulk
12. Batman Batwoman
13. Invincible Iron Man
The only movie here that I don't like here is Invincible Iron Man. That movie was fucking shit. Batwoman and Planet Hulk are slightly below average/good. I might be hard on Planet Hulk for not being half as good as its source material though. Also, Doomsday might actually be even more than below average, once I think about it but even after I stopped really liking it, it was pretty entertaining to me. Lastly, while the field is mostly not bad, its also mostly about 7 out of 10 material with only the first two being exceptional, imo.
Early reviews for GOTG are very favorable. Wow! There have been a lot of critical hits this summer, and this may just be the 3rd exceptionally great Marvel film this year (and the 2nd made by Marvel Studios). It's definitely a huge step up from last year. Anyone who thought that Marvel was losing their momentum and becoming lackluster just may have been proven wrong.
This is going to be the first MCU movie I miss opening weekend, since I'll be out of town, and the family I'll be with aren't much for super heroes. I'll probably get to see it later in the week.
But it's great that critics are liking it! I was really hoping that GOTG would catch on, and it seems like it will.
It's been a pretty good year for comic book movies, hasn't it? And they just seem to be getting better and better.
So, what's up next? What are you most eager to see?
For right now, I'm just looking forward to Avengers: Age of Ultron. As for Ant-Man, I was initially excited about it, until it was announced that Edgar Wright was leaving the project. Now I'm not really sure what to think of it,mbut I do hope that it turns out to be good.
Yeah, my excitement for Ant-Man has been consistently decreasing after all of the behind the scenes turmoil has been announced.
I find it funny that people want Marvel to replace Ant-Man with a Black Widow or Black Panther movie or something, since it really seems like they don't know how movies work. If these are even in the works now, there's just no way that they'll be ready in time for next summer, and Marvel has a quota to keep up with. Usually fast tracking a film's production isn't a good thing for it at all. Although, the same is often true for replacing talent so late into a movie's production...
I heard that the script for the movie isn't even finished yet, and filming is scheduled to begin in literally just a few weeks. If Marvel wants to stick with a summer release, then they'll need to drastically rush the film, and it'll probably suck in that case. If they want to re-evaluate it and re-work it into something better, then it'd be smarter to delay the film for a Holiday release next year, as they did for Thor: The Dark World.
It's funny, because they actually pushed Ant-Man further than it was originally planned to come out since Wright's original take was going well and POTC 5 wasn't getting along at all.
Now neither movies are!
sin city is my most anticipated comic book sequel ever.
hearing how successful lucy has been makes me think a black widow (hopefully black widow and hawkeye) movie could be a hit.
Now that I'm more well-versed in live action cape films, I guess my new list of favorite comic book movies would be:
1. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. Cemetery Man
3. Oldboy (original)
4. Kick-Ass
5. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
6. Ichi The Killer
7. The Dark Knight
8. Captain America: The First Avenger
9. Batman Returns
10. Iron Man
I don't know why I posted this. Just had the urge to, I guess. Anyone else got any recent top 10's of their own?
Only counting live-action:
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
3. Guardians of the Galaxy
4. The Dark Knight
5. X-Men: Days of Future Past
6. X2: X-Men United
7. The Avengers
8. Iron Man
9. X-Men: First Class
10. Batman (1989)
Yeah, 3 of my top 5 are from this year alone. Man was this an amazing year for superhero films. Even the flop that was TASM2 (which incidentally I liked well enough, and feel gets a bit more flak than it deserves) can't detract from that.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 28, 2014, 11:09:16 PM
Let's try a top 10:
1. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
2. Captain America: The First Avenger
3. Captain America: Winter Soldier
4. X-Men: Days Of Future Past
5. The Dark Knight
6. The Avengers
7. X2: X-Men United
8. X-Men: First Class
9. Iron Man
10. Superman: The Movie
I realize two of them are extremely new, and I have no idea where they will eventually fall, but they are too good to leave off entirely.
Slide GOTG right under Avengers and you have my current top ten. (Take out MOTP if you only want live action films)
1. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
2. The Incredibles
3. The Dark Knight
4. Spider-Man 2
5. Iron Man 3
6. Iron Man
7. Superman
8. Batman Begins
9./10. The Avengers/Guardians of the Galaxy
Honorable Mention: Superman II
I included animation because I couldn't think of enough to fill a live action list (as it is, the last part of the list had to be a tie). If I just did live action, then Superman II would've be next on the list, but that would still leave #10 open. And though I could put something there, it would seem like a filler choice that I don't like on the same level as the movies above.
ah, some the incredibles love.
The Incredibles is a comic book movie?
Quote from: Foggle on August 15, 2014, 12:29:34 AM
The Incredibles is a comic book movie?
I was just thinking of superhero movies in general. But then again, The Incredibles has some comic book panels, so it counts. ;D
Besides, Pixar beats DC and Marvel at their own game.
I feel like making a pros/cons list of the MCU movies.
Iron Man
Pros- Above all else, inspired casting. Robert Downey Jr was born to play Tony Stark, while Gwyneth Paltrow is near-perfect as Pepper herself. I can just as easily add this as a pro to all of the Iron Man movies. But besides that, this is a damn-fine adaptation of the original story that cuts out a lot of the uncomfortable racism and Cold War parallels that plagued the earlier Iron Man stories at the time. the structure of the film is pretty strong, and considering how convoluted comic book movies were getting at the time, the film's pacing was a fresh change of pace that still holds up on it own now.
Cons- The bad guy's pretty flat, all things considered. But just like the strength of Downey and Paltrow's performances, this is something common with the entire franchise, and I'll get to the later villains when we're there. And it's true that Tony should have been able to realize that there was a traitor in the mix, but that's been spoken about enough.
The Incredible Hulk
Pros- It doesn't take over a hour for Banner to Hulk up in this one, thankfully. The action is pretty strong when it happens, and in between, Norton's a fine Banner.
Cons- I've seen this movie 2 or 3 times, and while I do like it, I honestly continue to struggle to remember much of the film. Add in its box-office results and how often people bring it up in discussion regarding the MCU, it's pretty easy to why it's regarded as the forgotten film in the canon. Although TIH is arguably referenced more in the Avengers than...
Iron Man 2
Pros- Well, some of the fights are strong. Most, really (no offense to the late DJ AM, but that shit was embarrassing). Don Cheadle was a suitable replacement as Rhodey, although he does get more to do in the third. I also really liked the Disney parallels, especially if you consider the main bad guy to be a stand-in for Katzenberg, and look at the film as a critique of the studio post-Lion King pre-Pixar buy-out.
Cons- A lot happens in this movie, but at the same time, it feels like nothing did at all. Black Widow's material is mostly completely replaceable until the very end. Both of the villains are worthless, with Mickey Rourke in particular showing off what is probably the franchise's biggest problem- RDJ's Tony Stark is such a dynamic personality, that anyone else with as strong of a pedigree in character building as him is bound to clash to the point of inferiority. This is why we usually end up seeing Iron Man have to deal with losers in suits and their drones, to balance things out for the film's sake.
Thor
Pros- Loki is easily the strongest villain in the MCU to date. He's rightfully menacing when he needs to be, and has a believable enough back story to give him some depth, but not enough to justify his actions. But what really makes the film what it is comes from his relationship with Thor, and both Hemsworth and Hiddleston pull off their characters wonderfully. It's also worth noting that at its best, the film can be mighty funny.
Cons- When all is said and done, this is really just a fish out of water story that you've probably seen before with similar pacing to the first Iron Man. Likable, but not all that original. Kat Dennings also isn't funny, at all.
Captain America: The First Avenger
Pros- Another film with solid acting choices all across the board. It took very little time for me to recognize the banana butt guy from Not Another Team Movie as Cap, while everyone else, from Hayley Atwell to Tommy Lee Jones, nail their parts. Steve and Peggy also have what might just be the strongest romantic bond of any characters in the MCU, even if it ultimately wasn't meant to be. And yes, the Rocketeer guy did a fantastic job making this feel like a unique period piece.
Cons- The Red Skull's a little disappointing, but to be fair, his best material usually came from when he became a problem of modern day Cap.
The Avengers
Pros- Everyone gets their time to shine. Black Widow instantly made up for her disappointing turn in Iron Man 2 within 3 minutes, while Hawkeye, who does ultimately get the short end of the stick in terms of development, surprisingly tells a lot in terms of physical acting. I also have to say that while I was a fan of Norton, Mark Ruffalo nails Bruce Banner in a way that I don't think anyone else could possibly match in a long period of time. Speaking of Banner, this is by far the best Hulk movie to date, even if it isn't completely his.
And on top of all of this, the film's screenplay is fantastic in terms of dialogue. I think this might be the one of the funniest movies made in the past 5 years, period.
Cons- Y'no, when you see the protagonists fight nameless bad guys, it's safe to say that good will usually prevail. I bring this up since it's obvious that the Avengers were going to nail the Chitauri. It was also apparent that Loki was no match on his own, since his skills lie in manipulation, not combat. So there ultimately isn't all that much at risk, which knocks it down in comparison to say, The Dark Knight, where the stakes are higher, and for the most part, more personal. You could also argue that the film loses its personality when the big fight in Manhattan takes place, and becomes a standard action movie, which is still enjoyable, but to be completely honest, even in my first viewing, I could find some obvious CG errors. It's still a great movie, but not exactly a masterpiece of the form.
Iron Man 3
Pros- Tony's struggling with PTSD after the battle in Manhattan is actually quite interesting and well developed. It gives the film some extra personality and some needed depth. Tony and Rhodey's bonding time is also very welcome, and makes for a lot of the film's most fun scenes. And that action sequence at the end was a sight to behold.
Cons- I've seen this before. Tony's obsessive, neurotic personality pushing Pepper away. The obnoxious businessman that Tony disregarded who eventually becomes his greatest enemy this week. Other people, like S.H.I.E.L.D., Pepper, or Rhodey trying and failing to do Tony's work for him. The ending fight scenes become increasingly more impressive and this was an obvious improvement over the second, but I think it's for the best that the franchise ends here.
Thor: The Dark World
Pros- In a lot of ways, this is a step up from the first. The acting has stepped up, with even Kat Dennings getting some good lines in. There's a lot more time spent in Asgard, which I'm all for, complete with more action and time for Sif and the Warriors Three to have a little more screentime. This was also a welcome continuation of Loki's story following the Avengers, his consequences for his actions in Midgard, and exactly what his adopted family still thinks of him. The ending leads into potential for some serious shit to occur in the third one, if they ever officially announce it.
Cons- This movie really struggled from Marvel wanting a shorter running time. Most of Malekith's stuff was cut up, resulting in him becoming another forgettable villain, which is a shame, since the design is cool and Eccelston seemed like game to pull off the material. And I have to say, I just don't buy Thor and Jane's relationship. Not only because I know what happens to them in the comics (and that's another issue I have, but you can't really blame it on the people involved- a severe lack of Sif. She was supposed to have a bigger role, but Jaimie Alexander seriously hurt herself in production, so they had to skip over a lot of her planned stuff. I guess her Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. episode was an apology of sorts for that), but there just isn't much in Hemsworth and Portman's chemistry or the writing itself to make me really care about them together. I like both characters on their own, but they could have their relationship off early in the film and instead focus on saving the day, without losing anything in the process. But I do still really like the movie, despite the obvious issues. Another draft or more saved material could have made this a true winner.
Captain America: The Winter Soldier
Pros- What can I say, Cap is awesome, Natasha is awesome, Bucky is awesome, and the Falcon is awesome. This could have easily lost the first film's personality by losing its nostalgic roots and becoming another MCU movie, but this is easily the best comic book movie since the Avengers, Marvel or not.
Cons- I don't think the film is as politicially smart as it wants to be. I also don't see why Marvel promoted this as a 70's espionage film, when Robert Redford aside, it doesn't resemble one at all, but that's hardly an issue.
Guardians of the Galaxy
Pros- This might be equal, or perhaps even superior to the Avengers in terms of humor. It also deserves points for taking 5 different heroes and successfully developing them in one movie. Avengers by contrast already had most of its character's traits down at the time the film start. GOTG had to start from scratch, and deserves an A+ for execution.
Cons- I don't think the villains are as weak as most people do, but yeah, Ronan and Nebula could have been more interesting. The film needed to expand on the heroes first, so I don't blame James Gunn and Marvel too much for letting them slide. I'd also say that aside from that excellent post-credits scene, the Collector wasn't all that essential to the film. And I do wish that Gamora could have saved Starlord once or twice to balance out his previous rescue attempts, but that's more like a nitpick than an actual complaint.
That's the problem when you have a personality as strong as RDJ's Tony Stark, finding a villain to go up against him is rough. To be fair, I actually thought Obadiah was the best they could really do considering, but they killed him off too fast. Keeping him around and making him the guy behind the Mandarin would have been an interesting touch, I think.
You're right about one thing for sure, Kat Dennings is just not funny.
That's one thing that ticks me off about the MCU formula. Every villain sans Loki has to die by the end of the film. It's extremely predictable and boring. And, just think about it. In the comics and some of the cartoons, the villains get multiple appearances, and their rivalry with the heroes as arch enemies is allowed to build and develop. That's something that you can't really capture well in a single film. And the case in point is that Loki has had 3 films up to this point, and you really buy the chemistry between him and Thor as both brothers and bitter enemies. On the other hand, every other MCU villain is the least memorable thing about each respective film.
Would it be controversial to say that I don't think the Red Skull is dead? That final scene is too vague to be a definitive death to me.
But I do agree. The villains need to either get put away or get away somehow. Killing them all off is too predictable and is not always appropriate to the story. (Though I could argue that Pierce isn't really the main bad guy in Winter Soldier, but Zola, he still does technically "die" at the end.)
it would be fine if the villains were better. i also think red skull could still be alive.
They've expressed little interest in bringing the Red Skull back, but I did take his ending as ambiguous in the movie. I would like to see him return, since as I said earlier, the Skull worked better as a threat to Cap in present day stories as opposed to his WWII exploits.
Although when you think about it, the MCU hasn't been using too many of the hero's big villains in their movies, which is why they're done for at the end of the flick. Loki is an obvious exception, and I just brought up the Red Skull as well. Whiplash is another one that could have been kept around to make things interesting for the Iron Man franchise, but the end result there was an unfortunate dud. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens with Ultron for AOU.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8mrZ1kGCfo
Also...
"There's just one lesson left, President Ellis. So run away, hide, kiss your children goodbye. Because nothing, not your army, not your red, white and blue attack dog can save you!"
I know he doesn't count, but still.
If we can't get Red Skull back as a villain, I at least want a character named Dell Rusk as a nod to him in the next film.
Actually, as far as villains go, while not that memorable, I found Red Skull to be one of the more fun. MCU villains with how over the top he was in a way that you'd expect a golden age comic book villain to be.
Some people were actually expecting him to show up in Winter Soldier, actually.
I liked him as a villain. Pure Golden Age evil, but he fit perfectly. I wouldn't mind seeing him show up one last time, but I don't know if that's in the cards. Bringing Hydra back without him feels like a piece is missing.
green goblin in spider-man 1 is much better.
Speaking of Hydra, I wonder if they're considering Madame Hydra for Cap 3. She was always a good one, and we could use a strong female villain in the MCU. True, there was Nebula, but I mean one who actually does something. :P
Quote from: gunswordfist on May 30, 2014, 04:53:42 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 15, 2014, 09:00:13 PM
I don't really see why Captain America is great (just good to me) and I actually like Avengers more. For me it's:
Iron Man
Avengers
Captain America
Thor
The Incredible Hulk (I need to rewatch Hulk hence this ranking)/Thor 2
Iron Man 2
I've yet to see Iron Man 3 and the first Iron Man movie is what I might consider great, idk, it's been awhile with that one too.
I'll just do a live action list for now:
The Dark Knight
Sin City
Batman Begins
300
Iron Man
Blade (need to rewatch, been awhile)
X-Men 1 and First Class (I have to rewatch both to separate them)
Avengers
Captain America
Thor
Amazing Spider-Man
X-Men The Last Stand
The Dark Knight Rises
Spider-Man 2
Spider-Man 1
V For Vendetta
Wolverine: X-Men Origins
The Incredible Hulk/Thor 2
X2
Spider-Man 3
Iron Man 2
Blade 2
Blade 3
Honestly, I need to rewatch every pre-2012 movie on this list for a proper ranking. I haven't seen the Batman films and Superman films since I was a kid so they won't be listed until I've seen them as an adult. I also have never seen Superman Returns, Man Of Steel, Iron Man 3, Winter Soldier or Days Of The Future Past.
I forgot some movies:
1. Lone Wolf And Cub
2. The Dark Knight
3. Sin City
4. Batman Begins
5. 300
6. Iron Man
7. Blade (need to rewatch, been awhile)
8. The Crow (REALLY need to rewatch this.)
9. X-Men 1 and First Class (I have to rewatch both to separate them)
10. Avengers
11. Captain America
12. Thor
13. Lady Snowblood
14. Punisher Warzone
15. Amazing Spider-Man
16. X-Men The Last Stand
17. The Dark Knight Rises
18. Spider-Man 2
19. Spider-Man 1
20. V For Vendetta
21. Wolverine: X-Men Origins
22. The Incredible Hulk/Thor 2
23. The Losers
24. X2
25. Punisher (Theatrical Release)
26. Spider-Man 3
27. Iron Man 2
28. Blade 2
29. Blade 3
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/robert-downey-jr-to-join-captain-america-3-exclusive-1201312229/
And....I'm scared.
As you all know, Captain America is my favorite superhero movie series so far. He's my favorite Avenger, and I just find the character really appealing compared to many other heroes, what with his more straightforward and optimistic attitude. When I first heard that Robert Downy Jr. would have a significant role to play in Captain America 3, I was already a bit nervous because I do believe that, aside from brief cameos, these "solo" MCU films should really just be kept SOLO. I feel that if you give someone like RDJ a big role in a CA movie, he'll just end up stealing screen time from Chris Evans. That said, I could still see the great possibilities from this mashup if I didn't strictly consider it to just be a CS movie. But then I found out that it's going to adapt the Civil War storyline from the comics....and then my excitement dropped even more, and my skepticism rose.
I have never read the Civil War storyline, and have barely read the comics, at that. But I'm well aware of it's very mixed (at best) reputation among fans, and based on what I've heard about it, I probably wouldn't enjoy that kind of story the way that it was written. Maybe the movies can adapt it better, but I'm really not keen on seeing the film's take on one of the most controversial (for the wrong reasons) story lines in the Marvel Universe. I still want to hold out hope that this movie will be great since we still have 2 years until it comes out, and as far as I know, nothing's been finalized yet. That said, I'm just praying that this doesn't turn into an absolute mess like Iron Man 2 did, with so much complication potentially going into its plot.
I'm nervous now. This sounds
nothing like the other two movies.
Anything involving Civil War makes be doubly nervous.
Putting in Tony Stark to take the spotlight away from Cap makes me triply nervous.
I was hoping Captain America 3 would be focusing on taking out the newly reformed Hydra while dealing with the loose ends from the first two movies and wrapping all three up. It feels like they're trying to Iron Man 2-it up by making it a platform for the movie universe instead.
I'm now going to have to wait for a trailer.
QuoteOriginally, Marvel wanted to hire Downey for a small role, which would have required just three weeks of work. But Downey wanted Stark to have a more substantial role in the film's plot, which would give him more screen time and naturally a bigger payday. This angered Marvel Entertainment chief Ike Perlmutter, who ordered the screenwriters to write Iron Man out of the script entirely, sources said.
NO, STOP IT! RDJ should be having no say on the CA movies!
Ugh. This is not looking good. At all.
I just skimmed the last two posts due to me not seeing Cap 2 yet and I want nothing from it spoiled so all I say is Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 and I believe a bit of Cable and Deadpool are the only Civil Wr related anythings that are good.
Yeah, I'm really not happy about this. Someone else said it perfectly, but it feels more like they are trying to make Avengers 2.5 with this movie rather than Captain America 3, and even then, if they are adapting Civil War, there's very little chance of it even being a good pseudo-Avengers movie. This just has "bad idea" written all over it, IMO.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 14, 2014, 11:48:48 PM
Yeah, I'm really not happy about this. Someone else said it perfectly, but it feels more like they are trying to make Avengers 2.5 with this movie rather than Captain America 3, and even then, if they are adapting Civil War, there's very little chance of it even being a good pseudo-Avengers movie. This just has "bad idea" written all over it, IMO.
I don't get why they're doing this, if they go through with it. Winter Soldier was one of their most successful films, why mess with what people want?
I mean, I liked Tony and Steve's banter in The Avengers as much as the next guy, but I don't want it to take away from Steve's films. He has his own arc going on outside of The Avengers, and this Civil War garbage is not something anyone wants and has nothing to do with him as a character.
Of course, then we won't have masterful scenes like a pundit saying Captain America can have no say on important issues because he doesn't post on the newest useless social networking site. Because that's what I want when I watch superhero movies-- undercooked rhetoric. This really needs to not happen.
Hey, I'm all for a movie where two heroes with a great chemistry between each other partner up buddy cop style or go at it against each other. Those can be entertaining and would arguably be even more entertaining team-ups than a full on ensemble cast like in The Avengers. And Tony Stark and Steve Rogers have EXCELLENT chemistry with each other, so I'm sure a movie with them together COULD work....just don't base it off of a storyline that's notoriously despised by many fans, and also don't call it Captain America 3 (or whatever subtitle they want to add), either. If they want to make this pairing movie first and then do the next true solo Cap movie later, then fine, I'll wait. But when I see a movie with Captain America and ONLY Captain America in the title, I expect it to be a follow-up to The Winter Soldier and I want to see Steve's quest to reunite with Bucky. That story doesn't need nor benefit from having Iron Man in it. Cap already has Falcon.
It just bothers me that they're considering giving RDJ more screen time in a movie that he has no place in. Look, I have no problem with cameos, the one in Thor 2 was clever and fit well, but these solo movies are supposed to be for the heroes themselves. The Avengers movies are the ones for team ups.
Tony Stark has nothing to do with Hydra, the Winter Soldier, the man out of time theme, the more somber atmosphere, or the style of action CA movies use. Sure, you could argue his father does, as the twist when we learn how he really died was interesting, but that's more incidental than anything. The character himself has no place in the final chapter of a trilogy he has yet to be a part of.
Then you throw in Civil War, which has nothing to do with Captain America's history or character development, and you have a huge mess.
I really hope this doesn't go through.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on October 15, 2014, 12:19:54 AM
It just bothers me that they're considering giving RDJ more screen time in a movie that he has no place in. Look, I have no problem with cameos, the one in Thor 2 was clever and fit well, but these solo movies are supposed to be for the heroes themselves. The Avengers movies are the ones for team ups.
Agreed, though what I meant was that I did see the value in a "pair-up" movie over a "team-up" movie, BUT I don't want that to be in a Captain America movie.
QuoteI really hope this doesn't go through.
The movie is still a LONG way off from its actual filming stages, so these still a chance that this situation can be reversed, but based on what I've heard, Marvel now seems content with the current situation, which I'm not pleased to hear.
A Civil War movie (or worse, movie series) would effectively kill the entire MCU for me, and probably a lot of other people as well.
Quote from: Foggle on October 15, 2014, 12:29:51 AM
A Civil War movie (or worse, movie series) would effectively kill the entire MCU for me, and probably a lot of other people as well.
They're planning a remake/revamp/who cares of Civil War in miniseries form apparently to lead up to this.
I'm not sure how considering there currently isn't
ANY ROOM for this to happen what with Thor dealing with Loki, Cap dealing with Hydra, The Avengers dealing with Ultron and then Thanos, and the side stuff like Ant-Man and Doctor Strange which would obviously not deal with this either. Add to the fact that
nobody wants to hear from Civil War ever again and it's even sillier. Why don't you just make the next X-Men movie based on House of M or Spider-Man based on The Clone Saga while you're at it? It makes about as much sense.
Doing this at all is a bad idea, cramming it into a Captain America movie is even worse.
WB reveals its DC movie slate for the rest of the decade. (http://www.toonzone.net/2014/10/warner-bros-unveils-superhero-lineup-remainder-decade)
Not a whole lot of Batman. I'm surprised.
Who wants to bet they'll change it up once these movies fail? :>
Yeah, I'm not expecting this to pan out. After Man of Steel, I have little to no faith that Zack Snyder can direct a great superhero film, and the problem is that in order for DC's movie lineup plans to go through! it literally completely hinges on the success of the Batman v Superman movie. If that movie isn't a mega hit, then they are pretty much screwed in the cinematic department.
Also, I find it funny that we are probably going to see a live-action version of the Justice League in the TV shows before the movies even come out.
Also, I just realized something:
The plot for Captain America 3, from the sounds of it, is basically Captain America v Iron Man, and that year it's directly competing with Batman v Superman....
....Goddamn-it, Marvel! Really!? :srs:
Our new Flash, everybody. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F02v-_L8VI0)
I'll just stick with this one, thanks:
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eonline.com%2Feol_images%2FEntire_Site%2F20131020%2Frs_560x415-131120090327-560.Grant-Gustin-Stephen-Amell.jl.112013.jpg&hash=f038dfcbb3d8aac522731fb4d5341a24681942c5)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fwww.comicbooktherapy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F03%2Fflash4.jpg%3Fresize%3D700%252C514&hash=220ff96ae08a49ed6f7d21440dcb260a4cc4fe41)
QuoteBatman v Superman: Dawn of Justice [Ben Affleck as Batman, Henry Cavill as Superman] (2016)
No faith in this to be anything above middling.
QuoteSuicide Squad (2016)
Uh, okay? I thought this was going to be a show? Should I just go watch The Expendables instead?
QuoteWonder Woman [Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman] (2017)
Bet it'll be garbage.
QuoteJustice League Part One [Affleck, Cavill, and Amy Adams] (2017)
I'll wait for the TV shows to handle this.
QuoteThe Flash [Ezra Miller as The Flash] (2018)
I'm good with the one pictured above, thanks. There's nothing in film form the show couldn't already do.
QuoteAquaman [Jason Momoa as Aquaman] (2018)
This is going to be embarrassing. I just know it.
QuoteShazam (2019)
This could make a good movie. But considering how they've handled Superman so far, I severely doubt it.
QuoteJustice League Part Two (2019)
Impress me with part one. Then we'll talk.
QuoteCyborg [Ray Fisher as Cyborg] (2020)
A non-sequitur in film form.
QuoteGreen Lantern (2020)
They're already remaking this. *sigh*
Nothing interesting looking to me. How about a Blue Beetle film? Death & Return of Superman trilogy? Something other than a pile of origin stories I already know and team up movies that probably won't beat the team ups we got animated over a decade ago?
Pick up the slack, DC.
You're kidding? Of course they are going to start with origin stories and do a few reboots. The whole point is starting over. In fact, it's not even really starting over since DC has never really had a movie universe. Whether it'll be good or not is another story. Plus they need to show they can make good movies for the A listers before they get to Blue Beetle or whoever.
Goddammit DC, just make a Deathstroke movie with Ron Pearlman as Slade already.
Quote from: gunswordfist on October 16, 2014, 06:28:04 PMYou're kidding? Of course they are going to start with origin stories and do a few reboots. The whole point is starting over. In fact, it's not even really starting over since DC has never really had a movie universe. Whether it'll be good or not is another story. Plus they need to show they can make good movies for the A listers before they get to Blue Beetle or whoever.
They can make the origin stories if they want to. I'm just not wasting money on tickets in order to see the same story adapted to film yet again with minor variations.
Of course, that doesn't apply to less adapted works. But I still have no confidence in DC.
Quote from: Rynnec on October 16, 2014, 07:31:26 PMGoddammit DC, just make a Deathstroke movie with Ron Pearlman as Slade already.
I'm good with what they're doing on Arrow in regards to Deathstroke.
He looks awful in that show.
But the performance is great, and:
Good acting >>>> How close he looks to the comic book version
There's this thing called a joke...
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.comicvine.com%2Fuploads%2Foriginal%2F0%2F6063%2F4161926-planet_hulk_2015.jpg&hash=91cfbcb78e70acc7186a5d1ce2e912b9478d5ec8)
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on October 16, 2014, 07:33:58 PM
Quote from: Rynnec on October 16, 2014, 07:31:26 PMGoddammit DC, just make a Deathstroke movie with Ron Pearlman as Slade already.
I'm good with what they're doing on Arrow in regards to Deathstroke.
Does Arrow's Deathstroke lend himself well to a spin-off show though?
In general, a good show/movie starring a comicbook anti-hero/villain would be something I'd love to see.
Deathstroke Full Cycle was a great anti-hero story.
Quote from: Rynnec on October 16, 2014, 11:27:41 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on October 16, 2014, 07:33:58 PM
Quote from: Rynnec on October 16, 2014, 07:31:26 PMGoddammit DC, just make a Deathstroke movie with Ron Pearlman as Slade already.
I'm good with what they're doing on Arrow in regards to Deathstroke.
Does Arrow's Deathstroke lend himself well to a spin-off show though?
In general, a good show/movie starring a comicbook anti-hero/villain would be something I'd love to see.
I really recommend watching Arrow. I don't really want to spoil what they do with him.
But I think you'd be pleased. 8-)
I have actually heard rumors that they may feature Deathstroke on that Suicide Squad spinoff show that they are planning, but if that's the case then I'm not sure if they'd keep him as a villain or give him a redemption arc to convert him to the status of being an anti-hero instead. From what I've heard about his comic book counterpart, he frequently shifts between the status of both roles.
I think we should at least give DC credit for finally stepping up and announcing Wonder Woman and Cyborg movies. Marvel keeps on hinting at potentially making ones for Black Widow, Captain Marvel, and Black Panther, but never deliver on them.
I mean, chances are that they'll end up as the next Catwoman or Steel, but at least it's progress that Marvel hasn't done yet.
Progress would be them actually being good movies, to be honest. If they're awful (and I have a great reason to believe they will be), then it really doesn't matter.
Thank you, Avaitor. The only "huh?!!" there is Suicide Squad. Cyborg was currently Justice League the last time I checked (as in the recent New 52). Meanwhile, key members of the Avengers haven't shown up at all despite the Marvel Movie Universe being around for like 10 years. The next Avengers is supposed to have Ultron in it and Antman is nowhere to be seen.
That reminds me, I completely retract my statement on a Black Widow and/or Hawkeye not selling well. Scarlet Johanssen's recent action (action/scifi?) movie (I forget the name. The one with Morgan Freeman talking abnout her powers) was #1 in the world when it was out. Marvel movies get major sells these days. If they do one movie for both Black Widow and Hawkeye, then it would be a guaranteed hit.
I have to agree with Desensitized on this one. While it's a nice notion to have a female star in a superhero movie for once, it's not really progress unless it's actually a good movie. Remember Elektra or Catwoman? No? Well that's because those were shit, and despite starring female leads, they still didn't do anything to progress the genre of comic book movies. The quality of the actual film says more than just simply putting it out there.
Quote from: gunswordfist on October 17, 2014, 12:52:37 AM
Thank you, Avaitor. The only "huh?!!" there is Suicide Squad. Cyborg was currently Justice League the last time I checked (as in the recent New 52). Meanwhile, key members of the Avengers haven't shown up at all despite the Marvel Movie Universe being around for like 10 years.
Actually it's only been 6 years, and Marvel has plenty of solo superhero films introducing new characters planned for the remaining 4 years.
Quote from: gunswordfist on October 17, 2014, 12:52:37 AM
The next Avengers is supposed to have Ultron in it and Antman is nowhere to be seen.
Ant-Man's movie is still happening. Edgar Wright's gone, but it should still come out next year.
And I know that some people are skeptical about Black Widow and Hawkeye holding movies on their own, but I've read enough great solo stories from the both of them to know that they can, and people like both characters enough to support them. It's all up to Marvel to just get them down.
Also, I do think it's a little premature to say that all of these movies will suck, even if I am skeptical myself. DC's most recent attempts at making their movies haven't been great, but it seems like they have enough of an idea of what the want to do that there is potential for these movies to be good. Although I really do hope that they retire the "no fun outside of Shazam!" mentality.
They did. It's "no fun even in Shazam".
Huh, I thought that I read that Shazam would be the exception. They can't actually expect that to work seriously, can they?
Then again, isn't that the reason why Wright left Ant-Man?
So Carrie Kelly might be in the movie. (http://www.thewrap.com/batman-v-superman-extra-risks-5-million-fine-over-revealing-movie-spoilers/) Odd choice, but a refreshing one.
I thought that said, "I started a cult." at first.
The Age of Ultron teaser is out.
Like, wow. That looks insanely good. The tone seems closer to Cap than I thought it would.
My hype levels are now through the roof. Any doubt that I had about whether this film could live up to the quality of the first film has pretty much been forgotten. This looks like everything that was promised. A darker and more intense film that will really put every Avenger to the test, and change the Marvel Universe in a big way (even bigger than The Winter Soldier). This has what it takes to downright surpass the first movie, and hopefully silence the naysayers who keep prattling on about how The Avengers aren't all that.
Of course, I can't just go by a trailer, as the film could always still suck, but it's hard to see how. It really looks like they know what they are doing with this one, and I have full faith in Joss Whedon fo deliver a kick-ass superhero teak film.
Also, I'm a bit more pumped for this one if only because I love The Ultron Imperative 2-parter from Earth's Mightiest Heroes, and I'm seriously considering reading Mighty Avengers in preparation for this film, since I hear that it apparently draws a lot of elements from that story-line.
I watched it three times now. It really does look great and a step up from the original. It doesn't really spoil anything, but gives off a good sense of the tone and direction of the film.
Question, I don't know if it has been answered yet or not, but has it been said where Ultron comes from since Ant-Man didn't invent him?
I heard he's something Tony made that got out of hand.
Since they didn't introduce Ant-Man yet, his origin has been changed so that he has been created in some way by Tony Stark, hence why we see Thor pick him up by the neck in the trailer, presumably because he's really pissed at him.
I'm not sure how hardcore comic book fans have taken that change, but it was revealed months ago and nobody got really vocal about it, so it seems like people are generally cool with if. Ultron's origin doesn't matter quite as much as the character himself, whether he was created by Stark or Pym.
Though I doubt they'll mention him, I'm interested at how the movie will portray Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch's past. Maybe have Ian McKellen do a little joke cameo without outright mentioning the M-word.
Ive just watched that damn trailer 5 times over, back-to-back, and I swear it just keeps getting more awesome every single time I see it. So far, this is easily and by far my most anticipated film of next year. I can't imagine anything else even coming close just in terms of sheer excitement-factor.
I feel like the hype for DC's movies has gone now that the Age of Ultron trailer has delivered so well.
I can't say that I'm surprised.
It was me! I did it!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillbarr/2014/10/23/avengers-age-of-ultron-leak-hurts-agents-of-s-h-i-e-l-d-and-possibly-future-star-wars-plans/
The truth is I sold my soul to Crowley. I didn't want to have to watch "Special Snowflake" next week. So I made a deal... we swapped spit... sealed the deal. The trailer is now out there, I don't have to watch the stupid show, stupid show doesn't get a ratings boost, and in ten years, I get torn apart by hell hounds.
I think I did right.
I was thinking about how this was just supposed to be a way to boost AoS's ratings since they were going to be airing it exclusively during next week's episode for the first time ever. The funny thing is that I STILL wasn't going to watch AoS, since I knew that I would be able to find that trailer uploaded to YouTube just under an hour after it premiered on TV, so I still didn't have to waste my time on that stupid show.
It does say a lot, though, how a single 2-minute-and-30-second trailer is far more interesting than anything that this entire show has ever had to offer us, and quite frankly would just make it look like even more of an utter joke in comparison.
heh.. That trailer for Age of Ultron must have made DC shit their pants and cry for their mommy. Not that Marvel really needed an ace up their sleeve, but... damn!
Here's hoping that the movie will indeed deliver.
So, who's willing to place bets on another announcement from DC about pushing back their release date for BVS? :sly:
Also, on another note, I just realized that this trailer effectively screwed up my childhood. I will never look at this classic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQC5bQKPj6o) the same way again. :whuh:
I heard they're in talks for Iron Man 4 now.
Please let this be true so RDJ will pull out of Cap 3.
Even if it is true, it probably won't come out until at least 2017, so I doubt that it'll effect their plans for CA3, especially since, if what I understand is correct, they've already signed him on for that movie, so his role is probably decided.
You know, I wouldn't have a problem with him being in CA3 if this was going to be just the Cap's story, and Stark maybe had the antagonist role. But I know that the studio executives will probably try to exploit his status in the film so that they can attract more RDJ fans being that he's the more popular actor.
I wouldn't have a problem with a movie of Captain America teaming up with Iron Man or Captain America vs. Iron Man, provided it was still mainly Cap's story. A Civil War movie, though... no. Please. Never.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 23, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
I was thinking about how this was just supposed to be a way to boost AoS's ratings since they were going to be airing it exclusively during next week's episode for the first time ever. The funny thing is that I STILL wasn't going to watch AoS, since I knew that I would be able to find that trailer uploaded to YouTube just under an hour after it premiered on TV, so I still didn't have to waste my time on that stupid show.
It does say a lot, though, how a single 2-minute-and-30-second trailer is far more interesting than anything that this entire show has ever had to offer us, and quite frankly would just make it look like even more of an utter joke in comparison.
I love you.
Greg and I talk about this each week, but the ratings for AOS keep on falling ever so slightly. I almost guarantee that if it goes below a 1.5 (which I believe is where the 18-49 ratings hit this week), the show is totally done for.
But yeah, I do not want a Civil War movie. For whatever reason, the only person who wants one are Stony shippers.
It's weird, though. I haven't seen anyone outside of this board seem displeased with the announcement of what story they are planning to adapt, and I've even heard some people call Civil War an "awesome story-line" from the comics, so either I only just happened to be hanging out with and listening to the opinions of just the people who dislike it (including some of the Linkara videos that I've seen, where he indicates that he doesn't care for this story-line), or it's flat-out scary just what some people are willing to accept as good story-telling. Based on everything that I've heard about Civil War, though, it doesn't seem like something that I would like.
Anyways, if they do go through with Civil War, then the best that I can hope for is that the movie is superior to its source material by a lot, which to be fair has been done before (just look at the first Kick-Ass, for example).
On an unrelated note, upon revisiting the Spider-Man movies, I actually find Spider-Man 3 to be the best one (and that includes the reboot films as well). It's an excellent piss-take on Marvel/Sony and one of the funniest farces ever, while also featuring some legitimately cool moments at times. The "emo" scenes are amazing, especially with that James Brown music. The Bruce Campbell cameo, too... It's Sam Raimi in top form.
I can definitely see why I didn't appreciate it until recently, though, as well as why it seems to be universally hated by Spider-Man fans. People just take themselves and their media too seriously sometimes.
Quote from: Foggle on October 24, 2014, 03:14:39 PMOn an unrelated note, upon revisiting the Spider-Man movies, I actually find Spider-Man 3 to be the best one (and that includes the reboot films as well). It's an excellent piss-take on Marvel/Sony and one of the funniest farces ever, while also featuring some legitimately cool moments at times. The "emo" scenes are amazing, especially with that James Brown music. The Bruce Campbell cameo, too... It's Sam Raimi in top form.
I can definitely see why I didn't appreciate it until recently, though, as well as why it seems to be universally hated by Spider-Man fans. People just take themselves and their media too seriously sometimes.
Finally! Someone gets it! :swoon:
I mean, no, it's not a great Spider-Man adaptation at all, but to be fair, NONE of the Raimi or reboot movies have been good adaptations of the source material. That said, I at least find SM3 to be incredibly entertaining just as a film that quite obviously was made to be intentionally goofy, for the most part, partly as a "fuck you" to the studio for forcing him to put in so many things that he never wanted to include in the film in the first place. The end result is just plain fun, IMO.
As for actual good Spider-Man adaptations in the cinema, we'll have to keep waiting for that perfect movie that we all want, but until then, The Spectacular Spider-Man is more than enough to satiate my appetite, as quite frankly Weisman puts both Raimi and Webb to shame.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 24, 2014, 03:18:14 PM
Finally! Someone gets it! :swoon:
I mean, no, it's not a great Spider-Man adaptation at all, but to be fair, NONE of the Raimi or reboot movies have been good adaptations of the source material. That said, I at least find SM3 to be incredibly entertaining just as a film that quite obviously was made to be intentionally goofy, for the most part, partly as a "fuck you" to the studio for forcing him to put in so many things that he never wanted to include in the film in the first place. The end result is just plain fun, IMO.
As for actual good Spider-Man adaptations in the cinema, we'll have to keep waiting for that perfect movie that we all want, but until then, The Spectacular Spider-Man is more than enough to satiate my appetite, as quite frankly Weisman puts both Raimi and Webb to shame.
I think it's the kind of movie that you can only really appreciate if you like Sam Raimi and his other work, and if you understand that none of the Spider-Man films have ever actually done the character proper justice outside of nifty special effects. I enjoy it a lot more after watching The Spectacular Spider-Man and revisiting some of the comics, while I now enjoy the other films a lot less. Also, being older and having seen most of Raimi's movies helped a lot.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 24, 2014, 03:05:52 PM
It's weird, though. I haven't seen anyone outside of this board seem displeased with the announcement of what story they are planning to adapt, and I've even heard some people call Civil War an "awesome story-line" from the comics, so either I only just happened to be hanging out with and listening to the opinions of just the people who dislike it (including some of the Linkara videos that I've seen, where he indicates that he doesn't care for this story-line), or it's flat-out scary just what some people are willing to accept as good story-telling. Based on everything that I've heard about Civil War, though, it doesn't seem like something that I would like.
Terrifying. I honestly had no idea there were people who actually
like Civil War; it's one of the most reviled Marvel storylines for a reason. Also, fun fact, it was written by the same person who wrote the original Kick-Ass comics. That should tell you everything you need to know about it.
mark millar wrote red son, the 3rd best superman comic.
The rest of Phase 3 was announced today. And yes, Captain America 3 is Civil War. :whuh:
May 6, 2016 – Captain America: Civil War
November 4, 2016 – Doctor Strange
May 5, 2017 – Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 (new date)
July 28, 2017 – Thor: Ragnarok
November 3, 2017 – Black Panther
May 4, 2018 – Avengers: Infinity War – Part I
July 6, 2018 – Captain Marvel
November 2, 2018 – The Inhumans
May 3, 2019 – Avengers: Infinity War – Part II
Source: http://deadline.com/2014/10/new-superhero-movies-marvel-titles-release-dates-captain-america-3-black-panther-captain-marvel-864131/
Guardians 2 being moved up is awesome, and I'm excited for both Black Panther and Captain Marvel as well (hopefully they get Katee Sackhoff!). Undecided on Doctor Strange (please don't make him a white guy, Marvel) and Inhumans, don't really care about Thor, and obviously the Avengers films will always be fun.
Inhumans can be fun if they up the camp.
And unfortunately, the big thing right now seems to be that Marvel is in talks with Benedict Cumberbatch to play Doctor Strange. Like him or not, you have to admit that this is the lamest, safest choice they could have gone with. Personally, I would have liked to see an Asian Strange.
But I'm excited about everything else, despite being skeptical about Civil War. It's about time that we finally get a Black Panther and Captain Marvel movie (assuming that it's Carol, which it probably should be, since no one cares about the male CM). I'm not sure if I'm excited for the last Avengers to be a two-parter, since that's a YA adaptation move, but it makes sense that Marvel wants to keep the money coming for as long as they can.
Edit: Yeah, it's gonna be Carol. Great call, since she really is the definitive Captain Marvel.
I would have liked to see Carlos Mencia as Doctor Strange.
Well, I think SJWs were hoping for Wanda Sykes to play the Doctor, so it could've worked.
Pretty sure the Avengers two parter is also going to include the Guardians and maybe even other non-Avengers Marvel heroes too, so it makes sense for it be multiple films I suppose.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMThe rest of Phase 3 was announced today. And yes, Captain American 3 is Civil War. :whuh
:srs:
Well, at least we got 2 awesome movies out of the character.
QuoteNovember 4, 2016 – Doctor Strange
Admittedly I don't know anything about the character outside of that one Spider-Man annual that I read, but I have faith that Marvel knows how to make a property as outlandish as this one work. I mean, they made Thor work, which you might call a freak thing, but then they made Guardians, a movie with a talking raccoon and tree, into one of the most popular things of the entire year. They definitely deserve the benefit of the doubt on being able to adapt just about anything, by now.
QuoteMay 5, 2017 – Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 (new date)
Easily my most anticipated Marvel film outside of Avengers. Normally that honor would to to Captain America, but then Civil War happened and....yeah.
QuoteJuly 28, 2017 – Thor: Ragnarok
The Thor films have always been solid, IMO, so I'll probably enjoy this.
QuoteNovember 3, 2017 – Black Panther
Yes! It's about time that we finally got this movie! I love the character in Earth's Mightiest Heroes, and he's my second favorite Avenger (right next to Cap) on that show.
QuoteMay 4, 2018 – Avengers: Infinity War – Part I
I love the Infinity Gauntlet comic, and I'm glad that this movie will be split into 2 parts in order to allow more time for good character development, rather than trying to cram so much into just one movie.
QuoteJuly 6, 2018 – Captain Marvel
My only experience with the character is from the show, but this could be a good movie if handled right.
QuoteNovember 2, 2018 – The Inhumans
I know nothing about this comic, so I'm not sure what to expect.
QuoteMay 3, 2019 – Avengers: Infinity War – Part II
I'm wondering if this will indeed continue with the MCU movie releases of happening in real-time, in which case a year would have passed since part 1, which is just kind of weird, or if it'll go against that tradition and pick up right where the first part left off.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMMay 6, 2016 – Captain America: Civil War
The only, and I mean
ONLY, hope for this is if it bears no resemblance to the comic at all. But taking the focus off of Hydra and the Winter Soldier is already a big strike against it. Might as well make Thor 3 about The Hulk while you're at it.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMNovember 4, 2016 – Doctor Strange
This has a good chance to be a lot of fun.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMMay 5, 2017 – Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 (new date)
Not surprising that they moved this up given the massive success of the original, but I'm still excited for this.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMJuly 28, 2017 – Thor: Ragnarok
Oh look, it actually has something to do with the first two films. What a novelty.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMNovember 3, 2017 – Black Panther
I thought Marvel was racist? Why are they doing this? In all seriousness, this should be interesting.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMMay 4, 2018 – Avengers: Infinity War – Part I
Oh wow, they're splitting the third movie into two films? Definitely more interested now.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMJuly 6, 2018 – Captain Marvel
I'm not the most knowledgeable on the character, but glad they're doing this nonetheless.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMNovember 2, 2018 – The Inhumans
Unexpected. Highly welcome.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 01:53:12 PMMay 3, 2019 – Avengers: Infinity War – Part II
Hope this doesn't get bloated, but this still looks like a good idea to me. How else do you make a film bigger than the first film and (potentially) the second.
Spoiler
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fcomicsalliance.com%2Ffiles%2F2014%2F10%2FCA_Supermovies2.jpg&hash=9588c9cd40e298cbc9903959e64909ff4e2d643a)
I can't believe how big superhero movies are these days.
So I guess a third X-Men movie set in the past is a no-go now, huh? Shame. I was hoping the cast would have one more go at it.
Also, I'm sure I'm alone, but I'd actually be interested in a Gambit movie. He was one of the few things I liked about the first Wolverine movie. Though since the movie is no longer canon, I have no idea what they'll do with him.
Thinking about it, the thing I'd most like to see from the Captain Marvel film is heart. While I'm far from an expert on the character, many of the recent books I've read featuring her had this sort of ethos you rarely ever see from cape comics or summer blockbusters; like, genuinely touching moments. A big part of what elevated Guardians of the Galaxy above all other comic book movies for me were the emotional scenes where the characters showed signs of vulnerability and humanity. I hope to see this kind of writing in future MCU productions, as it really makes for a breath of fresh air in contrast to the suffocating darkness and humorous flippancy we've almost solely seen from the genre for decades.
I just don't want to see what happened to her in Avengers #200 to make its way into the movies.
Oh, and word is that Ant-Man will be the end of Phase 2 now, rather than the start of Phase 3. Fair enough.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 10:24:48 PM
Thinking about it, the thing I'd most like to see from the Captain Marvel film is heart. While I'm far from an expert on the character, many of the recent books I've read featuring her had this sort of ethos you rarely ever see from cape comics or summer blockbusters; like, genuinely touching moments. A big part of what elevated Guardians of the Galaxy above all other comic book movies for me were the emotional scenes where the characters showed signs of vulnerability and humanity. I hope to see this kind of writing in future MCU productions, as it really makes for a breath of fresh air in contrast to the suffocating darkness and humorous flippancy we've almost solely seen from the genre for decades.
Out of curiosity, have you seen Days of Future Past? Paired with First Class and the original X-Men movies, it packs a good punch for the characters.
Quote from: Avaitor on October 28, 2014, 10:30:19 PM
I just don't want to see what happened to her in Avengers #200 to make its way into the movies.
What happened there? :o
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on October 28, 2014, 10:30:41 PM
Out of curiosity, have you seen Days of Future Past? Paired with First Class and the original X-Men movies, it packs a good punch for the characters.
I loved Days of Future Past and the first two X-Men movies! I still need to see First Class, though.
i have no clue why everyone is adamant about wanting strange to be non-white. i am excited about black panther. avengers being a 2 parter worries me. edit: whoops, fixed that.
Quote from: Foggle on October 28, 2014, 10:49:41 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on October 28, 2014, 10:30:19 PM
I just don't want to see what happened to her in Avengers #200 to make its way into the movies.
What happened there? :o
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/linkara/at4w/42795-avengers-200
As for lots of heart and genuinely emotional moments, I'd say that the first Captain America has more of it than any other MCU film that I've seen. It was directed by the same guy who did The Rocketeer, an underrated classic, and just like that movie, you could see he put a lot of passion into the work. That's why I just don't get it when people say that Captain America is the weakest Avenger and has the most boring movies. On the contrary, whereas the other MCU movies can be entertaining, there is a bit of a coolness and disconnect with many of the other characters, especially Tony Stark, which is why, while a great character, has never been a personal favorite of mine. With Cap, I always got a sense of genuine hear and emotion. I'd say that as a character, he's both more likable and more interesting than the other Avengers, personally.
In terms of not being dark, I don't really think that such a tone has ever been a problem for Marvel movies so far. They've all been generally pretty lighthearted and in the spirit of fun, with just the right touch of seriousness to them. I've say that as far as the tone goes, they've had that nailed down pretty well for years, which is why I don't mind that the Age of Ultron trailer was really dark, because I know that's just for the sake of building him up as a villain, and that the actual movie won't just be exclusively dark and gloomy and devoid of any fun or humor.
Also, have you seen Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes, Foggle? That show is the epitome of heart and fun and character, while still delving into really interesting stories that have some good dramatic merit to them as well. It's also where I got introduced to Black Panther and Ms. Marvel, among other unique characters (including the Guardians of the Galaxy, even if it was just one episode), and those interpretations of the characters are what got me interested in them in the first place.
Quote from: Avaitor on October 28, 2014, 11:06:20 PMhttp://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/linkara/at4w/42795-avengers-200
Damnit! You beat me to it. I was just about to link him to that review. :D
oh yeah, i like the inhumans thanks to war of kings. i hope that turns out well.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 28, 2014, 11:09:55 PM
As for lots of heart and genuinely emotional moments, I'd say that the first Captain America has more of it than any other MCU film that I've seen. It was directed by the same guy who did The Rocketeer, and underrated classic, and just like that movie, you could see he put a lot of passion into the work. That's why I just don't get it when people say that Captain America is the weakest Avenger and has the most boring movies. On the contrary, whereas the other MCU movies can be entertaining, there is a bit of a coolness and disconnect with many of the other characters, especially Tony Stark, which is why, while a great character, has never been a personal favorite of mine. With Cap, I always got a sense of genuine hear and emotion. I'd say that as a character, he's both more likable and more interesting than the other Avengers, personally.
I was actually going to mention Captain America as well, but GOTG is my favorite (and actually made me cry a little) so I simplified by just sticking to that one. The first half and the ending of Cap 1 have some great emotional resonance, for sure. Winter Soldier also had some good human moments sprinkled throughout, as did the first act of Iron Man.
QuoteIn terms of not being dark, I don't really think that such a tone has ever been a problem for Marvel movies so far. They've all been generally pretty lighthearted and in the spirit of fun, with just the right touch of seriousness to them. I've say that as far as the tone goes, they've had that nailed down pretty well for years, which is why I don't mind that the Age of Ultron trailer was really dark, because I know that's just for the sake of building him up as a villain, and that the actual movie won't just be exclusively dark and gloomy and devoid of any fun or humor.
Yeah, I don't think the MCU has any tonal problems; I was speaking more of what everyone else was/is doing there. But I do want to see more emotional scenes in my movies about buff dudes beating up aliens. .3.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 28, 2014, 11:10:44 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on October 28, 2014, 11:06:20 PMhttp://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/linkara/at4w/42795-avengers-200
Damnit! You beat me to it. I was just about to link him to that review. :D
Watching now...
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 28, 2014, 11:10:44 PM
Also, have you seen Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes, Foggle? That show is the epitome of heart and fun and character, while still delving into really interesting stories that have some good dramatic merit to them as well. It's also where I got introduced to Black Panther and Ms. Marvel, among other unique characters (including the Guardians of the Galaxy, even if it was just one episode), and those interpretations of the characters are what got me interested in them in the first place.
I really need to, especially since I loved Spectacular Spider-Man so much. One of these days...
As far as that goes, while TSSM is the clear best Marvel cartoon, I'd say that AEMH is a close second, with some arcs arguably being on par with the best of TSSM. That is, everything except for the back half of season 2, which saw a replacement of the writers when Jeph Loeb took over. But honestly, while the quality is a definite downgrade, it still never becomes a bad show (outside of that Man of Action episodes), a did say that there are still some surprisingly good quality episodes into the final quarter of the show, so it's still one of my favorites.
New footage for Age of Ultron: http://youtu.be/66f5EKU6j5s
Note: Only the first minute of it is new, the rest is the usual trailer that we've all seen.
I like that this shows how the movie indeed does have a sense of humor to shut those people up who kept complaining about the trailer being too dark in tone.
Also, I'm happy to say that I didn't have to wast my time with Agents or Shit last night to watch this. I saw The Flash instead, and just found this footage uploaded on YouTube this morning.
Still looks like the fun Avengers I remember. What's to hate?
Also, notice how Captain America was the only Avenger who could make the hammer budge, even just a little bit. I don't know if he's ever been able to fully pick up Thor's hammer in the comics, but if any other character among the current cast of the movies were to be worthy of it besides Thor himself, it'd definitely have to be Cap.
i just know he lifted it and beat a version of the hulk in the ultimates.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 29, 2014, 05:31:11 PM
Also, notice how Captain America was the only Avenger who could make the hammer budge, even just a little bit. I don't know if he's ever been able to fully pick up Thor's hammer in the comics, but if any other character among the current cast of the movies were to be worthy of it besides Thor himself, it'd definitely have to be Cap.
Cap is one of the very few characters in the comics that have picked Mjonir up.
Another one, besides Beta Ray Bill of course, is Wonder Woman.
Oh yeah, I heard about that. Wasn't that part of that 90's DC and Marvel crossover comic?
It'd actually be kind of fun to try and list off some fictional characters outside of the Marvel Universe who would potentially be considered worthy of picking up Mjolnir.
Also, now that I think about it, it's unlike Joss Whedon to hint at Cap having the potential to pick up Mjolnir and then do nothing with it beyond that. I mean, it could just be a subtle little nod to the comics, or it could be a tease at a scene later on in the movie where he manages to surprisingly use it against Ultron. It'd be really awesome to see, if the movie goes that route, and I wouldn't put it past Joss Whedon to add in major fan service like that.
I was about to say, I bet it's foreshadowing. At one crucial moment Cap will pick up Mjolnir for some reason or the other (most likely to defend someone) and cause a turnabout of some sort.
Oh, also wanted to say that I recently rewatched both Winter Soldier and Days of Future Past. Still two of my favorites. :)
i've yet to see either. i also need to see the wolverine.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on October 29, 2014, 06:44:08 PM
Oh, also wanted to say that I recently rewatched both Winter Soldier and Days of Future Past. Still two of my favorites. :)
Ignoring ASM2 like all people who want to remain sane should, this year has been utterly fantastic for comic book movies, and really showed that the genre still has lots of steam left in it. Three of the all time best released in such close proximity to each other; it's been great.
Honestly, I don't think that ASM2 was nearly as bad as people made it out to be, much like the 3rd Raimi SM movie. It's a really flawed movie, for sure, but I can't stand the modern day way people critique things by just bashing the hell out of it in angry fashion and over-exaggerating how terrible they think it is. To me, the movie is a mix of both good and bad things.
Putting that aided, though, we got 3 of the best movies in the entire genre, so it was definitely a good year for comic book movies.
I found this quote about the upcoming "Civil War" movie for Cap 3:
Quote"Events of the whole cinematic universe will make all governments in the world want regulation. Not so much about secret identity, but about who reports to who."
It looks like it's going to be about the entire world's reaction to the emergence of superheroes as a whole and nothing to do with the horrible, horrible comic.
They still shouldn't use that title.
That makes me feel a "little" more relieved, but I'm still skeptical. I'll need to see a trailer.
My rankings of the X-Men movies!
X2
Days of Future Past
First Class
X-Men
The Wolverine
Origins
The Last Stand
Good list. I pretty much agree with all of it, though DOFP is my new personal favorite, but it and 2 are pretty close in quality for me, so I could see it go either way, really.
I just saw DOFP last night, and I REALLY liked it. I'd say that Marvel is 4 1/2 for 5 this year, or possibly a complete 5 if I want to be generous to ASM 2.
That reminds me that I still need to see Big Hero 6, but even with TASM 2, this was still Marvel's best year by far, IMO.
Here we go, my rankings for all of the Batman movies (that I've seen):
Great Batman Movies:
1. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker (yes, this is my personal favorite)
2. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
3. The Dark Knight
4. The Dark Knight Returns Part II
5. Batman (1989)
Good Batman Movies:
6. The Dark Knight Rises
7. The Dark Knight Returns Part I
8. Batman Begins
9. Batman Returns (OK, it's not good, but it's a guilty pleasure)
Mediocre Batman Movies:
10. Under the Red Hood (a lot of people love it, but I thought it was just OK, personally)
11 Sub-Zero
12. Mystery of the Batwoman
Entertainingly Bad Batman Movies:
13. Batman Forever
14. Batman and Robin
Horrendously Bad Batman Movie:
15. Son of Batman
And no, I haven't actually seen the Adam West or black-and-white Batman films, so I didn't count those within this ranking.
Also, I don't count Year One as a feature-length film, hence why I didn't rank it, but if I did, it'd be a top 5 for sure.
I think it's fair to call Batman Returns a legitimately good movie. It's certainly nothing special, but Tim Burton's art direction and Danny Elfman's score are still great. And I do like Catwoman and the Penguin (Penguin a little less so, admittedly). My main problem is that it feels a bit too much like typical Tim Burton, and neither villain is as likable as Jack Nicholson in the first movie.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on November 21, 2014, 10:50:22 PM
I think it's fair to call Batman Returns a legitimately good movie.
Read the first sentence before the second. :sly:
I like Batman Returns in the same way that I like Spider-Man 3, in that it's better to view the former like it's a Tim Burton movie rather than a Batman movie, and the latter is of course a better Sam Raimi film than it is a Spider-Man film. The one great thing about both of them is that they each use Danny Elfman music.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on November 23, 2014, 12:03:45 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on November 21, 2014, 10:50:22 PM
I think it's fair to call Batman Returns a legitimately good movie.
Read the first sentence before the second. :sly:
Doesn't matter. You still made Foggle upset. geeeze... You should be ashamed of yourself. :il_hahaha: Go sit in the corner and think about what you did. :sly:
Quote from: talonmalon333 on November 21, 2014, 10:50:22 PM
My main problem is that it feels a bit too much like typical Tim Burton, and neither villain is as likable as Jack Nicholson in the first movie.
I remember Tim Burton saying that he wanted to eliminate the "funny little man" image he had of The Penguin from the 60's Batman TV show and turn him into something truly vile and sinister. I like how he handled it. It's definitely Tim Burton's Penguin to be sure. And Danny DeVito... my god... so brilliant!
I understand what you mean, though. Jack Nicholson as The Joker was fun and upbeat. The Penguin was quite dark and foreboding. It was Catwoman who tended to liven things up for the better in that movie. She created a certain balance.
Quote from: Lord Il on November 23, 2014, 01:05:46 PM
Doesn't matter. You still made Foggle upset. geeeze... You should be ashamed of yourself. :il_hahaha: Go sit in the corner and think about what you did. :sly:
:il_hahaha:
QuoteI remember Tim Burton saying that he wanted to eliminate the "funny little man" image he had of The Penguin from the 60's Batman TV show and turn him into something truly vile and sinister. I like how he handled it. It's definitely Tim Burton's Penguin to be sure. And Danny DeVito... my god... so brilliant!
:thumbup:
You know what the TV show Gotham is missing, or rather, NOT missing? Noses. There are too many noses left in-tact on people's faces, and a certain someone seriously needs to bite them off. Perhaps he can do it to Jim Gordon's actor and get him replaced with someone more interesting.
Wonder Woman has a director, (http://www.superherohype.com/news/322901-its-official-michelle-maclaren-to-direct-wonder-woman) and it's a great call.
Does this mean that not every movie in the DC live action canon will be directed by Snyder?
That doesn't sound like it would be remotely feasible to attempt, even if DC really wanted it.
Quote from: Avaitor on November 25, 2014, 02:57:59 PM
That doesn't sound like it would be remotely feasible to attempt, even if DC really wanted it.
I knew that the next few were his, so I just kind of figured we were stuck with him for these movies.
He wouldn't be able to direct that many movies in such close proximity to each other. That was never going to happen. Most likely he will just be kept in charge of any Superman-related films.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 25, 2014, 03:43:21 PM
He wouldn't be able to direct that many movies in such close proximity to each other. That was never going to happen. Most likely he will just be kept in charge of any Superman-related films.
Right. I mostly had in mind the Superman & Batman movie, as well as the Justice League movie (which I think are both his). I kind of forgot that a bunch were recently announced. Truthfully, I barely keep up with superhero movie stuff anymore. :P
What do you guys think is better, Agents of SHIELD or Iron Man 2? I haven't seen that show, but I ask this question because I know the general opinion seems to be that it, at best, is mediocre. That seems to be the same case as with Iron Man 2.
Iron Man 2's average at best, a bit annoying at worst. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. is just mediocre.
I don't like either of them, though AOS is definitely worse.
im2 is average, the few minutes of aos i watched were boring.
Now this is a story all about how my life got flipped, turned upside-down and I'd like to take a minute just sit and nod, I'll tell you how I became the prince of the Suicide Squad. (http://www.themarysue.com/warner-bros-suicide-squad-cast/)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F40.media.tumblr.com%2F6be1b14d38dff98b1bbcb94514b86587%2Ftumblr_mtpcz5qYl51qa8t6fo1_500.jpg&hash=0764d664b302c7b415357971383b83a5e23995b2)
Interesting casting decision, to say the least.
Welcome to Earth.
I'm super interested in each of the potential Waller choices.
keep on rapping, rynnec!
I was thinking this about Spider-Man 3. You guys know how people say that too many villains are in this movie, and therefore, they aren't developed enough?
But really... are any of the villains other than Venom underdeveloped? Sandman got a lot of screentime and story, and Harry of course had the whole trilogy to build on, and his story arc was fine. Venom was the only one who seemed underdeveloped (and I'm pretty sure Raimi only put him in to please fans). They complain that Venom only appears at the end of the movie... but quite frankly, I think that exact reason is why the other two villains are fine. Since Venom only takes form in the last 15 minutes, that means the other villains do still get 90+ minutes to work from.
Do I think Venom needed to be in this movie? Not really. But I do think Sandman and Harry perfectly survived his inclusion and had good roles in the movie.
Cramming Venom in was the weakest part of the movie, but I thought Eddie Brock and the suit themselves got enough focus. Just together they didn't really have the chance to develop anything.
To be fair, Eddie Brock wasn't very well-developed in the comics to begin with. SM3 tried its best to make his story come off stronger, but Venom's basic lack of presence is what held him back in the movie.
Spectacular really did the best for both Eddie and Venom. If I ever get the chance to go back to my reviews, I want to get into just how Eddie's deteriorating opinion on Peter worked so well in the show.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 04, 2014, 03:21:44 PMBut really... are any of the villains other thanVenom underdeveloped? Sandman got a lot of screentime and story, and Harry of course had the whole trilogy to build on, and his story arc was fine. Venom was the only one who seemed underdeveloped (and I'm pretty sure Raimi only put him in to please fans). They complain that Venom only appears at the end of the movie... but quite frankly, I think that exact reason is why the other two villains are fine. Since Venom only takes form in the last 15 minutes, that means the other villains do still get 90+ minutes to work from.
Fully agreed. People just love to say complaints for the sake of saying them because it's popular to say them. I've always found the complaint about the villains in SM3 being under-developed to be BS, though. Yes, Venom is definitely underdeveloped. What about Sandman? He has an entire character arc devoted to him, complete with a back story, a transformation into being a villain, and capped off with being forgiven by Peter in the end. Harry's character arc was developed over three films, and the third film is appropriately the final act of his character arc. It's the pay-off after all of the build-up in the first two movies, and contrary to how silly the tone of the Raimi Spider-Man films are, I found this part of the story to be its strongest point, as it was taken pretty seriously for the most part, and really went into the dynamic of Peter and Harry's longtime friendship, and the increasing tension between them. That was executed really well when they became enemies, and admittedly Harry's face turn to help Peter out at the end happened a bit too abruptly for my taste. I feel like if there was ever a 4th Raimi film, that should have been where Harry had his redemption arc. That said, it was still really awesome to see Peter and Harry working together as heroes to take down a bigger threat. I mean, yes, I know that this was completely out of character for the Green Goblin character in the comics, but in the context of Sam Raimi's films, the scene fit just fine, and made for a really cool final battle for the trilogy.
What sucks is that this movie can just never win. People will hold things against it that, when analyzed, weren't really done nearly as badly as they say, and some of the really good parts of the movie get completely overlooked just so that people can bitch about how Venom was butchered. Yes, one of Spider-Man's biggest foes was executed poorly, but I'll take the bad Venom along with the well-done parts of the movie. And if we're complaining about too much being crammed into a movie, how come more people don't berate Iron Man 2 for it's numerous subplots which go nowhere and the fact that it does absolutely nothing to develop the characters any further.
QuoteDo I think Venom needed to be in this movie? Not really. But I do think Sandman and Harry perfectly survived his inclusion and had good roles in the movie.
The funny thing is that Raimi was never even planning to put Venom in the movie. As I recall, he just wanted to do Sandman in this film, and focus on further developing Harry's character arc without having him featured as a villain in this film. I read this stuff a long time ago, so I could be wrong, but I think that had things played out his way, Harry would have only completed his transformation into a villain by the end of the film, and a 4th film would probably pit him against Peter. Either way, the attention being split between three villains had more to do with studio interference rather than Sam Raimi's own oversight.
Technically what happened to Harry in the Raimi films is what happened to Normie (Harry's son) in Spidergirl. They just decided to give it to Harry instead of his son.
Also, in regards to Venom in TSSM, I do wonder if Eddie would have been redeemed or at least shifted up to anti-hero status that he had in the comics. Knowing Mr. Weisman, I think it would have been very possible for him to go down that road. Especially since Eddie does have a seed of a good person in him.
I just re-watched X-Men DOFP with my brother (who was watching it for the first time) last night. Yep, still my favorite X-Men movie, and one of the best films in the genre, IMO. I've heard some people say that movies like this and X2 aren't that great because they aren't nearly as "exciting" as something like The Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy. As someone who absolutely LOVES all of those films, I'd say that where those two X-Men movies succeed over those two MCU movies for me is in terms of nuanced characterization and much more elaborate and intriguing stories and concepts. Mind you, The Avengers and GOTG are also among my top 10 favorite superhero films of all time, and I'm not saying that I consider those two X-Men movies to be better than them, but that they are on the same level of quality to me for an entirely different reason, as they offer something that I haven't really seen any other superhero films offer, or even come close to, personally. If I only had one gripe with DOFP, it's that Trask was a bit too underutilized for how much he was built up, but overall it's really a pretty minor complaint for me.
Is Agent Carter the girl from Captain America?
Yes.
Thought so. Today, while doing my annual Christmas decorating, I saw on television a few ads for Agent Carter. I haven't seen the original Captain America since the first time I saw it a while back, and I don't recall her appearing in the sequel, but when I saw the ad I was pretty sure it was her. And the Marvel logo basically confirmed it but I just needed to be sure.
EDIT:
Actually wait, I think she did appear in the sequel.
She had a brief appearance as an old woman in The Winter Soldier, and also had a flashback scene in AOS.
I have no hope for it as I have no hope for Marvel's TV studios as they are.
Yeah, pretty much my thoughts exactly. Which really bums me out, considering that Captain America: The First Avenger is my favorite superhero movie, and a TV series exploring the lore of that time-period of the MCU would normally be an amazing prospect to me. But instead I'm highly expecting this to just be Agents of Shield: World War II Edition.
it could be great if done right...but don't count on it.
I forgot to mention that a while back I spent a spare day watching some X-Men movies with my mom (who is a big X-Men fan herself) as she missed some of them. We watched, in order: X-Men Origins: Wolverine, First Class, and Days of Future Past. I figured I would do a post with some of my experiences with the films watching them so close together and contrasting them with the rest. My comments are nothing earth-shattering, but I thought they were neat tidbits.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
-The title implies there are other X-Men Origin stories. I'm waiting, Fox.
-The movie is not the worst in the series. I mean, it's not particularly great, but it's watchable on a mindless action level. Sure it's convoluted and overstuffed, but only one character really got assassinated here compared to the massacre of X3.
-Sabretooth deserved something beyond this one appearance. I mean he is absolutely jobbed post-adamantium. One of the characters cast the best, honestly. His power-level is nonsensical, though.
-Deadpool and the other team members were well cast. Shame they were all murdered off with one having fan outcry leveled at what was done to him.
-Some of the action sequences are pretty cool. The one where he is chased by Zero is pretty cool, too.
-Somehow this is Gambit's only appearance in the movies. They got a good actor, and his powers are quite well done. Shame they haven't used him again.
-How does Professor X find the mutants, exactly? And why does he not know about Logan or Gambit being there? If he used Cerebro to find them, then he would have spotted them as they are also mutants.
-I've always liked Stryker in the movies, and here is no exception. He makes a good villain.
-The amnesia explanation makes no sense. It would have made more sense for the adamantium operation to have done it.
First Class
-The 60s spy theme meshes really well with X-Men.
-The movie takes a loooooooong time to start up.
-Some of the lines are cringeworthy and none of the villains aside from Shaw and Frost really stand out. I didn't really remember that so much.
-That said, the direction in this film is really class. Whether following Eric getting revenge, or Charles being a brat, or the action, it's really engaging.
-So, how many Emma Frost's are there? Fox can't seem to keep it straight.
-Darwin's death is pointless. It would have made sense had they done something with it, but he just dies and . . . that's it.
-Banshee, Havoc, and Beast are really well done. Shame they aren't really in the sequel save for Beast and one cameo from Havoc.
-Charles and Eric's relationship starts out so strong here, that I might call it the highlight of the movie.
-The usage of stock footage from the era is a nice choice.
-Everything about the final battle is so well done.
-Mystique kind of came off as a brat to me here, which is fine because of what happens next.
Days of Future Past
-Everything good about First Class is here and even better.
-Everything good about the Wolverine movies is here and even better.
-Everything good about the core X-Men films is here and even better.
-Banshee and Emma Frost are two of the dead mutants. Strange choices to kill of considering they are core X-Men.
-Quicksilver is a clever addition to the story, even if he doesn't stick around.
-I really like Trask. He gets a bit more focus and scenes to himself, and his motivations make a lot of sense. He's not just evil bad guy #81.
-The future team is masterfully chosen. Blink, Bishop, Sunspot, Warpath, Iceman, Shadowcat, and Colossus, are all core X-Men that have never quite gotten any focus in the X movies. Every scene with them is pretty good. Not really a fan of Ellen Page, though.
-James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender bring it to the next level from First Class. While that film say their friendship grow and shatter, here we see them become what they are now.
-The themes of hope and second chances are all over this story. Some characters choose the right thing, some don't.
-That is probably the best ending of any superhero movie I've seen. If this was the last X-Men movie, I think I'd be okay.
Obviously, I liked the last one the best. It's easily the bet X-Men movie to me now, and I really hope the next one can live up to it (since Singer is directing, I have faith), but I have to say that the X-Men movie series isn't half bad as a whole. Of all the non-Marvel Studios Marvel films, X-Men has gotten the most good stuff.
i've been thinking, if cyborg is getting a movie then that likely means he'll be justice league and green latern will be hal. good good.
Now that I have a job, I finally bought the Phase 1 set. It also helped that I found a place which had it for only $80, with basically everything in tact. For all of the trinkets alone, it's basically worth the price. I've spent a surprising amount of time looking over the little extras and playing with the Cosmic Cube.
And last night, I watched Iron Man, which really is a good movie. I'm not one of those people who think the MCU formula peaked with it, and prefer a decent amount of the films since (then again, Iron Man has always been my least favorite by a significant amount of the three MCU movie leaders, so take of that what you will). But it does still feel pretty fresh years removed, and RDJ's performance is excellent.
I find it really odd that some people think Iron Man is the best and only real good MCU movie. How anyone could think that every movie between it and now is a disappointment is just bizarre.
The original Iron Man is a great movie and still holds up, IMO. That said, I'd say that I personally find both Captain America movies and Guardians of the Galaxy to be better, as far as MCU films go.
I was surprised by Guardians of the Galaxy. They took a bunch of character that (from what I gather) not many people knew about, and made one of the biggest films of the year.
A lot of people were surprised by it, but personally I don't get why. A lot of people also seem to forget that, just bout 7 years ago, nobody outside of comic book fans knew who Iron Man was, and Marvel made that character a household name, and then proceeded to do the same thing for Thor a few years later. By the time that Guardians rolled around, I was already willing to believe that they could pull it off. Now people are wondering whether Doctor Strange can possibly work as a movie, and to me, as long as Marvel keeps up what they've been doing in terms of quality, then the answer is yes.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 01, 2015, 01:19:55 PM
A lot of people were surprised by it, but personally I don't get why. A lot of people also seem to forget that, just bout 7 years ago, nobody outside of comic book fans knew who Iron Man was, and Marvel made that character a household name, and then proceeded to do the same thing for Thor a few years later. By the time that Guardians rolled around, I was already willing to believe that they could pull it off. Now people are wondering whether Doctor Strange can possibly work as a movie, and to me, as long as Marvel keeps up what they've been doing in terms of quality, then the answer is yes.
I was also surprised by Iron Man. But that was years ago, so I kind of forgot he was ever less than a well known hero. .3.
Robert Downey Jr. helped to make the character into a mainstream name.
iron man was well known but not super popular. iron man 1 is my favorite marvel movie.
Iron Man was well known to fans of superhero comics. The average mainstream movie viewer who didn't read any comics either mever heard of that character or were unfamiliar with who he was or that he was even part of the Marvel Universe, until the movie trailers came out, of course.
Captain America was more of a character that was well known by the mainstream public, but not in the forefront of relevance until the modern movies came out.
Captain America was really popular during WWII, and while Marvel was able to push him better than Thor or Iron Man during his silver age revival, but until the movies, he wasn't on the level of Spider-Man or the X-Men.
These movies really are doing wonders for the company.
Quote from: Avaitor on January 01, 2015, 04:03:44 PM
Captain America was really popular during WWII, and while Marvel was able to push him better than Thor or Iron Man during his silver age revival, but until the movies, he wasn't on the level of Spider-Man or the X-Men.
People such as myself had heard of the character and were familiar with his status as a WWII icon (and in my case as a playable character in the MvC games), but until The First Avenger came out, most only knew him as that, and nothing about his actual character. I, myself, got properly aquatinted with him in AEMH prior to the release of the first film, which is probably why I enjoyed him so much more whe the film finalky did come out, since he was already one of my favorite Marvel characters.
The MCU has skyrocketed the popularity of every character that has appeared in them. The Avengers are a big deal now, but they were never highly known outside comic book circles until the movies. Of course, no one needs to mention GOTG and how the movie put them over the top in popularity.
I wanted to pick up a copy of Marvel Premiere Classic copy of the Rocket Raccoon miniseries that my local comic book store had when it was only about $8, but after the movie came out, they started selling it full price.
Can't blame them, though.
i seriously doubt iron man was that unpopular. i didn't start reading comics until 2008 but i knew who iron man was since i was kid thanks to the spider-man cartoon. plus he's been in multiple cartoons and games since at least the 90s.
Not everyone is you. A lot of people who watch movies aren't also necessarily gamers or comic book fans.
i also said cartoons. iron man had his own show as well. he wasn't just some obscure character before his movie.
Unpopular Cartoons that most people never even watched, hence why they were canceled before long.
I also watched Avengers today, and you know, I've seen this in theaters more than once. I've also seen it online in rather shitty quality, but even then, I really enjoyed the film. On Blu-Ray on a decently big screen... yeah, this isn't a deep reflection on the psyche of a veteran and the playboy he casually feuds with, but despite some touch of shallowness, I still enjoy almost everything about the movie.
It really does feel like the big super hero film that I always wanted ever since I started reading comics. It's still got to be in the top 5 comic book films, for sure.
While not my favorite, it is still a damn fun film. It's not a deep or intricately plotted film, but it doesn't need to be. It knows what it is and excels at what it sets out to do. It's among the best in the genre.
It's a popcorn movie. And one of the best of its kind.
i haven't watched it since the theaters. it was good but not great.
i love 300 so much.
I don't really have time now, with work and school coming up and all, but I definitely plan to use my set to watch The First Avenger and Incredible Hulk again in the near future.
I still quite like the first Thor, but I think I've seen it more than I have Avengers, so I'll probably save that for some time later. Maybe when I watch the sequel again, as I'm planning a Phase 2 rewatch before Age of Ultron. And I probably won't use the Blu of Iron Man 2 for the feature any time soon, but I'll get to the bonuses when I have the chance.
Guess who's finally joining the MCU roster: http://marvel.com/news/movies/24062/sony_pictures_entertainment_brings_marvel_studios_into_the_amazing_world_of_spider-man
So I had two fantasies about the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
1. Spider-Man returns to the fold.
2. We find out out that Coulson has been dead all along, Special Snowflake is actually Mephisto, and the events of "Special Snowflake and the SHIT Squad" have all been Coulson's experience in Hell.
One of these things just happened. Shall I keep hoping for the other?
Well, the one good thing about AOS being so inconsequential to the MCU's overall continuity is that it's easy to pretend that it doesn't exist.
As for Spider-Man being integrated into the MCU, while I have personally enjoyed some of Sony's films, I'm fully aware that none of them have done the character any justice. It'll be fun to finally see a live-action iteration of the web-head done by people who understand the character.
Although, I don't anticipate seeing him play a big part in any of these movies until Infinity Wars, but he may make for an awesome post-credits scene appearance in one of the upcoming MCU movies from 2016 or later.
I just really hope Spidey doesn't join the Avengers. He's the antithesis of a team player, and has just never fit them at all.
In terms of movies, I just hope they skip the origin story, and maybe high school in general. It's been done so much already.
oh my...my favorite hero that was ever an avenger. hopefully they don't force him into the spotlight. i don't want to see spider-man punching out thanos just because he's the most famous hero they have.
i actually hope he does, even though even in the new avengers comics he didn't fit well on the team. he should just not be a full fledged member because yeah, spidey is better solo. they should have him come on whenever he's really needed, kind of like how terry never really joined the justice league in batman beyond.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 10, 2015, 10:36:50 AMIn terms of movies, I just hope they skip the origin story, and maybe high school in general. It's been done so much already.
Marvel has actually gone on record saying that they will no longer do any origin stories inthe MCU after Ant-Man and the Netflix shows.
So,
another reboot? Well, if this one is done by Marvel I might care.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 10, 2015, 10:36:50 AMIn terms of movies, I just hope they skip the origin story, and maybe high school in general. It's been done so much already.
For the love of everything, PLEASE skip the origin story and high school already.
Seriously, does nobody ever read anything? Marvel already addressed that months ago.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on February 10, 2015, 01:20:39 PM
Seriously, does nobody ever read anything? Marvel already addressed that months ago.
Spider-Man is a special case. :cop:
exactly, spark.
i would like to see college peter, myself. also, a live action spider-man that's actually funny and charismatic.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on February 10, 2015, 01:21:27 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on February 10, 2015, 01:20:39 PM
Seriously, does nobody ever read anything? Marvel already addressed that months ago.
Spider-Man is a special case. :cop:
:il_hahaha:
That gave me a good laugh for some reason.
Poor Spidey..
I do think the idea of Spidey appearing in Civil War wouldn't be too bad, as long as the film goes in the direction that I hope it does and doesn't steer too far away from Steve.
and so we can watch stark own both cap and parker.
seriously, can they even put spidey in their in time?
Ew, apparently the new Spider-Man movie is pushing back a few Phase 3 films, including Black Panther and Captain Marvel.
I'm really hoping that this will be the great Spidey movie we deserve, but that's just not right. We've had 5 Spider-Man movies, but the MCU has yet to make a movie where a female or non-white character is the lead. Unless they're going with Miles instead, I'm not happy.
miles seems like a decent character but i don't want peter to be replaced. they should have just not pushed black panther back.
http://moviebob.blogspot.com/2015/02/marvelous.html
Thanks, MovieBob. I needed that. :happytime:
The chances of them using Miles Morales is less than zero.
Nevertheless, I was more interested in a Black Panther movie than yet another Spider-Man one.
Yeah, it's a longshot.
Although I do believe that we'll get Miles on the screen before DC skips Dick Grayson for any other Robin, but that's a whole other discussion.
you two and your red robins..
since Cyborg will be an upcoming dc movie, looks like i could get my dream lineup:
Hal jordan
Green arrow (oliver and not his son)
Batman
Superman
Charismatic flash. I don't give a shit which birth name he takes as long as he is not boring.
which do you like more, mcu or dcau?
It's kind of tough for me to compare movies to fully fleshed-out series, but on the whole I'd say that the MCU is more consistent. Out of all of the DCAU shows, there were four great ones, IMO: BTAS, STAS, BB, and JL/JLU (I didn't care for Static Shock or The Zeta Project, personally). They also had two great movies in MOTP and ROTJ. That said, the actual shows themselves didn't have very consistent runs. I find that BTAS feels a bit clumsy in execution with a lot of season 1 episodes, as well as with stuff from season 4 and TNAOBAR. As for Superman, the episodes are pretty hit or miss for me, personally. With BB, seasons 1 and 3 are goid, but it feels a bit awkward in season 2, even though I still like that season. Then, with JL, the first season hasn't aged that well, season 2 is excellent, and the JLU episodes are pretty hit or muss for me, mostly due to splitting the focus of characters within the expanded roster. I love the DCAU, but certain aspects of it haven't aged well, IMO. And I'm not counting shows like TBATB or GLTAS, because they aren't part of the same Universe/continuity as what we refer to as the DCAU.
As for the MCU, The Incredible Hulk is just OK, and IM2 and AOS are the only real misfires, IMO. Everything else ranges from good to great, and the Captain America movies as well as GOTG are among my favorite films in the genre. So, overall, I'd personally have pick the MCU.
i like dcau more. i like teen titans and pre-gear static more than captain america, both thors, tih and iron man 2. so you can imagine how much more i like btas, jl and bb than the movies i listed. i am still not sure where to place avengers, im1 and im3, as i need to rewatch all 3 (i am liking what little of avengers i saw on tv more though) and have yet to see gotg of winter soldier.
Teen Titans isn't part of the same continuity as the DCAU shows, if I'm not mistaken (and personally I can't stand that show, anyways).
it arguably is but the reason i named it is the dvds have it under dcau. except for zeta, it's my least favorite dcau show but i like it.
I don't really know if it's fair to compare movies to TV shows like this.
I will say though, that a comic book adaptation passes if I can read a story with the actor's voices in my mind. I've been imagining Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, Dana Delany, etc for years, so obviously the DCAU passes. And in recent years, when I go through Marvel books, I can imagine RDJ, Hemsworth, Hiddleston, and Evans easily. I'll get back to you when I finally read the Guardians series from 2008.
i always have heard 90s/2d capcom wolvie whenever i read his comics.
just got done watching the climax to the dark knight again. i love it.
I think a better comparison would be the current Live-Action DC universe and the DCAU.
Movies to shows are kind of awkward.
Zack Snyder has revealed Aquaman on his Twitter.
https://twitter.com/ZackSnyder/status/568650209581858817/photo/1
I'm resisting the urge to call him Khal Drowno.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 20, 2015, 03:41:51 PMI'm resisting the urge to call him Khal Drowno.
Well, it looks like you beat me to the obvious GOT joke.
I'm waiting for the less obvious Stargate Atlantis joke.
I'm late as usual but...was that Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in the Age of Ultron trailer?
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 04, 2015, 02:31:05 PM
I'm late as usual but...was that Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in the Age of Ultron trailer?
Yep.
No idea how they'll be handling them, though.
I didn't think that it was possible, but after the latest trailer, yep, I'm even more pumped for Avengers: Age of Ultron.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 04, 2015, 03:16:16 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 04, 2015, 02:31:05 PM
I'm late as usual but...was that Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in the Age of Ultron trailer?
Yep.
No idea how they'll be handling them, though.
You mean with them being mutants/Magneto kin? I think they'll do like I think they did in the comics, or at least in the 90s cartoon and have them not know who their father is. Except Magneto will never be revealed as their Dad and the word mutant will be banned. I hope they join the team for good. War Machine too, for some variety.
I think I just read something about how they're retconning Magneto's ties to them in the comics.
I don't really mind tbh, since it was hardly that important, and that was a retcon to begin with. Just keep the cow stuff to a minimum in the movies.
Heh, I think I do remember them saying they won't originally Magneto's kids. Also,..weren't they a couple beforehand :whuh: or am I mixing up Star Wars retcon in there?
I do wonder how they will handle characters like War Machine, Falcon, or Winter Soldier in Ultron. Since they aren't technically Avengers they could just not be there, but I would like some sort of reasoning for it, at least. Since this is not exactly a small problem the Avengers are dealing with here.
:( *runs out of thread after seeing Winter Soldier* I should have known it wasn't safe to not be fully caught up yet.
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 04, 2015, 05:52:17 PM
:( *runs out of thread after seeing Winter Soldier* I should have known it wasn't safe to not be fully caught up yet.
You haven't seen Winter Soldier yet? Oh man, you gotta fix that ASAP.
Anyway, sorry for the spoiler!
Oh, no problem. I should have expected Winter Soldier spoilers during Avengers 2 talk after bringing Avengers 2 talk up myself. I think TWS is the only modern Marvel movie I have not seen. Maybe Netflix has it, idk.
Finally got around to the next Avengers teaser.
So we've got Vision! Glad to see him!
I was wondering about him. I need to watch that now.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_iQ6GvUwAA7m8J.jpg)
https://celebrity.yahoo.com/news/chris-pratt-chris-evans-good-011315123.html (https://celebrity.yahoo.com/news/chris-pratt-chris-evans-good-011315123.html)
I salute you, Captain America and Star Lord. :thumbup:
Glad to see it. :)
Whoa, Avengers 2 trailer 3 is really good..I can't believe it's coming out in less than 2 months. I'm thinking we'd have to wait a year or something. This is going to be a good year for live action Marvel.
The new TV spot seems to confirm Cap as the leader (it's Tony who says it, so it counts) which I'm glad. It was the one thing about EMH that felt a bit off as Cap is a natural leader and whenever he took charge in the show things tended to work out better.
But of course I'm biased. :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WM915QsOyI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WM915QsOyI)
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 20, 2015, 10:43:44 PM
The new TV spot seems to confirm Cap as the leader (it's Tony who says it, so it counts) which I'm glad. It was the one thing about EMH that felt a bit off as Cap is a natural leader and whenever he took charge in the show things tended to work out better.
But of course I'm biased. :P
Did I mention that I would want Beast to join the team more than Spider-Man or Wolverine yet? Anyway, put him, Black Panther and Vision on the team and that'll be all I ask for.
http://www.comicvine.com/articles/report-the-russos-may-direct-avengers-infinity-war/1100-151773/ (http://www.comicvine.com/articles/report-the-russos-may-direct-avengers-infinity-war/1100-151773/)
Quote
While it stinks to see Joss Whedon go, Captain America: Winter Soldier was an incredibly strong film that was surprisingly epic, so having the Russos on board for the third and fourth Avengers films seems like a great idea. What do you think about this report?
:(
This is pretty old news, actually. It was well known months ago that Joss would be stepping down from Marvel films and that the Russo brothers were in consideration for directing the next Avengers movie(s).
As for my thoughts on that, I'm perfectly on board with it. The Avengers was great, and I'm sure that Age of Ultron will be great as well. After that, it makes sense that Joss would be burned out on making these kinds of films, so he likely wouldn't be able to put his all into any more of them. Meanwhile, it'd be interesting to see the Russo brothers put a fresh new spin and style on these films, and they have proven their talent and capability with The Winter Soldier.
It seems like a wise decision to make on Marvel's part, IMO.
Winter Soldier is one of my favorite superhero movies so I'm fine with it. Joss seems to have put his all into Ultron so it should hopefully be a good send off for him.
Not either waterworks in this thread. anyway, I have yet to see Winter Soldier..still.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQHYYh2h.jpg&hash=8e666441d3972e09fd35da1390e87242eb30c773)
He looks exactly like the Smallville Lex. Pfft.
I could go another twenty years and not see another live action Lex Luthor, to be honest. And I don't even dislike the character.
If you had invented Lexcorp, you would have invented Lexcorp.
Why Lex now? They should be making other Superman villains more famous and then bring in Lex.
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 25, 2015, 02:47:27 PM
Why Lex now? They should be making other Superman villains more famous and then bring in Lex.
Because apparently Lex and Zod are the only villains Hollywood can bother themselves with.
It's quite absurd that after near forty years they've been basically the only Superman villains in the live action films.
Does Nuclear Man count?
....Yeah, on second thought, it's probably best to forget that Superman IV ever existed.
That's right, Zod was the other big bad. :P I was giving them credit for using someone not named Lex in the movies but I can't even give them that now.
I'd also like to see them use someone else besides Darkseid and Doomsday and then have them come later on. It's been made very clear who are the top dogs in Superman's mythos, now it's time to give someone else spotlight, not that I'm getting my hopes up..
No! The people!
The hell was I typing? :P :D *edits*
http://collider.com/spider-man-kevin-feige-confirms-peter-parker-in-high-school/ (http://collider.com/spider-man-kevin-feige-confirms-peter-parker-in-high-school/)
As long as they don't do the origin again, I'll give it a shot.
I think it's perfect. Peter starts out as a teen and then the MCU lasts for a few more years and he grows up during that time.
:gonk:
Not particularly excited for another Peter Parker movie, but I've loved the character since I was a kid, so if they skip the origin story I'll be happy-ish.
Does anyone else think Ant-Man looks really boring? The lack of Edgar Wright is extremely apparent. Looks like some boilerplate superhero fare a la Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2 IMO.
I actually enjoyed The Incredible Hulk, for what it's worth, and I wouldn't quite say that it looks like Iron Man 2 since that movie's problem was that it tried to do too many stories at once and just became a mess.
This movie looks like it'll be fairly average, for the most part. Not particularly exciting nor extraordinarily bad, but we'll just have to wait and see.
The obvious problem is that Marvel wants every new movie they produce to be part of the MCU, and Edgar Wright's vision was for a stand-alone story, so this disagreement forced him to leave the project and basically forced Marvel to rush into getting a new director and trying to make a movie in the style that they wanted. The key problem here is that this new vision for the movie was just rushed into production to meet a deadline, and that shows in the previews where the movie doesn't really see like it has its own distinct identity.
The Incredible Hulk is just fine. A lot of people have been saying Ant-Man looks boring. Even worse than they say the Fantastic Four film is looking.
There's nothing wrong with another Peter Parker film. I wouldn't have mind another origin film either.
I didn't truly
hate Incredible Hulk or Iron Man 2, but even though they had different reasons for my not liking them, they just felt like uninteresting superhero flicks to me. Ant-Man looks like it'll pan out similarly for me. :(
I know why Edgar Wright left/was kicked off of the project, it just sucks that his stylish direction is nowhere to be seen. This was my most anticipated Marvel film for the longest time purely because of him. :'(
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 13, 2015, 01:51:00 PM
A lot of people have been saying Ant-Man looks boring. Even worse than they say the Fantastic Four film is looking.
Ew. Those people are wrong. F4nt4stic F0ur looks awful.
QuoteThere's nothing wrong with another Peter Parker film. I wouldn't have mind another origin film either.
The origin has been told
so many times, though. I've had my fill of Uncle Ben at this point when it comes to live action cinema.
I don't care. Until they get Peter Parker right they can do the origin story as much as possible. :bleh:
I've seen only a little bit of the footage of Fantastic Four...but I hear Doctor Doom is a blogger so I agree with you anyway.
I wish Edgar Wright did the Deadpool movie and Ryan Reynolds had nothing to do with it but we can't everything we want.
Ryan Reynolds is an awesome Deadpool, though. He nails the voice better than anyone other than Nolan North IMO. He also really cares about the character and is a huge fan of the comics. The film wouldn't exist without him pitching it to Fox and he was the one who pushed for the R rating it eventually got.
Maybe they should worry about getting Peter Parker right first and then maybe do the origin in the second film if this rereboot actually works out. ;)
I still hate Reynolds. :oo:
Hell no. I'd settle for no origin over an origin in a 2nd film. I don't want it THAT much. lol
I'm just worried that doing the origin again would turn a lot of people off. I mean, I personally wouldn't mind it if the film was good, but a lot of people were already complaining about them re-doing the origin back when Amazing Spider-Man came out. A third time might kill the enthusiasm for many casual fans.
I'm no Ryan Reynolds fan by any means, but his love for Deadpool is infectious. And quite a few of the comic's writers have stated that he'd be perfect for the role.
Guys, it's okay. No origin story. (http://www.craveonline.com/film/articles/845723-exclusive-marvels-spider-man-reboot-not-origin-story)
I also mentioned several pages back how Marvel went on record saying that they weren't going to do any more origin stories by phase 3, but I guess nobody on this board actually ever reads anything. :thinkin:
They should make every Spider-Man movie the origin story.
I'm okay with another Spider-Man reboot, since as much as I like Andrew Garfield in the role, his movies have not lived up to their potential. And I'm fine with Peter Parker, since I honestly still have yet to read a Miles Morales story anyway.
Just don't turn Mary Jane into Gwen or make Peter more interested in his parents than Uncle Ben, please.
We know there's no origin story. We were speaking hypothetically.
Spark, shutty.
Avaitor, Spider-Man Blue is what showed me that Mary Jane came before Gwen. I had no clue whatsoever before that. That shows you how much attention Gwen has gotten over the years. I'm glad I'm not the only one that liked Garfield as Peter Parker. I wish we could have saw him outside of Parker's sad lonely phase and more of a wise cracking hero myself.
I'm not sure if he meant he wanted Miles to replace him.
I just got around to seeing the new Ant-Man trailer. I definitely don't agree that it looks boring. I have some issues with it as well as some stuff that I genuinely like. My biggest problem is that it seems too indecisive about its tone. The best part of the trailer was when they were having an epic fight only for it to zoom out and show us how insignificant it seemed when it resulted in a choo-choo train harmlessly crashing and falling off the toy tracks. Stuff like that feels both creative and fun.
The general story aspects don't feel very compelling, though. We're clearly supposed to take the characters a bit more seriously, but other than maybe Paul Rudd as Scott Lang, I'm not really feeling it from anyone else, especially the villain who, aside from his awesome costume design, looks incredibly generic in terms of his character and motivation, though, to be fair, you could say that for almost every MCU film.
Anyways, it's a trailer and hardly enough to go by. That said, it kind of looks like a mixed bag to me. There's enough stuff that I like to make me want to give the movie a shot, though.
At the very least it'll probably be better than Iron Man 2. But I find it hard to gauge certain movies by trailers (every Pixar trailer is usually pretty lame, for instance) and being that this is going to be different from the other movies in some way, I don't know if I can say how good it looks from the trailer.
Anyway, it seems like a weird movie to close out phase 2 with.
I watched a trailer but it wasn't much, as in it was short. I think it was the first trailer, idk. I'll have to look into it.
It doesn't seem too weird. I'm sure they wanted this movie to be shown earlier and they are trying to get another key member on the team.
It's worth mentioning that I thought the trailers for Thor were ass, didn't really feel much of anything from the trailers for the first Captain America movie, and whike it's not Marvel, I found The Dark Knight trailers to be painfully underwhelming. Yet I enjoyed the hell out of those movies.
On the other end of the spectrum, I actually really liked the trailer for Kick-Ass 2, and going back quite a few years, I remember how cool The Matrix Reloaded trailer was back in the day. Neither film lived up to my expectations. And don't even get me started on Chappie.
The point being that trailers aren't necessarily the best indicators of how good or bad a movie will actually be. A lot of people don't even realize that trailers aren't even cut by the actual filmmakers. Those are handled entirely by the marketing department.
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 13, 2015, 06:59:29 PM
I watched a trailer but it wasn't much, as in it was short. I think it was the first trailer, idk. I'll have to look into it.
It doesn't seem too weird. I'm sure they wanted this movie to be shown earlier and they are trying to get another key member on the team.
There's a new full-length trailer out today. That's what I was referring to.
Well then that's just sad. :unimpressed:
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 13, 2015, 06:53:02 PM
I just got around to seeing the new Ant-Man trailer. I definitely don't agree that it looks boring. I have some issues with it as well as some stuff that I genuinely like. My biggest problem is that it seems too indecisive about its tone. The best part of the trailer was when they were having an epic fight only for it to zoom out and show us how insignificant it seemed when it resulted in a choo-choo train harmlessly crashing and falling off the toy tracks. Stuff like that feels both creative and fun.
I agree about that part of the trailer; it was the only bit I particularly cared for. That and Michael Douglas. "Boring" might the wrong word, though. More like it just doesn't interest me at all.
But the point about trailers is also good. Kick-Ass and In Bruges have some of the worst trailers I've seen, but they're also two of my favorite movies ever. I just find it difficult to retain interest in this movie without Edgar Wright.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 13, 2015, 03:46:52 PM
I also mentioned several pages back how Marvel went on record saying that they weren't going to do any more origin stories by phase 3, but I guess nobody on this board actually ever reads anything. :thinkin:
Interesting. Will they just jump right in with Captain Marvel and Black Panther, then? That's unheard of for a live action superhero adaptation; mainstream audiences seem to expect origin stories at this point. Not that I mind, myself.
Well, just as a reminder, The Incredible Hulk skipped the origin story, so they've been doing it since phase one as is.
You honestly don't really need an origin story movie, anyways. You could easily just do a 2 or 3 minute flash-back explaining how these characters became superheroes.
In the case of Black Panther, it'd be a similar origin story to Thor. T'challa inherits the mantle of the Black Panther from his father, and the Black Panther is basically the protector and ruler of Wakanda, a fictional advanced society in Africa that is basically like a version of Asgard on Earth.
If someone really wanted to know his and Ms. Marvel's origin stories, I'd recommend AEMH. It's one of the best superhero cartoons of all time, and it does a great job of streamlining iconic Marvel characters and story-lines for very casual Marvel fans such as myself and many others.
I guess I interpreted that as "no origin at all." Hulk wasn't an origin movie, but it was still shown during the opening credits and was very important of the plot.
Speaking of Marvel cartoons, now that they're amazing friends with Sony again, the new Spider-Man movie should be called Spectacular Spider-Man and function as a sequel to season 2 of SSM...
I'd love that about as much as Nintendo getting Ratchet.
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 13, 2015, 10:18:44 PM
I'd love that about as much as Nintendo getting Ratchet.
Same. ;)
Quote from: Foggle on April 13, 2015, 10:12:45 PMSpeaking of Marvel cartoons, now that they're amazing friends with Sony again, the new Spider-Man movie should be called Spectacular Spider-Man and function as a sequel to season 2 of SSM...
Ultimate Spider-Man is still airing.
Just be hopeful the new Spider-Man movie isn't based on that.
Quote from: Foggle on April 13, 2015, 10:19:31 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 13, 2015, 10:18:44 PM
I'd love that about as much as Nintendo getting Ratchet.
Same. ;)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F--92YGgsjo3E%2FUPtGXdSHWfI%2FAAAAAAAACgI%2FPa-N2yrtf2A%2Fs1600%2FHomer%2B%26amp%3B%2BBart1.gif&hash=1866cfb6f20d07bfdd5980efd0473486bfab501c)
Batman vs. Superman leaked teaser (https://vid.me/NlzG)
It's a crappy cam rip for right now, but if you don't wanna wait for the official release (which will be a while)...
It certainly looks... dark.
Yeah, that didn't tell me anything about the movie.
Typical trailer.
Making a good trailer must be hard. They usually either end up spoiling a lot of the plot or not revealing enough to get people interested.
Quote from: Foggle on April 17, 2015, 12:14:45 AM
Making a good trailer must be hard. They usually either end up spoiling a lot of the plot or not revealing enough to get people interested.
This is one of my favorite trailers. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvEndehlM60)
It tells you the basic story, sets up some intrigue, and doesn't spoil anything important. Good trailers are hard to make, but I prefer them tell me
something about the movie than leaving me with nothing but questions.
Bad trailer to a good movie: http://youtu.be/yUmSVcttXnI
It does not properly set up the tone of the movie and how most of it is actually really entertaining. Unfortunately, people didn't see the movie based on the trailer.
Wow, that is a pretty bad trailer. I never saw that one before, but yeah I would have no idea what the movie was about if I didn't know it was an adaption of All You Need Is Kill. The whole repeat theme is not really explained. It's also poorly paced. Yowch.
Nice Black Panther suit, Ben Affleck.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on April 17, 2015, 12:25:36 AM
Quote from: Foggle on April 17, 2015, 12:14:45 AM
Making a good trailer must be hard. They usually either end up spoiling a lot of the plot or not revealing enough to get people interested.
This is one of my favorite trailers. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvEndehlM60)
It tells you the basic story, sets up some intrigue, and doesn't spoil anything important. Good trailers are hard to make, but I prefer them tell me something about the movie than leaving me with nothing but questions.
If we are posting best trailer...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRfCUWazKaY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRfCUWazKaY)
Spoiler
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSHesXNk.png&hash=8e6736a62fc2cf21ab7bcf55dbd41225eb67b046)
What Man of Steel failed to do, Exhibit A.
But the movie did have Superman staring at a vast land devoid of human life while having his arms around someone of his own kin.
I didn't know people thought the aliens in the Avengers could have been Kree or Skrulls.
So does this mean The Amazing Spider-Man series has been canceled? Doesn't really effect me personally, but I just thought I remember them planning a big franchise out of it, with multiple sequels and spin-offs starting Venom and other characters.
As far as I know, the only part of that original plan that has survived is the Sinister Six movie, which apparently Sony is still making, although I imagine it will somehow have to be changed to fit within the context of the MCU.
The reviews for Age of Ultron are coming in, and it's looking pretty good. The critics who are burnt out on super hero movies haven't really been swayed, but the more accepting ones are willing to call this a good one, even if the reception seems to be mixed in this topping the first Avengers. Still, the last time I checked, it was at 90% on RT, which is nothing to sneeze at.
We'll just have to see for ourselves next week, though. Critics aren't always right, after all.
I feel like ridiculously high expectations will cause the movie to do less well with critics than the first one, but I hardly use RT as a measuring stick for how good a movie is. Captain America: The First Avenger has a 78% on RT, and it's my favorite MCU film to date, despite being one if the less well-received films in the franchise.
I wasn't a huge fan of The Avengers, but this one looks more like my thing. I'll probably also re-watch the original soon and see if I like it more now.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 21, 2015, 08:28:08 PM
I feel like ridiculously high expectations will cause the movie to do less well with critics than the first one, but I hardly use RT as a measuring stick for how good a movie is. Captain America: The First Avenger has a 78% on RT, and it's my favorite MCU film to date, despite being one if the less well-received films in the franchise.
It also has the lowest score of any MCU film on IMDB I believe. People are weird.
And the kind of people who won't like Age of Ultron seem like those who automatically hate any Marvel movie simply for the sake of it. It's not like we haven't come across those killjoys before.
I know something will be good if even Insomniac and Foggle are excited about it,
The original is an excellent "popcorn" flick in every sense, IMO. It doesn't offer much in the way if depth or nuance, but if you're looking to just have fun without having your intelligence insulted, it's a really good time, and to be fair, that's appropriate for the first movie of its kind like this. In order for crossover movies to be a success, Marvel chose to make something more accessible to a wider audience in the first place, to sell them on the concept. Now that it has a wider audience, it can attempt to tell a more interesting and engaging story with the sequel.
That's exactly what I'm hoping they are doing.
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 21, 2015, 08:37:14 PM
I know something will be good if even Insomniac and Foggle are excited about it,
Hey, it works well enough to get me into The Wire and Jojo.
shit, I'm behind on the latter, though
To be fair, I tend to overly praise pretty much anything I like or think looks good these days. :il_hahaha:
The Avengers is pretty good for what it is, definitely. I think I just fucked up by not watching the solo films first. I'm sure I'll like it more the second time around.
Foggle got me interested in the latter! I still haven't even tried to start the former...
Sometimes I succeed at things!
I want to rewatch the Avengers. I gave it shit for not being that deep (shut up) but once I think about it, they pulled off the impossible and gave every Avenger a good amount of screen time.
Quote from: Foggle on April 21, 2015, 08:45:22 PM
Sometimes I succeed at things!
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.clipartguide.com%2F_named_clipart_images%2F0511-1103-1211-5046_Smiley_Holding_a_Mug_of_Beer_clipart_image.jpg&hash=1a66c16dfae98811b61e258a02b92d7b35a73bef)
I'd say one of my main issues with the first Avengers was with Loki. I liked him more in Thor because there seemed to be a point to his evil, while his motives just don't have as much weight when trying to conquer Earth.
I was just thinking about how Loki could have been done better when I was writing about how much screen time they gave the Avengers. He seemed to be kind of just..there. Almost could have been replace by any conqueror Marvel villain.
I take a lot of critical opinions with a grain of salt until I know where they're coming from. I remember one review slagging Winter Soldier because they said it was forgettable in that you would leave the theater and not remember anything about it. Man, I was thinking of the ending of that movie for weeks afterwards. Not to mention the ones that were like "He's the hero so of course he will never die so there's no tension!" which could be applied to virtually any action, adventure, or drama movie ever.
If they're complaining about things like the script, the acting, the plot, the general execution, or the special effects, then I'll pay more attention.
So with the new Avengers moving on its way into theaters, one of my friends who has missed a few of the recent movies wants to catch up, so we will be doing that this week. Tonight we rewatched (or in his case, watched for the first time) Captain America: The Winter Soldier. I think Chris Evans is quite likable in the role. Also, they did a really good job of aging Peggy for her scene in this movie. Another thing I think is good is that Black Widow has a good role here. I feel like they hadn't given her much of a presence in these movies until this one. They hinted at a romance between her and Cap and I wouldn't be totally against them going that route if they can do it. Sometime later this week, we will be rewatching the only other film he missed, Thor 2. I remember not really liking this one, but I'll watch it again since my friends will be watching it, so, why not?
I feel like the first Avengers movie is an incredibly pander-ish movie, but it hardly matters because it's just really fun. I'll admit that I'm kind of burned out on superhero films at this point, but even so I do enjoy seeing most of them in theaters, as they are just entertaining movies to go see late at night with a group of buddies. So, with that, I do hope The Avengers: Age of Ultron is a keeper.
Eitherway, it's probably best not to let negative reviews bemoaning a lack of depth cloud hopes for a movie, since some reviewers go out of their way to find faults that not even the most astute viewer could see. Case in point. (http://blip.tv/confused-matthew/gurdians-of-the-galaxy-general-review-7007021)
I can understand how some people are burned out on superhero films, but personally I'm still incredibly enthralled by the genre. Marvel has been killing it lately, so it's arguably the best time to be a fan of this genre.
Another reason to take RT scores with a grain of salt: http://m.3aw.com.au/news/review-jim-schembri-reviews-the-avengers-age-of-ultron-20150422-1mqzk9.html
According to RT, this writer qualifies as a professional critic and is thus factored into the overall cumulative critic consensus. But if you read the review, it boils down to nothing more than: "Guh, This movie is stupid! Superhero movies are stupid! It's loud and has too many special effects and too much action, so it's stupid!"
Clearly there will be a few haters of the genre trying to bad-mouth the movie, so it's best to rely on your own instincts.
I love when people who despise a certain film genre are paid to review a movie in said genre.
Yeah, there have been some critics trying to create a backlash by not judging these movies for what they are but just by the fact that they exist. Fortunately most people are not interested in such reviews that trash a genre movie for being a genre movie.
I'm going to play the best strategy video game in the world today and then trash it for being a strategy game.
I didn't know it was already out? *avoids thread*
In the UK, I believe. We have another week.
Yeah, we had some regular posters from the UK at the old Excel Saga Forum who saw new releases a whole week ahead. They'd disgust me. :il_hahaha:
Man, I didn't realise Age of Ultron was so fast approaching. Guess I know what I'm seeing next weekend.
I've heard a lot of early reviews call this film more Whedon-esque than the last one, so people's mileage may vary based on how much Whedonism they can tolerate. Personally I love Whedon's style, so I'll probably appreciate the movie more than others if that's the case.
I feel like, out of these Marvel universe films, Guardians of the Galaxy is the only one that I was actually surprised about, in terms of quality. I went into it knowing nothing about it and liked it a lot, easily more than most of the others. As for the rest of the movies, whether I liked them or not, they were about on par with what I expected from them. Well, maybe Iron Man was better than I expected it to be, but that came out so many years ago so I honestly don't remember what I expected from it before seeing it.
Quote from: Homura Akemi on April 25, 2015, 11:09:27 AM
I've made Dalek hate Age of Ultron. Whoops.
If Dalek hates it, then I'll probably love it by default. :>
Dalek hates everything!
Dalek hates Mother 3 and Legend of Galactic Heroes.
I'm not really crazy about Wanda and Pietro's Romani root being removed from the film.
Spoiler
And apparently they're also show nas Nazi sympathizers at one point. Da fuq
Quote from: Homura Akemi on April 25, 2015, 01:34:38 PM
I'm mean, he has some pretty good reasons to hate the film from what I've told him. It's exceptionally dumb.
You mean, like every superhero film ever made? That kind of goes without saying with this genre. :>
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 25, 2015, 02:10:58 PM
Quote from: Homura Akemi on April 25, 2015, 01:34:38 PM
I'm mean, he has some pretty good reasons to hate the film from what I've told him. It's exceptionally dumb.
You mean, like every superhero film ever made? That kind of goes without saying with this genre. :>
I haven't seen Age of Ultron yet, but there's a difference between normal superhero dumb like Guardians and insufferably dumb comic book refuse like X-Men: The Last Stand. Not that I'm comparing that shit stain to AoU, of course.
I'll just watch it for myself and see. I have a feeling that whatever the problem is, it probably won't bother me nearly as much. After all, I'm one of the two or three people on Earth who likes Spider-Man 3 and feel that people were pretty nuts to take any of those films seriously in the first place.
Well until then, some friends are holding marathons of all the movies, by Phases. Yes, that means that they're going to watch the first 6 MCU movies in a row, and that'll be tomorrow, while Phase 2 will be on Tuesday. I'm off for both days, so I'll try to make it to both, but I'm probably only going to do the latter half of Phase 1, or at least come for First Avenger and Avengers.
I arrived at the marathon just as the credits for Iron Man 2 were rolling, and stuck for the back half. It was swell.
Thor is actually tied with Avengers as my most seen MCU film, but not really by choice. Still, it's a very enjoyable film that is made on its lead actors, which Hemsworth and Hiddleston instantly nail. Hemsworth's straight-faced delivery of his absurd lines in the second act definitely help to keep it fresh, even when it gets occasionally tedious. But when the brothers are on screen together, it's all worth it.
And while I'm not as closely tied to The First Avenger as EK is, there's no denying that it's top-notch stuff, and pretty fun the whole way through. The Red Skull is definitely among the stronger Marvel villains seen so far, although I do still wish that he had a little more badassery time. Hugo Weaving is definitely captivating enough to require more screentime. Still, the film's throwback to the period was done quite well, which is to be expected from the guy behind The Rocketeer.
Avengers is Avengers. I still get that rush each time I see it, but to be fair, I try to keep distance from my viewings, so it still happens. But my friend's projector helped to keep the movie looking great!
I'll make it for the full Phase 2 marathon on Tuesday. We had such a good time that I can't wait!
I had to miss the first 2/3rds of Iron Man 3 for the Phase 2 marathon, but after I came over, it was a great time! I still think that IM3 is a little samey, but the last act does contain some of the MCU's best action sequences, while The Dark World does have issues in story, which are made up by a plethora of other elements elevating it from the first. It really is the latter 2 films that help to make the second phase superior to the first, though.
And I can't wait for Thursday night!
Winter Soldier and GOTG make phase 2. But IM3 and The Dark World are great additions nonetheless.
I still say that unless Age of Ultron and Ant-Man suck, Phase 2 will remain superior to the first.
And honestly, it's starting to seem that it's possibility for either, if not even both, but I'm still keeping my excitement alive for them.
The general consensus on AOU so far seems to be that it's good but not as good as the first movie. I haven't seen many people say that it outright sucks.
I haven't really heard too many people say that either, but there are some serious criticisms that have been hinted at, which I've yet to fully look up. I want to go in as blind as possible.
Well, since no one brought up any criticisms for the first one when it came out, at this point I can only consider the ones for the second being related to high expectations. I mean, anyone here should remember the whole "Whedon > Cameron" idiocy when the first movie came out.
As someone who is expecting an entertaining action flick like the first, I'm not sure how to be disappointed.
I've checked out a number of reviews, and surprisingly few of them seem to be truly positive or negative; most of them are just kind of lukewarm, I'm finding. The major criticism seems to be that the story is poorly told/stupid/makes no sense, with praise going to the action scenes and character interactions.
Not like it's completely inconceivable for Whedon to drop the ball, however. He's done it before in mediums other than film. However, I do find people tend to give him a pass a lot of the time or overlook when he messes up as I mentioned before with the overpraise the first Avengers movie got. I'm probably the harshest critic of Whedon on this site and am pretty hard on his screw-ups so I'd probably be more inclined to agree with flaws pointed out in the movie.
But I'll only being going into this expecting an entertaining movie like I did last time. I trust he can deliver on that front.
Either way, he's not going to be back for Infinity War, so whatever.
Similar to Whedon>Cameron arguments, I've already heard Russos>Whedon go around. Which is pretty premature, to say the least.
Now, see, as much as I really enjoyed Winter Soldier, that's far too early to say. I don't know why people are so quick to make such sweeping generalizations of people's careers so quickly.
Whedon is hella problematic, I get it. He has said and written in some stupid-ass shit in the past. But at least he has more than one movie and a handful of television directing credits under his belt.
I'm sure that they'll continue to do fine with their movies, but it seems really weird to consider the Russo brothers to be the MCU's saviors.
First it was Favreau, then Whedon, then the Russos, and it will probably end up being Gunn after that.
Just let them do their jobs and hope for the best. The MCU does not rely on the vision of one person.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on April 29, 2015, 01:34:57 AM
First it was Favreau, then Whedon, then the Russos, and it will probably end up being Gunn after that.
Just let them do their jobs and hope for the best. The MCU does not rely on the vision of one person.
Yep.
Especially because if any one person is responsible, it's probably Feige.
To be honest, the story for the first movie wasn't exactly gold, either. Nobody criticized it because they were too blinded by spectacle at the time since nobody had really seen a movie like this before. But really, Loki was barely a threat by the third act, and the whole story was just a way to write around great set-piece moments. Other than that, it basically just boils down to teamwork is good, fighting amongst each other is bad. It's a basic moral with a very flat story. The reason everyone ignored that, though, was because the action was awesome and the characters were so well-acted. The movie had a great sense of humor and felt like a big deal. No matter what, the second movie can't capture that feeling again, so despite high expectations, of course people will be more prepared to actually critique it, rather than just giving it a pass on everything like the first movie.
Anyways, I've listened to just a few reviews from reviewers who I've been following for years and have a lot of trust in, and they all seemed to find it to be a really fun movie, but not without its flaws. I have a feeling that it'll come off that way to me, as well. Once again, I'm that one ass-hole who actually really enjoyed Spider-Man 3, so I'm pretty sure that I can look past whatever flaws that this movie has if it's still really entertaining.
Would you believe it's 2015 and I've yet to see a single MCU movie? None of 'em. I want to marathon them all in order one weekend. Maybe when Age of Ultron makes it to Blu-ray I'll splurge and buy them all.
The official line-up of Civil War. (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/captain-america-civil-war-castings-794055?facebook_20150507)
I was not expecting Ross to return.
*SPOILERS* FOR ULTRONQuoteAudiences saddened that there won't be another new Avengers movie until 2018 can find comfort in the fact that Earth's Mightiest Heroes will be assembling far sooner than that — Marvel Studios has announced that the Avengers will be seen in full in next year's Captain America: Civil War.
In addition to Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr.'s warring Captain America and Iron Man, the movie will also feature Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow, Anthony Mackie's Falcon, Paul Bettany's Vision, Don Cheadle's War Machine and Elizabeth Olsen's Scarlet Witch, the complete lineup of the team as things were left at the end of Avengers: Age of Ultron.
Additionally, Jeremy Renner's Hawkeye, Sebastian Stan's Bucky Barnes and Paul Rudd's Ant-Man will make appearances, with Chadwick Boseman debuting as T'Challa, the Black Panther.
Other familiar faces in the movie will include Emily VanCamp reprising her Winter Soldier role as Sharon Carter, Frank Grillo returning as Brock Rumlow and, perhaps surprisingly, William Hurt returning for the first time as The Incredible Hulk's Thunderbolt Ross.
Avengers: Civil War
So we're not getting a third Captain America movie.
First of all, we've been down this road. This is nothing new. We already knew that this film would have a large cast, so I don't get why peopke are treating it like news.
Now, to be fair, it just says that those characters will be appearing in the film. Appearing and having major roles are two completely different things. For example, Black Panther will most likely only get a cameo, as will several other characters mentioned.
The only people we know will be having major roles are all of the core CA characters from the last two movies, and Tony Stark/Iron Man. I also want to give the Russo Brothers the benefit of the doubt, as Winter Soldier was excellent, and I recall them saying that this would still very much be Steve's story, despite the other characters.
Personally, I'm no longer a fan of jumping on the "it's going to suck" bandwagon until I've at least seen a trailer or something. With the MCU's track record since their inception, they get it right more often than not, so I'm going to give this a chance and see the movie before I make any bold claims about it.
I never said it would suck in my last post.
Spider-Man's in it, too.
Let's just hope it's better than the comic book.
Kind of hard for it not to be better, really.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 07, 2015, 09:06:47 PM
Kind of hard for it not to be better, really.
Yeah, as long as Captain America doesn't start talking about how shitty America is, it'll be better than the source material. ;D
He's also only getting a cameo, though.
As for the movie, I feel like it'll take more cues from the Death of Captain America story-line written by Ed Brubaker (which is part of Civil War), rather than anything written by Mark Millar. Also, Kevin Feige said that movie Civil War would be very different from comic Civil War, so there's also that.
What do you guys think they are going to do about these movies when the actors, for any reason (age, no longer contractually obligated, etc.) aren't returning?
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 07, 2015, 09:11:50 PM
He's also only getting a cameo, though.
Then that pretty much proves the film will be completely different from the comic. :D He was one of the most important characters IIRC.
QuoteAs for the movie, I feel like it'll take more cues from the Death of Captain America story-line written by Ed Brubaker (which is part of Civil War), rather than anything written by Mark Millar. Also, Kevin Feige said that movie Civil War would be very different from comic Civil War, so there's also that.
Y'know, between Kick-Ass and Kingsman, I kind of wish Matthew Vaughn and Jane Goldman were the ones to adapt Civil War. They've taken Millar's ideas and improved them 100-fold twice now. :rtard:
Quote from: talonmalon333 on May 07, 2015, 09:14:56 PM
What do you guys think they are going to do about these movies when the actors, for any reason (age, no longer contractually obligated, etc.) aren't returning?
Kill them off or pull a War Machine.
Brubaker's stuff is much more interesting to adapt than Millar's, so I hope it does. Also, Baron Zemo being there is a good touch. I'm guessing it'll center on Cap and his team, but hopefully it also centers on the search for Bucky, too.
Speaking of Brubaker, I'm hoping his Iron Fist stuff ends up in the series. It got pushed to last in the upcoming series, so I hope there's a reason for it.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on May 07, 2015, 09:14:56 PM
What do you guys think they are going to do about these movies when the actors, for any reason (age, no longer contractually obligated, etc.) aren't returning?
Not use them, I assume. They sign contracts for multiple movies and when their arc is done, that's when it ends. If they don't come back after their contract is up, they just don't use the character.
Well, both of those guys did a good job adapting shitty material, but who's to say that the Russo Brothers can't? After all, they have proven that they really understand how to make a good CA movie.
Though, Matthew Vaughn did also direct X-Men: First Class, so he's got three solid comic book films under his belt.
I just mean that they seem to have a knack for taking Millar's work and making it good. ;)
And now the Russo Brothers will (hopefully) prove that they aren't the only ones who have a knack for it. ;)
I saw a video on youtube the other day comparing the comic book and movie versions of Kick-Ass and it's not even a competition which was the better of the two. I wasn't aware Millar could be such a terrible writer, but there's your proof.
Only problem I have with First Class now is the uneven pacing and some of the cringeworthy dialogue. Otherwise it gave a second wind to the series after X3 almost killed it.
It's a shame Vaughn's only producing the new Fantastic Four movie. Would do wonders to alleviate the mountain of doubt for that film.
Aw, I didn't think any of the dialogue in First Class was cringe-worthy. It had the best line in X-Men film history when they meet Wolverine at the bar!
To be fair, Bryan Singer wrote the screenplay for that film, not Goldman, and Vaughn just directed it. Singer writes great stories and characters and is a great director, but he has written terrible dialogue from time to time.
Quote from: Foggle on May 07, 2015, 09:42:31 PM
Aw, I didn't think any of the dialogue in First Class was cringe-worthy.
Mutant and proud, motherfucker! :sly:
Oh God, that scene.
The script for DOFP was fantastic, just some of the lines in FC are a bit odd now. Like ^ that one.
Still, it's a really good film-- easily the best since X2 even if DOFP completely surpasses it.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 07, 2015, 09:41:36 PM
It's a shame Vaughn's only producing the new Fantastic Four movie. Would do wonders to alleviate the mountain of doubt for that film.
I was actually surprised when I saw the trailer in during Ultron. It looked a lot better than I thought it would. I mean, I haven't been keeping up with it at all, but it was a surprisingly well done trailer. I don't know what it says for the final product, but whoever did the trailer did a good job.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 07, 2015, 09:44:45 PM
Mutant and proud, motherfucker! :sly:
Was that... an actual line? Because I just watched the movie a few weeks ago and I don't remember it. I thought they used the only allotted PG-13 "fuck" in the Wolverine scene...
Quote from: Foggle on May 07, 2015, 09:46:48 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 07, 2015, 09:44:45 PM
Mutant and proud, motherfucker! :sly:
Was that... an actual line? Because I just watched the movie a few weeks ago and I don't remember it. I thought they used the only allotted PG-13 "fuck" in the Wolverine scene...
It's a line. Believe me. I was watching it with other people again a few months ago and I
did cringe. Like being hit with a truck of subtlety.
That exact line was said twice in the movie....minus one word, maybe. :D
Ewwww. I must have just ignored it, then.
FF4 actually has a really solid cast. Miles Teller in particular turned in a brilliant performance in Whiplash last year. That said, I can't speak at all for the director, as I've never seen any of his films, and the only one that I even know about is a found footage film called Chronicle.
Yeah, that and the rumors about Doctor Doom's portrayal are what get to me the most.
You mean about how he's supposedly going to be an evil blogger in this movie? :sly:
Speaking of evil bloggers, if they don't bring back JK Simmons for the Spider-Man re-reboot, they may as well not make it at all.
Of course they will. It's mandatory at this point.
And just to fuck with the audience, have Jonah make stealth references to what happened in the Raimi films so bloggers will make mountains of conspiracy theories and charts about it.
As long as Raimi gets to write his dialogue.
Just as a pipe dream, think of how much cooler superhero movies would be if Marvel and DC properties could cross over with each other. Batman vs. Superman sounds lame to me, but Captain America vs. Superman or Batman vs. Spider-Man would be ace. Everyone's inner five-year-old would squeal with glee.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 07, 2015, 10:20:18 PM
And just to fuck with the audience, have Jonah make stealth references to what happened in the Raimi films so bloggers will make mountains of conspiracy theories and charts about it.
He should also reference random minor events from the Amazing Spider-Man films and all the various cartoon series!
God, the Amalgam Cinematic Universe.
He should get to talk about his pet Spider-Verse theory before someone shoots it down and calls it absolutely retarded.
http://youtu.be/IgL8h_u2PHw
Also, somehow work in a reference to this scene, but apply it to criticizing someone in the MCU instead: http://youtu.be/mIABSdupWdI
Jonah was so good in those movies. Nobody does it better than JK.
Whoa, please happen. (http://www.thewrap.com/marvel-courting-ava-duvernay-to-direct-diverse-superhero-movie-exclusive/)
Holy Civil War spoilers!!! (http://boxintypex.blogspot.com/2015/05/major-spoilers-this-is-who-dies-in.html)
Spoiler
While I like Peggy Carter as a character, Marvel is going to need to do a bit more than killing off a geriatric to truly surprise me.
Spoiler
That's assuming she's killed off instead of just dying of natural causes.
I don't find it that shocking, honestly.
Spoiler
I'm not sure, but this does explain the frames taken of Steve, Sharon, Natasha, and Sam exiting a funeral from a few days ago.
Top 10 Favorite MCU Characters (So Far):
1. Captain America (Steve Rogers)
2. Star Lord (Peter Quill)
3. Rocket Raccoon
4. Peggy Carter
5. Daredevil (Matt Murdock)
6. Loki
7. Iron Man (Tony Stark)
8. Jarvus (Human Version)
9. The Winter Soldier (James "Bucky" Barnes)
10. Black Widow (Natasha Romanov)
This should be fun. Here are my rankings for MCU characters:
Good guys:
1. Daredevil (Matt Murdock)
2. Captain America (Steve Rogers)
3. Thor
4. The Winter Soldier (Bucky Barnes)
5. Rocket Raccoon
6. Iron Man (Tony Stark)
7. Star Lord (Peter Quill)
8. Gamora
9. The Black Widow (Natasha Romanov)
10. Drax the Destroyer
Bad guys:
1. The Kingpin (Wilson Fisk)
2. Loki
3. The Red Skull (Johann Schmidt)
4. Arnim Zola
5. Brock Rumlow
6. "The Mandarin" (Come on, I had to. It was brilliant!)
7. Obadiah Stane
8. The Winter Soldier (As a bad guy)
9. Alexander Pierce
10. Ronan the Accuser
I was considering doing a separate list for villains, but not enough in the MCU stood out to me.
Good lists, though!
Thanks! Yeah, I had to pad out the villain list a bit with good villains instead of awesome ones, but if they keep improving I'm sure my list will change eventually.
As for the hero list, I thought it was pretty obvious. I couldn't even fit them all on there.
Fisk is probably my favorite MCU character overall, followed by Matt. I really loved that show. :)
Heroes-
1- Peggy Carter
2- Black Widow
3- Thor
4- Captain America
5- Hawkeye
6- Daredevil
7- Rocket Raccoon
8- Iron Man
9- Gamora
10- Starlord
Villains
1- Wilson Fisk
2- Loki
3- Ultron
4- Nebula
5- Red Skull
6- Winter Soldier (really here out of iconography, but I love Sebastian Stan as Bucky in general)
7- Arnim Zola
8- Ronan the Accuser
9- Alexander Pierce
10- The Mandarin
Honorable mention to Yondu, who I totally loved but wasn't sure if he should qualify as a villain. And if I could bump my heroes list up to 15, I'd find room for Banner, Sif, Rhodey, Sam. and Drax. There really are some badass good guys in the universe.
Ava DuVernay is officially the director of Black Panther. (http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/06/ava-duvernay-direct-black-panther-marvel?mbid=social_twitter)
Awesome!
http://www.comicvine.com/articles/marvel-announces-tom-holland-will-play-spider-man-/1100-152687/ (http://www.comicvine.com/articles/marvel-announces-tom-holland-will-play-spider-man-/1100-152687/)
Aww, I was hoping for Butterfield.
I know 0 actors under 20. :-X
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on June 23, 2015, 04:58:04 PM
Aww, I was hoping for Butterfield.
Same.
Still, I'm sure they picked well.
http://comicbook.com/2015/06/24/spider-man-confirmed-for-captain-america-civil-war/ (http://comicbook.com/2015/06/24/spider-man-confirmed-for-captain-america-civil-war/)
Might as well just confirm who WON'T be in Civil War.
Next we'll get an announcement that FOX Studios has made a similar deal to Sony with Marvel, and have given them back the rights to use X-Men characters, and that literally all of them will be appearing in Civil War because why the hell not, at this point?
By the time that we finally get to Infinity War, it's going to seem like a downgrade as far as crossovers go. :lol:
Goddamn, look how good that Deadpool costume is.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ew.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fi%2F2015%2F07%2F01%2Fdeadpool.jpg&hash=b2ee127bdf1d1e1075acb3677108ca3c18cdb759)
It's practically 1:1 from the comics! This is going to be so great. :swoon:
That's got to be the best looking costume in the whole MCU. My hype levels for this movie are through the roof. :shakeshakeshake:
Quote from: Cartoon X on July 02, 2015, 01:40:34 PMThat's got to be the best looking costume in the whole MCU. My hype levels for this movie are through the roof. :shakeshakeshake:
Deadpool is being produced by FOX, not Disney/Marvel Studios, so it's not part of the MCU (and unlike Sony, they have yet to make any sort of deal with Marvel). It is in the same Universe as the X-Men movies, though.
You mean DP^. I can see how you could make that mistake given DD's new costume.
It does look great! I hope it's good seeing as Deadpool is my favorite superhero ever.
If you were to tell me 5 years ago that Fox was seriously going to make a Deadpool movie that stays true to the character, and maintains an R rating, I wouldn't believe you.
Beyond excited.
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 02, 2015, 02:47:12 PM
I hope it's good seeing as Deadpool is my favorite superhero ever.
Same. :)
Quote from: Avaitor on July 02, 2015, 03:06:01 PM
If you were to tell me 5 years ago that Fox was seriously going to make a Deadpool movie that stays true to the character, and maintains an R rating, I wouldn't believe you.
Beyond excited.
"Deadpool is a hard R. It's graphic. Nothing is taboo. You either commit to a truly outrageous boundary-pushing kind of movie or you don't."
-Producer Simon Kinberg
:joy:
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 02, 2015, 02:47:12 PM
You mean DP^. I can see how you could make that mistake given DD's new costume.
It does look great! I hope it's good seeing as Deadpool is my favorite superhero ever.
Well, actually it was another case of fucking auto correct. I despise having to use a cell phone to type.
Quote from: Foggle on July 02, 2015, 03:26:21 PM
"Deadpool is a hard R. It's graphic. Nothing is taboo. You either commit to a truly outrageous boundary-pushing kind of movie or you don't."
-Producer Simon Kinberg
:joy:
Can't wait!
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 02, 2015, 02:34:20 PM
Deadpool is being produced by FOX, not Disney/Marvel Studios, so it's not part of the MCU (and unlike Sony, they have yet to make any sort of deal with Marvel). It is in the same Universe as the X-Men movies, though.
Oh. Then let me rephrase that and say I think it's the best-looking costume in any Marvel movie. :D
Now, if this movie could just somehow manage to find a way to top the "go fuck yourselves" cameo from First Class, it may in fact become the greatest cinematic masterpiece ever made.
Ava won't be on Black Panther after all. (http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/03/ava-duvernay-black-panther-pass?hootPostID=9ec2dd718f53144dcf8ed2417351774e)
I can't help but wonder how many talented writers/directors have turned down Marvel films due to not liking the "big picture" sort of way they do things. Ava DuVernay and Edgar Wright would have been amazing additions to their franchise.
The reason they walked away was because they wanted to do their own thing, but that would require the movies to be outside of the MCU. Since Marvel wants all of its movies to take place in the same fictional Universe, it means maintaining continuity and thus they can't have directors deviate too much from their overall vision. That's the double-edged sword of having a fictional Universe like that. On the one hand, it allows for cool crossovers and an extensive mythos. On the other hand, it just messes with the creative control of certain writers and directors.
At any rate, it's not like things always don't work out. They successfully got the guy who did the massively underrated but cult classic The Rocketeer to do a great superhero period piece with Captain America, and then they got the Russo Brothers who worked on the show Community to make an excellent sequel. And they also managed to get an oddball director like James Gunn to adapt an obscure comic book series and he was allowed to basically run wild with his creativity. Having Joss Whedon do the Avengers films was also a great choice.
And of course Marvel has shown some good talent in its TV division as well, this year. Agents of SHIELD was garbage (and thankfully is essentially non-canon, now), but Agent Carter and Daredevil were excellent, and showed lots of creative control in terms of the writing.
Anyways, my point is that creative differences are bound to happen from time to time, and given their overall good track record, I don't think that it's quite right to think that there is a problem with Marvel or the directors that turn them down whenever they don't see eye-to-eye, especially since that happens in film pretty much all of the time.
Still sucks that Edgar Wright is not on the team, though. :imnothappy:
While it's sad, I'm not sure if the people who offered Duvernay the job really thought it through. Like someone who's good at directing historical dramas might not be as good at directing superhero action movies. It's like how Aronofsky's pitch for Batman got thrown out.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 04, 2015, 06:31:09 AMWhile it's sad, I'm not sure if the people who offered Duvernay the job really thought it through. Like someone who's good at directing historical dramas might not be as good at directing superhero action movies. It's like how Aronofsky's pitch for Batman got thrown out.
This too.
Marvel goes meta: http://io9.com/watch-a-viral-video-setting-up-ant-man-and-linking-to-c-1716384609
I hope we see Yellowjacket.
So, early reception for Ant-Man is super polarizing. I expected it to be mediocre to above average reviews across the board, but I've seen quite a few reviewers either seem to despise it or love it. Of course, as always, I'm going to see the movie and formulate my own opinion on it, but while I would never discredit someone else's opinion based on what I haven't seen yet, it's worth noting that all of the negative reviews are extremely critical towards Marvel for Edgar Wright leaving the movie, whereas the positive ones seem to indicate that putting the behind-the-scenes drama aside, a lot of Wright's influence still remains in the movie and that it's one of Marvel's most entertaining films to date.
Anyways, given how people reacted to AAOU, I have a feeling that I'll probably enjoy this movie a bit more than the majority of people. But who really knows?
I watched the leaked Deadpool trailer from Comic-Con on YouTube. Low quality video footage aside, this movie looks fucking amazing. It'll be a day one viewing for me.
Awesomesauce!
So, as someone who just flat-out didn't like Man of Steel and in general hasn't been that on board with DC since TDK trilogy ended, I have to admit that I really liked the new Batman v. Superman trailer, personally. The tone really reminds me of Frank Miller's TDKR, the fact that it's actually dealing with Superman's crazy destruction of Metropolis from the first movie to turn people against him is a good plot point salvaging a big fuck-up in my book, and I really feel like the dark atmosphere actually fits with this movie based on the trailer (whereas a solo Superman movie shouldn't be as depressing as MoS was, IMO). Also, Ben Affleck really does look like he could make for a great older version of Bruce Wayne.
That isn't to say that I'm completely sold on the movie. I'm not really that into how they are portraying Lex Luthor, and the trailer also makes it seem like Wonder Woman is being crammed into this movie rather than being an integral part of the story, but on the whole I actually liked what I saw.
That said, a well cut trailer can always still lead into a bad movie, but suffice it to say that DC has at least managed to perk my interest a little bit, which is saying a lot in a genre almost entirely dominated by Marvel these days.
I just watched both trailers.
I thought they were going to not make Deadpool look fucked up. I could barely see but it seems like he's ugly as ever. Good!
Batman v Superman is looking pretty good from the trailer. Since I don't care too much about Wonder Woman, I am not worried about how much she is in the movie. I really hate that version of Lex Luthor though. He'll probably lose his hair but his dialogue is even worse.
To be fair, though, they are trying to be different from any previous film versions of these characters, while still staying true to the spirit of the comics, so their rationale for characterizing some iconic characters differently is to update them in order to make them believable for modern audiences. That isn't to say that I'm down with this version of the character, but I couldn't exactly expect them to try and copy Gene Hackman's version either.
That said, Jesse Eisenberg did shave his head and was wearing a wig for those scenes in the trailer, so he will be bald by the end of the movie.
As for Wonder Woman, my point was that I rather wouldn't have her introduced in this film at all. I can't stand when characters or plot points are just tacked onto a story that doesn't really need them (such as Black Widow in Iron Man 2), but they seem to be shoehorning her into the film in order to build up to Justice League. I could be wrong, but I'd rather have her introduced in a movie where she's more central to the plot. This movie should strictly be contained to the personal conflict between Batman and Superman, IMO.
I know exactly what you mean. I hate it when they do that too but I just wanted to show how much I don't care for most versions of Wonder Woman. :D
I wonder if Lex will lose his hair like he did in Birthright. I almost feel dirty for saying that since that's my 2nd favorite Superman story and the best Luthor ever though.
Wonder Woman is long overdo for a movie. Is she getting one?
Right, but for me it has less to do with whether I care about Wonder Woman as a character or not and more to do with the fact that if she's shoehorned into the film, it can end up feeling over-bloated or leave less time to focus on the core characters and plot points of the movie, hence it negatively effects the film as a whole.
Gotcha.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 12, 2015, 05:27:50 PM
Wonder Woman is long overdo for a movie. Is she getting one?
Just watch the animated movie
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 12, 2015, 05:27:50 PMWonder Woman is long overdo for a movie. Is she getting one?
DC announced solo movies for her and several other DC characters months ago (including Shazam, Cyborg, and Aquaman, among the B-list heroes).
Of course, those will only happen if you assume that DC's franchise becomes a success. If BVS and Suicide Squad BOTH manage to somehow bomb next year, then I doubt that they'll even manage to make it to Justice League.
Anyways, if you want to see a good Wonder Woman movie, I recommend the 2009 animated film, which is easily one of the better DTV DC movies to have ever been released.
If Batman vs Superman ends with Batty and Supes becoming best friends and sharing drinks together while regaling each other with tales of battling evil, I will officially start giving the DCCU the time of day. :D
Deadpool looks like the best superhero movie ever, but I need to see that footage in HD. Right now.
Well, I don't know if I'd call it a superhero movie as much as it is an anti-hero movie.
Just trying to make the distinction between all comic book movies and ones based off of Big 2 properties. Deadpool isn't a superhero of course, though he does want to be (at times).
https://mobile.twitter.com/VancityReynolds/status/620373032402456577
I don't care if the VFX shots aren't done yet, I want the Comic-Con trailer in high quality right now. I can't wait 3 weeks for it!
Quote from: Foggle on July 12, 2015, 06:53:23 PMIf Batman vs Superman ends with Batty and Supes becoming best friends and sharing drinks together while regaling each other with tales of battling evil, I will officially start giving the DCCU the time of day. :D
So, basically like the ending of most Marvel and DC-related HISHE episodes.
I keep calling the DCCU the "dickoo".
Any talk of the Suicide Squad (https://youtu.be/NxQbI0hWi3I) trailer?
Gotta say, it doesn't do much of anything for me, and I liked both the JLU episode and Arrow team. It's so stilted and lifeless.
Of course the final movie could be different, but at this point I don't owe DC's movie team any sort of benefit of the doubt. They need to prove it to me first with the final product.
To be fair, that movie is a full year away, so they obviously haven't filmed most of it, especially any special effects heavy scenes (hence why you see no actual action in the trailer). It's kind of unfair to judge a movie when it's that early into production.
That isn't to say that I'm supporting it, but rather that I have no opinion on it at this point.
I think I'd be more interested in Suicide Squad if the Joker wasn't in it. Yes, I understand that he's Batman's most iconic villain, but the amount of Joker worship that's been shoved down our throats over the past few years (beginning with Arkham Origins) in the non-comic universes is making me tire of the character. Plus, the SS movie version looks ugly as hell, and I also think they should have given him a rest from the films until at least 2018 out of respect for Heath Ledger.
Well, that's a bit of a double-edged sword. If you are viewing these movies as a fan of comics, then you could argue that it's tiring to see Batman characters at all (unless they did a Nightwing movie, which would be awesome). I mean, not just the Joker, but Batman himself has been the subject of over-exposure over the past several years. So in that regard, it's easy to say that they should give those characters a rest.
But now think from DC/WB's perspective as a business. Batman is their most iconic character, and the Joker their most iconic villain. Also recall that at least 90% of the audience for these movies probably don't read comic books at all. In that regard, of course DC is going to want to use their most recognizable characters to boost the interest in their films, especially when they have to compete with the already well-established MCU.
Nobody who isn't a nerd of some sort would even know who any of the characters in the Suicide Squad are. Using a villain that people can recognize is the best way to gain the attention of tons of non-comic-book readers.
And with all due respect to Heath Ledger, this movie will be releasing in 2016, a total of 8-years after TDK and his tragic passing. That's a pretty sizable gap of time.
And lastly, I have to kind of chuckle a bit whenever people once again judge the Joker based on his design rather than his performance (and seeing him for all of 2-seconds in a trailer doesn't count as seeing his performance). Remember how people flipped their shit when Ledger's design was revealed at Comic-Con 2007 and people openly exclaimed that he would suck? Because I do.
Granted that Leto's Joker could always suck, but I personally have nothing reliable to go on to make a judgement yet.
And once again, I'm not a DC-apologist by any means. I just think that people are being a bit unfair in their pessimism here; which, BTW, is also proof that I don't just defend stuff that I actually am a fan of, like the MCU.
I just agree that the new Joker is ugly.
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 14, 2015, 02:24:59 AM
I just agree that the new Joker is ugly.
Because he's supposed to look pretty, obviously.
Some would agree that he is in fact pretty. :)
Well, clearly he wears so much makeup for a reason.
Naw, I think DC deserves the pessimism. ;)
I'm willing to wait and see how it turns out, but I'm not going to give them any benefit of the doubt until they show me something worth seeing. This trailer ain't gonna do it.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 14, 2015, 01:12:22 PM
Naw, I think DC deserves the pessimism. ;)
Because TDK trilogy never happened.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 14, 2015, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 14, 2015, 01:12:22 PM
Naw, I think DC deserves the pessimism. ;)
Because TDK trilogy never happened.
Christopher Nolan is doing this?
The last non-Batman film DC did that was any good came out in 1980. I don't see why pessimism isn't deserved.
1980... :(
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 14, 2015, 01:44:59 PM
1980... :(
Superman II. 35 years ago.
Like I said, if the film is good, I'll go see it. But DC is going to earn my trust first outside of Batman movies.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 14, 2015, 01:42:19 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 14, 2015, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 14, 2015, 01:12:22 PM
Naw, I think DC deserves the pessimism. ;)
Because TDK trilogy never happened.
Christopher Nolan is doing this?
He's executive producer on these films.
QuoteThe last non-Batman film DC did that was any good came out in 1980. I don't see why pessimism isn't deserved.
Because assuming that just because these are all DC films they are all going to be of the same level of quality is stupid.
First of as all, this trailer was never supposed to be released to the public. DC only wanted to show-case it at CC for fans to see something, and wait for more scenes to be filmed (once again, this movie is more than a year away from release) before releasing a proper trailer to the public, but released the official version after the trailer leaked online.
It'd be one thing if you were pre-judging this if it were directed by Zack Snyder, but it's not. It's written and directed by different people. But by your logic it doesn't matter just because it's DC. That'd be like saying that all future X-Men movies would suck unless they were directed by Bryan Singer, but then Matthew Vaughn did First Class and it was great.
Secondly, you seem to forget that Marvel was awful throughout all of the 90's, and had just as many duds as good movies up until 2008 when they formed their own studio. DC hasn't had as many films since then, but at least three of them were good (and Superman Returns is underrated, IMO).
Thirdly is that as far as the DCCU goes, you literally only have one movie to go on so far. I didn't like MOS, but I'm not going to be pessimistic based on one bad movie (and to be fair, there are a lot of people who like that movie, so it's not even universally hated).
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 14, 2015, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 14, 2015, 01:44:59 PM
1980... :(
Superman II. 35 years ago.
Like I said, if the film is good, I'll go see it. But DC is going to earn my trust first outside of Batman movies.
Well, seeing as how Batman v Superman is a Batman movie, and SS has Batman in it at least as a cameo, you shouldn't have anything to complain about. :sly:
Batman vs Superman is looking a little better, but I'm not sold on Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor yet. And Suicide Squad still does little for me, especially not Joker or Harley.
I'd like to be proven wrong, though.
Luthor is the only part of BVS that I'm not buying, but he doesn't seem to be a huge focus of the movie. The rest of the trailer was great, and once again, that says a lot considering how much I disliked MOS. I'm cautiously optimistic about this one, now.
As for SS, I could go either way on the Joker's design. It depends completely on the performance, though. Heath Ledger's Joker design was incredibly ugly and just looked wrong, but he fit so perfectly with his performance that people forgot how much they were bitching about it before.
As for Harley, though, I think that her design looks great, myself. I'm surprised that they got it to look so good without being too silly in live action.
Speaking of Eisenberg. (http://t.co/5AJlH3AkgO)
We'll see. :il_hahaha:
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 14, 2015, 02:10:58 PM
Thirdly is that as far as the DCCU goes, you literally only have one movie to go on so far. I didn't like MOS, but I'm not going to be pessimistic based on one bad movie (and to be fair, there are a lot of people who like that movie, so it's not even universally hated).
I know they decided to remove it from the canon after bad reviews, but let's not forget that Green Lantern was supposed to be the first DCCU movie.
Fun fact about Green Lantern:
That movie involved many of the same people behind Arrow and The Flash. However the movie is ass and the shows are actually good.
So what happened? The executives at WB raping whatever plans that they originally had for the film is what happened.
In an interview with Greg Berlanti, he said that the movie studio changed almost everything from the original script. He didn't have any creative control over it. If I could remember where I originally read the interview, that would sure be awesome.
Which is a shame, because Supergirl looks like the most authentic live action portrayal of Superman's universe I've seen in a long time. It's clear these guys should have more creative control.
Yeah, I read that same (or maybe a similar) interview. It's well known by fans, though, that they basically butchered the original screenplay.
And when you look at how good Arrow and The Flash turned out, it really showcases how incompetent some movie producers can be.
Alright, so RT aside (though, do note that the average review score is actually going up rather than down as the movie comes closer to release), it appears that the people outright slamming on Ant-Man are mostly the same people who are just tired of Marvel in general.
Meanwhile, 4/5 of the YouTube reviewers that I regularly follow gave the movie very positive reviews, even stating that it's one of the stronger solo MCU films as well as one of the genuinely funniest. The one other reviewer that I follow hasn't gotten to see an advanced screening of the film, so he hasn't posted a review up yet.
I wasn't expecting too much from this movie, TBH, but I'm really glad to hear that it's actually quite good from people who's opinions I generally trust based on several of their other reviews.
I found the interview with Berlanti, it's on the second to last page of the DC thread. They didn't even use his script at all. Amazing.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 14, 2015, 09:40:57 PM
Alright, so RT aside (though, do note that the average review score is actually going up rather than down as the movie comes closer to release), it appears that the people outright slamming on Ant-Man are mostly the same people who are just tired of Marvel in general.
Yeah, it looks like I'm going to have to narrow looking over opinions for future superhero films. People who are sick of a genre and want it to end are not my concern when looking for a review of the actual film. It was tough dealing with AoU over that (while still trying to keep legit criticism) and it's only going to get worse from here on out.
Yeah, I feel like no matter what, when anything gets too popular, you'll inevitably get people hating on it unfairly. The annoying part is sorting out the haters from the actual legitimate criticisms from people trying to view the movie from a less biased POV.
AAOU was hardly a perfect movie by any means, but neither was the first film, yet people hold that up to a pedestal while being way too ridiculously hard on the second film, IMO. Most of its problems are far more minor than a lot of negative reviewers let on, and the few actual noteworthy problems are obscured behind BS like people whining about Black Widow having a romantic interest in Bruce Banner.
I feel like we're entering into a phase of Marvel where people are now scrutinizing the films for anything they get wrong, whether it's a big issue or a minor one, rather than enjoying the movies for what they are. And there's nothing wrong with having high expectations, but I'm referring specifically to the people who go into these movies with the sole intention of hating on them.
On the internet, people think it's "cool" to be sick of Marvel movies now. You'd think 5 or more came out each year and that Ant-Man wasn't the first true B-lister to get a MCU movie going by what they're saying.
Ant-Man seems like one of those movies that's going to be what you want it to be. If you're bitter about Edgar Wright leaving or that we got an Ant-Man movie before a solo Black Widow, then you're probably going to go out of your way to dislike it. If you think that this looks like a fun change of pace for the MCU or just want more material from it, it should be good.
I'm all up for it, myself.
I'm just about to see Ant-Man!
I'll make a talkback when I come back. I'm pretty excited, though.
The reviews have been fairly good for it. Putting the naysayers aside, the five YouTube critics that I regularly follow all gave it pretty favorable reviews, with two of them even stating that it was now their favorite Phase Two movie.
So, in other news, we should probably all be grateful that TASM series is done.
Had TASM2 been a success, this is supposedly the even more ludicrous third movie that we would've got: http://io9.com/the-bonkers-plan-for-amazing-spider-man-3-bring-back-e-1718146107
I'm fairly certain those movies aren't going to be remembered for very long. Had they come out a decade or so ago they'd probably have more of a shot, but they just don't stack up to the other movies the genre is putting out now. I don't think this would have helped much.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 16, 2015, 08:07:26 PM
So, in other news, we should probably all be grateful that TASM series is done.
Had TASM2 been a success, this is supposedly the even more ludicrous third movie that we would've got: http://io9.com/the-bonkers-plan-for-amazing-spider-man-3-bring-back-e-1718146107
What do you have against the Clone Saga?
Nothing. I just think that it's a poor concept for a film. Not everything that works in one medium is necessarily suitable to be adapted into another.
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 16, 2015, 08:14:13 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 16, 2015, 08:07:26 PM
So, in other news, we should probably all be grateful that TASM series is done.
Had TASM2 been a success, this is supposedly the even more ludicrous third movie that we would've got: http://io9.com/the-bonkers-plan-for-amazing-spider-man-3-bring-back-e-1718146107
What do you have against the Clone Saga?
Which one, at the end of the day, is the clone?
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 16, 2015, 08:24:59 PM
Nothing. I just think that it's a poor concept for a film. Not everything that works in one medium is necessarily suitable to be adapted into another.
You actually think that I would defend the Clone Saga? :srs:
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 16, 2015, 08:27:56 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on July 16, 2015, 08:14:13 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 16, 2015, 08:07:26 PM
So, in other news, we should probably all be grateful that TASM series is done.
Had TASM2 been a success, this is supposedly the even more ludicrous third movie that we would've got: http://io9.com/the-bonkers-plan-for-amazing-spider-man-3-bring-back-e-1718146107
What do you have against the Clone Saga?
Which one, at the end of the day, is the clone?
According to the tvtropes page I was reading, there's like 4 or 5 clone sagas. lol
I quite liked Ant-Man. While the tone was very much a MCU movie, it felt more like a heist film with a neat gimmick than a superhero film to me, which as a fan of heist films, was something I could get into pretty easily. I also found the protagonists fairly compelling. While perhaps not a necessarily special characterization, the fact that Scott was a dad just trying to do right by his kid made him more quickly sympathetic and endearing to me. I also really liked the movie's version of Hank. As someone whose only familiar with Ant-Man through EMH, I liked the movie's version of the character(s) much more. I appreciated that there was only one real big fight scene and it was saved towards the end. Considering Marvel was all about fight after fight with AoU, that surprised me, but I think that really helped it make more of an impact since it's not quite as over-the-top or elaborate as those in other Marvel films.
The weakest link in the movie is pretty easily the villain. He's as obvious, one-dimensional, and over-the-top as they come. He's amusingly hammy so that didn't drag the film down for me too much, but it would have been nice if they made him a more well-rounded and developed character, since there was a good foundation for one. But the villains have never been the strong point of these movies, I suppose.
Flaws, formula, and all, I still enjoyed the film. More than AoU, actually. Of course, I've never been as enthusiastic about the MCU films as others here have and I'm fond of heist films, so ymmv. Still, I think the negativity and reservations people might have towards the film are unfair and unwarranted, and think most people here would quite enjoy it.
Also, I was pleased with both the mid-credits and post-credits scenes. The post-credits one is especially sweet hype for Civil War.
I'm glad he's better in the movie since Hank was easily the worst main Avenger.
It also sounds like Marvel has filmed yet again to make a good movie villain. The latest Marvel movie I've seen is GOTG and so far I only like Loki, Red Skull and The Winter Soldier.
They should have used the Irredeemable Ant-Man as the villain. It would have worked great with the comedic tone. Would have been even better if Yellowjacket made a cameo.
Anyway, this sounds fun. Definitely will be seeing this one eventually.
The post-credits scene was awesome. It actually has me really excited for Civil War, now.
As for the movie, I already gave my thoughts on it in the other thread, but it was plenty of fun. I still personally prefer AoU, but this was an above average solo superhero-film. And while I did like the heist elements, it did still feel a bit too formulaic to me in the first half with the whole typical character arc and training montage, but it was all still executed rather well.
One thing I've said before is that we'll probably see Miles Morales on screen before DC ever skips over Dick Grayson as Robin. Well... (http://www.techtimes.com/articles/69797/20150719/jason-todd-could-be-the-main-villain-in-ben-afflecks-standalone-batman-movie.htm)
If this is true, well, I'm certainly a little more interested.
The Titans show (if it ever gets off the ground) is supposedly about Dick Grayson transitioning to become Nightwing. I mean, of course, that's still no Jason Todd or Tim Drake as Robin, but at least it's something. Being as I like (movie) Red Hood and Red Robin, I would certainly like them both to get more focus.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 22, 2015, 03:26:31 PM
One thing I've said before is that we'll probably see Miles Morales on screen before DC ever skips over Dick Grayson as Robin. Well... (http://www.techtimes.com/articles/69797/20150719/jason-todd-could-be-the-main-villain-in-ben-afflecks-standalone-batman-movie.htm)
If this is true, well, I'm certainly a little more interested.
I was reading about that theory on the trailer's comments. I'm not sure what to think if this actually happens.
More DC news to ponder. (http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/sdcc-wb-announces-green-lantern-corps-movie)
I really like the idea of a Green Lantern Corps film. This means that GSF can have his Hal, and we can have actually interesting Lanterns. :awesome:
I didn't know Spark worked on Avaitor's computer. :thinkin:
Where do you think he goes during the weekend?
NANI?! :SHOCK:
If I get a high dose of Guy Gardner, I'm perfectly okay with it.
He's okay in small doses. :>
Deadpool teaser! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JydoN2mxLAU
Ryan Renolds seems to be fitting into the role pretty well. Can't wait to see the trailer (if it is indeed coming out tomorrow).
I'm sold on the voice! And good laugh at the end.
https://twitter.com/deadpoolmovie/status/628762429678186496 (https://twitter.com/deadpoolmovie/status/628762429678186496)
:joy:
Awwww....they cut out the best joke from the Comic-Con trailer. :-\
Still an awesome trailer, though.
In related news, they uploaded an extended FF trailer with Deadpool at the end telling people to go see it because his trailer will be in it. As funny as that moment is, it really shows you how desperate they are to get people to see this movie. They just know how bad it is and that it's painfully obvious to everyone at this point.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 04, 2015, 11:19:04 PM
Awwww....they cut out the best joke from the Comic-Con trailer. :-\
The Rob Liefeld bit?
QuoteIn related news, they uploaded an extended FF trailer with Deadpool at the end telling people to go see it because his trailer will be in it. As funny as that moment is, it really shows you how desperate they are to get people to see this movie. They just know how bad it is and that it's painfully obvious to everyone at this point.
I thought you meant Deadpool for a second. :lol:
I have never been more excited for a superhero movie in my entire life. February 2016 cannot come soon enough. :swoon:
Why the hell would anyone use FF to promote Deadpool? :D
Of course I mean FF when I say that it's shit. ;)
I'm rather disappointed the new FF movie is going to be shit. Though I wasn't much into superhero comics as I kid, I always liked reading stories featuring the FF, but for some reason they just can't seem to get a half-way decent movie or tv series. Considering they are one of Marvel's founding and most recognizable properties, it's a real bummer they can't seem to catch a break.
I'd become more hopeful recently due to Fox's handling of Deadpool and Apocalypse, but yeah, Fantfourstic looks pretty bad. It's a real bummer.
Fantastic Four needs to be pure Silver Age for it to work in live action. Unapologetically Silver Age with Johnny being a cocky jerk, Ben being cynical and wisecracking, and Doom being his Doom self is the best, and only, way to do it.
FF with grit just doesn't fit. It's really its own thing.
Speculation is that FF is going to do better than Ant-Man, regardless.
Then again, the insiders who estimate the box office were expecting AOU to be a bigger hit than it was, and had no idea how big Jurassic World was going to be, so hopefully they're off here, as well. This has been a wild summer, in terms of box office.
There's barely any promotion for Fant4stic as well. I saw non tie in comics, the only food chain I see with a promo is Dennys, people apparently didn't notice the stars of the flick casually walking around Comic Con one day. I barely noticed a marketing machine for this flick. Well that and we all know the main reason this flick was made was just so Fox could keep the rights to making F4 movies.
http://www.comicvine.com/articles/tom-hardy-to-take-on-100-bullets-feature-film/1100-153180/ (http://www.comicvine.com/articles/tom-hardy-to-take-on-100-bullets-feature-film/1100-153180/)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.comicvine.com%2Fuploads%2Fscale_super%2F0%2F6063%2F4740056-untitled-4.jpg&hash=e71f8a32f342aafdbe64284b4e9af7810d0b952c)
I probably shouldn't get too excited because comic book movies love extended stays at development hell and I have no clue if it'll actually be good but if my favorite comic book series gets a good movie.. :'( of joy
Phase 3 extension! (http://news.yahoo.com/marvel-reveals-ant-man-wasp-announces-first-phase-170406100.html)
I'm not surprised, since it seems like they're trying to build up Hope in the canon. I am a little disappointed that Black Panther and Captain Marvel are being pushed back, but she deserves her time to shine. I still don't get why Scott had to be in either suit instead of her, honestly.
Motherfucker, the Civil War trailer actually makes the movie look really good. And also, about Captain America. brb putting a crow in the oven.
EDIT: Forgot the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVdV-lxRPFo
I'll watch it once I watch Ultron. :thinkin:
MY BODY IS READY! :joy:
If this movie is as amazing as it looks, not only could it surpass The Winter Soldier, but it could cement Captain America as the greatest superhero film trilogy to date.
It really does look wonderful. I'm so glad they're making this an actual Captain America 3 instead of just Avengers 2.5 or Cap vs. Iron Man as I'd feared. Or, worse still, a legitimate adaptation of the comic book. :whuh:
I should probably get around to watching Ant-Man and the other films I missed out on sometime (as well as finally giving Avengers 1 a second chance). This trailer and Jessica Jones have officially restored my MCU hype. :)
Can someone please explain to me how the Cap keeps getting better with each movie? It's something I wasn't expecting when this whole MCU started panning out.
He started out as a "meh" entry in Phase 1, then he gets the best movie in Phase 2, and now... :huh:
Cheered when I saw Black Panther.
It's just too bad Infinity War Part 1 will probably be Cap's last appearance in the MCU. :'( These movies have really made me a fan of his.
Chris Evans said that even if he'd retire from acting in other movies and go into directing, he'd still like to be Cap for as long as Marvel wants though. (http://www.ibtimes.com/captain-america-3-spoilers-chris-evans-may-not-retire-acting-following-marvels-phase-1887619)
Wow, I hadn't heard about that! Hooray! :im_nabeshin:
Quote from: Foggle on November 24, 2015, 11:53:19 PM
It really does look wonderful. I'm so glad they're making this an actual Captain America 3 instead of just Avengers 2.5 or Cap vs. Iron Man as I'd feared. Or, worse still, a legitimate adaptation of the comic book. :whuh:
I should probably get around to watching Ant-Man and the other films I missed out on sometime (as well as finally giving Avengers 1 a second chance). This trailer and Jessica Jones have officially restored my MCU hype. :)
:D It looks like it'll be Marvel's 2nd good Civil War.
That reminds me, I need to watch Ant-Man myself.
Quote from: Daikun on November 25, 2015, 12:09:34 AMHe started out as a "meh" entry in Phase 1, then he gets the best movie in Phase 2, and now... :huh:
:il_rope:
The First Avenger was the best part of Phase 1 besides the original Iron Man.
Quote from: Foggle on November 25, 2015, 12:15:10 AM
It's just too bad Infinity War Part 1 will probably be Cap's last appearance in the MCU. :'( These movies have really made me a fan of his.
Go watch AEMH and read Ed Brubaker's Captain America run, in that case. It'll make you an even bigger fan. ;)
Literally the only good part of Civil War was The Death of Captain America story-line by Brubaker, from what I've read.
That was WAY better than I was expecting. It looks nothing like the awful comic or an Iron Man Vs Captain America movie, but like the sequel to Winter Soldier building up to an epic conclusion.
If this pans out it will be the best superhero trilogy without a doubt.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 25, 2015, 01:57:48 AM
Quote from: Daikun on November 25, 2015, 12:09:34 AMHe started out as a "meh" entry in Phase 1, then he gets the best movie in Phase 2, and now... :huh:
:il_rope:
The First Avenger was the best part of Phase 1 besides the original Iron Man.
:il_rope:
It WAS the best phase 1 movie. If any of you guys haven't seen it since it came out, I highly recommend rewatching it. You might be surprised by how well it holds up.
Well, I wasn't expecting to be on team Iron Man, but it looks like I am.
Hell of a trailer, btw.
Iron Man looks like the jerk in this (again), if that's what you mean.
Almost done with Jessica Jones! I don't think I can watch more than two episodes of this at once. It's too intense, my heart can't take it. :il_hahaha:
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 25, 2015, 02:01:30 AM
Go watch AEMH and read Ed Brubaker's Captain America run, in that case. It'll make you an even bigger fan. ;)
Literally the only good part of Civil War was The Death of Captain America story-line by Brubaker, from what I've read.
Can do. :)
The Cable & Deadpool part of Civil War was really good too, but it also had pretty much nothing to do with Civil War at all, so...
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on November 25, 2015, 09:12:27 AM
It WAS the best phase 1 movie. If any of you guys haven't seen it since it came out, I highly recommend rewatching it. You might be surprised by how well it holds up.
It really was. I don't understand why Captain America is considered "the weakest Phase 1 film" by most people; it's far and away the best one, for me.
Quote from: gunswordfist on November 25, 2015, 12:57:27 PM
Iron Man looks like the jerk in this (again)
I think that's basically his entire character at this point. :lol:
That was my joke. :D
I do think Captain America was kind of average (only watched it once though) but I still liked it and I don't see how anyone can say it's the worst part of phase one or even to that. Since I fucking love Winter Soldier so much, I want to get around to a 2nd viewing. Also, I need to rewatch Iron Man (again, only saw it once) since it was my favorite MCU anything.
Also, once I get access back to it, I'm finishing Jessica Jones. I love her snarky ass.
Just so we're clear: I don't think of the Cap as the weakest Phase 1 film. That "honor" would be a tie between Iron Man 2 and The Incredible Hulk.
I agree with gsf. For me, The First Avenger was middle-of-the-road.
Quote from: Foggle on November 25, 2015, 03:21:54 PMIt really was. I don't understand why Captain America is considered "the weakest Phase 1 film" by most people; it's far and away the best one, for me.
I think it has a lot to do with expectations. Based on the trailers, I think that most people were expecting an action-packed WWII-themed superhero movie. It certainly delivered on the latter aspect of the previews, but was actually pretty tame with its overall lack of huge set-piece action scenes compared to the other superhero movies. The parts shown in the trailer were very misleading of the tone of the actual movie, as most of those scenes were literally just montage clips during one part of the film. The trailer was certainly deceitful, but I can hardly blame the film itself for that; just the people in charge of marketing it.
If one looks into why Marvel hand-picked Joe Johnston to direct this movie in the first place, though, they'd probably get a better understanding of what this film really is. Joe Johnston directed a somewhat obscure yet well-beloved cult classic comic book film in the early 90's called The Rocketeer. It was based on a comic book that was essentially a throwback and amalgamation of all of the charm and heart of those WWII-era golden-age adventure serials. Joe Johnston may not exactly be a consistent director (Jurassic Park III and The Wolfman remake were awful, IMO), but he was always at his best when just making movies that captured an innocent spirit of fun, adventure, and above all else, had a ton of heart to it. That's where films like the original Honey I Shrunk The Kids, October Sky, and of course The Rocketeer come in.
Captain America: The First Avenger is not a superhero action film, and was never intended to be one. It's a tribute to golden-age idealistic adventure stories, and the film excels at that, IMO. Johnston himself admitted to not having read any Captain America comic books prior to making this film, but stated that it gave him the opportunity to portray the character and his story from an unbiased perspective, much in the same way that Bryan Singer did for the X-Men movies (who also never actually read any of the comic books prior to directing the first film). What I find to be so brilliant and also so underrated about The First Avenger, myself, is how it really does nail that heart and soul of what that era of comics represented at their best. For instance, it was a brilliant writing and directing decision to have Captain America in the movies start out as he did in real life with the comic books: as WWII propaganda. In that regard, it does sneakily acknowledge the fact that the character's original conception wasn't built around all of the most noble intentions, but in the form of the movie it's a very clever way to introduce the concept of the character, which by all accounts is absolutely ridiculous, but in this case it's actually supposed to come off that way to the audience at the start. Over time, Captain America earns his iconic status through his actions and adapting to serve a greater purpose, in this case sort of symbolizing the evolution of the character in the comic books, from my interpretation.
Now you could make the argument that the movie should have explored more of the racism and social injustices that were abundant in many of Cap's earlier issues (which may have been considered acceptable back then, but definitely not by today's standards), but as I said, the point of this film specifically, much like The Rocketeer, was to capture the tone of these sorts of comics when they were at their best. Looking at the movie from that point of view, I find that it's an incredibly fun and heartfelt story of a great man trapped in a physically weak body getting the opportunity to prove himself to the world, which is an idealistic sort of story that isn't too popular with most of today's jaded and cynical comic book fans and moviegoers, but IMO is handled really well with the intention of showing just why those sorts of stories were considered great in the first place. And it's because of this very set-up that the breakdown of all of Cap's ideals in The Avengers films and The Winter Soldier (and hopefully in the upcoming Civil War) make for great drama, IMO. The First Avenger did such a good job of settings those things up that it really hits hard when they fall apart.
At any rate, I thoroughly enjoy The First Avenger because it's just a really entertaining movie that I believe excels at what it sets out to do. It's not great as an action movie, but as a WWII-themed adventure film with great character development from its lead, I personally find it to be one of the MCU's more interesting pictures, and that's saying a lot since I'm clearly a big fan of the MCU to begin with.
QuoteQuote from: gunswordfist on November 25, 2015, 12:57:27 PM
Iron Man looks like the jerk in this (again)
I think that's basically his entire character at this point. :lol:
To be fair, I'm interested in seeing RDJ's portrayal of the character in this film because it actually feels like he's intentionally being written to be antagonistic in a genuinely interesting way. I feel that Tony Stark in the MCU is a pretty poorly written character after the first Iron Man. It's like the writers didn't know what to do with him after Iron Man 1 became such a hit, so they have to make up cheap sub-plots to add fake dramatic stakes and tension (such as Tony Stark slowly dying in IM2), or they just have to invent a new problem for him out of the blue like his PTSD from The Battle of New York after The Avengers, in IM3, which really felt laughably inconsistent given how their was clearly no hint of this in The Avengers to begin with, and thus it really makes no sense when the problem is presented to us viewers all of a sudden in the third Iron Man movie. Other than that, they just have him act like an arrogant dick most of the time while missing the point of how he was also likable despite all of that in the first movie. The thing that made Tony Stark such a memorable and fun character past the original film is RDJ's excellent performance. Without that, I feel that the flaws of the writing in Tony Stark's MCU character would be much more apparent.
Another thing that I like about Captain America as a character in the MCU is that he clearly has a consistent character arc running throughout all of the MCU films, so watching the movies in order allows you to trace his development over the films quite smoothly.
Having said that, going by the trailer to Civil War, I get a sense that whether we end up liking or agreeing with Tony Stark in this movie or not, we'll at least get a sense of why his character has his stance and not actively want to hate him for opposing The Cap. That line about Cap protecting Bucky because he's his friend, and Tony Stark in a definitive way of breaking off his former comradery with Rogers, but also seemingly showing some signs of being hurt by doing that, replies: "So was I." To me that's the highlight of the trailer, and gets me to believe that the writers aren't simply just going to make Tony an arrogant ass-hole in this movie, but an opposing force with his own legitimate, justified viewpoints.
Great post!
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 25, 2015, 11:16:03 PM
Johnston himself admitted to not having read any Captain America comic books prior to making this film
This is pretty surprising to me. Honestly, of all the live action superhero films I've seen, I'd say The First Avenger is the one that feels most like the comic book it's based on (though Guardians of the Galaxy comes close, and Deadpool probably will too). It just has the heart and soul of what made classic comics great.
QuoteTo be fair, I'm interested in seeing RDJ's portrayal of the character in this film because it actually feels like he's intentionally being written to be antagonistic in a genuinely interesting way. I feel that Tony Stark in the MCU is a pretty poorly written character after the first Iron Man. It's like the writers didn't know what to do with him after Iron Man 1 became such a hit, so they have to make up cheap sub-plots to add fake dramatic stakes and tension (such as Tony Stark slowly dying in IM2), or they just have to invent a new problem for him out of the blue like his PTSD from The Battle of New York after The Avengers, in IM3, which really felt laughably inconsistent given how their was clearly no hint of this in The Avengers to begin with, and thus it really makes no sense when the problem is presented to us viewers all of a sudden in the third Iron Man movie. Other than that, they just have him act like an arrogant dick most of the time while missing the point of how he was also likable despite all of that in the first movie. The thing that made Tony Stark such a memorable and fun character past the original film is RDJ's excellent performance. Without that, I feel that the flaws of the writing in Tony Stark's MCU character would be much more apparent.
. . .
Having said that, going by the trailer to Civil War, I get a sense that whether we end up liking or agreeing with Tony Stark in this movie or not, we'll at least get a sense of why his character has his stance and not actively want to hate him for opposing The Cap. That line about Cap protecting Bucky because he's his friend, and Tony Stark in a definitive way of breaking off his former comradery with Rogers, but also seemingly showing some signs of being hurt by doing that, replies: "So was I." To me that's the highlight of the trailer, and gets me to believe that the writers aren't simply just going to make Tony an arrogant ass-hole in this movie, but an opposing force with his own legitimate, justified viewpoints.
Yeah, I agree with all this. The Civil War trailer is the first time I've found Iron Man interesting since his first movie. It's such a shame that they allegedly chickened out of making Iron Man 3 an adaptation of Demon In A Bottle; that would have been brilliant, IMO. I mean, I guess Iron Man 2 already kind of was, but they did such a bad job with that aspect of it, and his returning PTSD in IM3 and Age of Ultron kind of implies that there was originally supposed to be something more there.
Good post, doc!
The conflict of the modern world and Cap's ideals wouldn't have worked nearly as well if the First Avenger wasn't as strong as it was. In fact, that's why the end of the second movie when Cap's ideals turn out to still be valid and inspiring despite the very bad situation and different times they're all in, and the return of an enemy long thought dead, works so incredibly well. Part of the reason both movies are still so strong is because they play so hard off of the other one (even though First Avenger couldn't do that, it still managed to date that way) and makes them perfect companions to each other. I mean, without the first movie I don't think the last scenes with Bucky would have been anywhere near as strong.
Which is why this trailer looks so good. It looks like its building up the conflict Steve has had inside himself since the First Avenger and that nearly came to a head in Winter Soldier. Then there are the other characters like Black Widow, Falcon, and Winter Soldier, and probably Nick Fury, that were surprisingly changed by the events of Winter Soldier and now have just as tough choices as Cap to make here. If this continues in the right way, it could easily be the best film in the trilogy and maybe the MCU. And that's saying a lot.
One thing to consider about Iron Man here is that it's believed that the Winter Soldier killed Tony's parents. So he may actually have a motive for his stance.
Quote from: Avaitor on November 26, 2015, 09:08:51 AM
One thing to consider about Iron Man here is that it's believed that the Winter Soldier killed Tony's parents. So he may actually have a motive for his stance.
That's a good point. Though it could have easily been Hydra operating on its own, it could have been Bucky that did it. There's a whole history there that hasn't been touched on since Winter Soldier.
We all know Hydra has to have a role in all this movie. The question is where they fit in.
For some reason I thought they basically destroyed Hydra at the beginning of Ultron, but that couldn't be the case, right?
Quote from: Foggle on November 26, 2015, 12:31:19 PM
For some reason I thought they basically destroyed Hydra at the beginning of Ultron, but that couldn't be the case, right?
"Cut off one head and two more will take its place."
It wouldn't be that easy. Plus, I think they at least made a cameo in Ant-Man.
Thanks for the comments on my post, guys! :joy:
As for Civil War, while I'm glad that the movie isn't going to be a direct adaptation of the comic book, I wouldn't mind if in some way it takes some inspiration from the source material in which:
Spoiler
Bucky inherits the mantle and title of Captain America by the end of the movie. That doesn't necessarily mean that Steve Rogers has to die like he does in the comic book, but his main character arc could reach its ultimate conclusion by the end of this film, and having him pass the torch onto his oldest war-partner and best friend would be a really rewarding thing to see, IMO. I also like how Tony Stark, out of his deep respect for and friendship with Captain America, despite being on an opposing side, is the one who ultimately helped to turn Bucky around and set him on the right path, as Steve would have wished for. To me, it was a small bit of redemption for how generally horrible his character was during the whole Civil War arc.
If they do end up bringing the whole "The Winter Soldier killed Tony's parents" card into play, though, then I don't see the story taking that direction at all. I do get a feeling that regardless of the outcome of this movie, it will be somewhat tragic in some way compared to the usual upbeat nature of most MCU films.
Spoiler
Personally, while I think the Bucky as Captain America thing will eventually happen in the MCU, I'd wager that it won't until during/after Infinity War. They might also make Falcon the new Captain America instead, since he currently is in the comics IIRC.
Quote from: Foggle on November 25, 2015, 11:35:57 PMQuote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 25, 2015, 11:16:03 PMJohnston himself admitted to not having read any Captain America comic books prior to making this film
This is pretty surprising to me. Honestly, of all the live action superhero films I've seen, I'd say The First Avenger is the one that feels most like the comic book it's based on (though Guardians of the Galaxy comes close, and Deadpool probably will too). It just has the heart and soul of what made classic comics great.
He's not alone. Lots of movie directors don't read comic books.
Tim Burton, for example, had never read Batman, yet he made one of the most iconic films in the franchise (maybe two, depending on what you think of
Batman Returns).
Well, if they do go the route of making Falcon into the next Captain America in the MCU, eventually, then it'd at least be cool if they give The Winter Soldier his own spin-off series like they did in the comics, since he's a great character and could really carry his own movie or TV series, IMO. It also makes sense since Marvel is pretty good about clearing away some of their older solo series to make room for the new ones, so that we don't have a clusterfuck of them all running at one time. The Incredible Hulk was basically considered a failure for them, so that's why it got no sequels, and while RDJ will be happy to reprise his role for an indefinite number of future Marvel films, the Iron Man solo series is also pretty much done at this point. Of course, those open spots are now being used to set up series like Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel, and Black Panther. That said, I'm pretty sure that the next Thor film will most likely be the last one, so it probably wouldn't be too hard for an already popular character like The Winter Soldier to get something of his own once there is some room cleared for him.
Saw the trailer for Civil War with a friend the other day, and we both had the same "aw hell yeah" reaction to it. My friend let out a "fuck yeah" when he saw Black Panther. The fight scene at the end of the trailer and the "So was I" line were probably my favorite moments in it. Needless to say, I'm really excited for this. Captain America has the best films in the MCU, and this looks to be the best yet. Admittedly, I'm still concerned about how many characters are in the movie, but Infinity War is going to be juggling way more, so getting it down with this film will be a necessary step. May's going to be a long wait.
Anyone remember this movie? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkFEyZL9f_M)
Yeah, I already forgot it was made.
Frankenzod. I was sort of on board with Batman and Superman's ideals conflicting with each other like that, but then Frankenzod appeared.
The first trailer actually surprised me and helped to build up some good faith toward this movie on my part, despite my distaste for Man of Steel. This trailer basically just flushed all of that good faith down the toilet. I'm now pretty wary of whether this movie will be any good or not, and my expectations are leaning more towards "not".
So, Captain America: Civil War it is. I'm also hoping that Doctor Strange turns out to be good.
I thought the trailer was good. Cera as Lex already seems like it'll be the worst thing about the movie though. When he showed in this one, it almost ruined the trailer, especially with how good the tone was before he came by.
I think you meant to say Eisenberg. Michael Cera is not even in a superhero movie, let alone this one. ;)
Eisenberg is a good actor. I know that he can be. But this just looks embarrassing on his part.
The new BvS trailer is the whole movie crammed into 3 minutes. Good job, WB!
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on December 03, 2015, 04:07:26 PM
I think you meant to say Eisenberg. Michael Cera is not even in a superhero movie, let alone this one. ;)
Is it too late to pretend that I was being sarcastic?...no? :-[
Quote from: Daikun on December 03, 2015, 06:05:04 PM
The new BvS trailer is the whole movie crammed into 3 minutes. Good job, WB!
Pretty much.
I can't believe they spoiled everything with that trailer. What is wrong with DC's movie division? Not only does everything have to be grimdark, but it's exactly what everyone expected it to be.
Seriously, just make a good movie without Nolan already. I want them to prove me wrong.
I liked the trailer fine until Luthor showed up. Then it took a baffling nosedive. I don't know why they decided to spoil the entire movie, but it sure as hell makes me uninterested in actually seeing it. :??:
A part of me wants to play Devil's Advocate and suggest the spoilers are meant to be a ruse to hide a bigger one, but I doubt the producers thought that through. Besides, what could they have left to reveal? We already know that Parademons, Doomsday, and 5/7ths of the Justice League will show up, so what else can you do without overstuffing your movie?
A lot of trailers these days have the problem of spoiling too much in their trailers. Even MCU movie trailers are criminally guilty of this, though not to the same extent as what DC just pulled.
Once again, whether the movie is any good or not, I have to commend the marketing people behind Star Wars for not showing too much. I've seen just enough of that movie in trailers to get excited for it without actually knowing what the plot is going to be and how it will play out, and that's the way that it should be. A trailer should give me and idea of what I'm in for with any given movie. It shouldn't just spell out the entire movie for me. More big studios really need to learn that concept.
I thought Luthor ruined it as well but I still want to check it out. I've always been cautious about this movie so my expectations aren't that high anyway.
Quote from: Cartoon X on December 04, 2015, 09:39:34 AM
I liked the trailer fine until Luthor showed up. Then it took a baffling nosedive. I don't know why they decided to spoil the entire movie, but it sure as hell makes me uninterested in actually seeing it. :??:
I agree completely. It actually looked like a good movie for the first 45 seconds, but Eisenberg ruined it single-handedly. That, and Ben Affleck's Bat-voice somehow managed to be even
worse than Bale's IMO.
Quote from: Foggle on December 04, 2015, 01:40:53 PM
Quote from: Cartoon X on December 04, 2015, 09:39:34 AM
I liked the trailer fine until Luthor showed up. Then it took a baffling nosedive. I don't know why they decided to spoil the entire movie, but it sure as hell makes me uninterested in actually seeing it. :??:
I agree completely. It actually looked like a good movie for the first 45 seconds, but Eisenberg ruined it single-handedly. That, and Ben Affleck's Bat-voice somehow managed to be even worse than Bale's IMO.
I wouldn't go that far. I recently re-watched The Dark Knight trilogy, and aside from Batman Begins where his voice was fine (I have no idea why they changed it), it's actually pretty laughably bad in the other two films. I kind of can't believe how I used to put up with it. I would go so far as to say that it almost ruins the movies, which only hold up thanks a ton to all of the other performances being so good. But trust me, Bale's Batman voice is worse by far, and I'm still not even a fan of Ben Affleck playing Batman (I'm still not over Daredevil, even though I know that movie wasn't really his fault).
I'll take your word for it. I haven't seen the Dark Knight trilogy in about two years, so I might have forgotten the true badness of Bale's Bat-voice. :il_hahaha: Personally, I have no problem with Affleck playing Batman, never have, but I don't like his Bat-voice much either. Maybe they should just get Kevin Conroy to dub over the live action actors while they're suited up.
Well, the trailer voice might not be what his voice finally ends up sounding like in the movie. It's possible to play around a lot with audio through editing these days, and if you remember, he used a synthetic voice mask in the first teaser for this movie that wasn't present in this trailer for whatever reason.
I'm indifferent on Affleck so far, myself.
As for Bale, I recently watched The Dark Knight for class, and honestly, it sounds like Bale needs some Milk of Magnesia or something. He might be the worst thing about the movie (give or take Rachel), but even then, his Bruce Wayne is great.
Bale's Batman voice was actually perfectly fine in Batman Begins. I have no idea why they decided to make him sound like he was taking a massive dump whenever he spoke as Batman in the sequels.
By the way, I recently re-watched Hellboy 2: The Golden Army. That movie came out in 2008, the same year as Iron Man and The Dark Knight, and was doomed to be overshadowed. As someone who loves both of those films despite some faults, I can honestly say that HB2 is on part with both of them. I never appreciated the HB movies enough when they came out, but they really are great.
Also, voicing Dr. Kraus is literally the best thing that Seth Macfarlane has ever done in his entire career. I love that character. It's a shame that we'll never get a third movie.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on December 05, 2015, 10:04:29 AM
Bale's Batman voice was actually perfectly fine in Batman Begins. I have no idea why they decided to make him sound like he was taking a massive dump whenever he spoke as Batman in the sequels.
Yeah, this has always confused me. He was still growly in BB, but he didn't sound anywhere near as bad. They really shouldn't have had him change it.
QuoteBy the way, I recently re-watched Hellboy 2: The Golden Army. That movie came out in 2008, the same year as Iron Man and The Dark Knight, and was doomed to be overshadowed. As someone who loves both of those films despite some faults, I can honestly say that HB2 is on part with both of them. I never appreciated the HB movies enough when they came out, but they really are great.
Also, voicing Dr. Kraus is literally the best thing that Seth Macfarlane has ever done in his entire career. I love that character. It's a shame that we'll never get a third movie.
Ron Perlman
really wants to make a third one, so we might actually see another Hellboy film someday...
The problem is that Hellboy 2 massively under-performed at the box office. Meanwhile, both Iron Man and The Dark Knight were big hits financially. While all three films garnered overall praise from critics, only Hellboy 2 lacked the actual returns to show for it. I feel like studios saw that and decided that nobody wants a movie like Hellboy, but rather more (relatively) realistic and straightforward superhero movies.
Granted, the Hellboy movies just could have been a tad ahead of their time. I mean, these are movies where the main character is a demonic being that was meant to bring about the destruction of the world but turned good from birth, and he works with a fish man, has a romantic relationship with a lady who can light herself on fire like the female version of The Human Torch (who is by far the most down-to-earth and normal character of the main cast), and takes orders from a scientist that is made up of pure gas and lives in a containment suit (and who is by far my favorite character in the second film, BTW). And the villains aren't any less strange. I LOVE that sort of set-up for a movie, but maybe it was too much for audiences back then. But, after movies like Thor and Guardians of the Galaxy have proven to be hits despite having similarly out-there worlds and mythology, I don't see why a Hellboy movie can't resonate a lot more with people now than it did before.
The only problem is that I doubt that Guillermo Del Toro would have anytime to make a third film with how many other projects that he's juggling, and I kind of don't want one unless both him AND Ron Perlman are returning. I just don't think anyone can do these sorts of films as well as Del Toro, and right now he's still trying to get a Pacific Rim sequel off the ground, while (supposedly) still shopping around a live action Monster TV series to different networks (which I also really want to see). So, the likelihood of a third Hellboy film is far too slim right now, given all of those things working against it.
This makes me want to rewatch the films. I was a mild fan of them. I wonder if I'll also like them more now. Plus, if I do, I'll watch the 2 or 3 animated movies. The ones I saw parts of were a sold PG-13 and had great character design (like the comics), animation and voice acting.
The X-Men: Apocalypse trailer just dropped: http://youtu.be/COvnHv42T-A
I'll admit, I know next to nothing about Apocalypse, and the most exposure that I've ever had with the character was the final boss fight from X-Men Vs. Street Fighter, but I'm pretty pumped for this movie all the same.
Also, it's a bit weird to hear Sophie Turner using an American accent.
I hope Apocalypse doesn't look as stupid as he did in that promo poster.
Get ready for 12 Days of Deadpool! (http://youtu.be/dgCkE90qLgA)
I WAS BORN READY
New Deadpool trailer! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIM1HydF9UA)
Also, check out the Christmas teaser. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YzCA0EyKYk) :happytime:
More Superman Vs. Batman. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUN0F5wKbGE)
Spoiler
Is it wrong that I laughed at the sound effect that played when the car hit him?
Spoiler
It sounded like someone threw a rubber ducky at Supes
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F90fDoYI.jpg&hash=85bfea1b19b0d30fa6f0d790ac32917987920fd6)
Seems like the perfect movie to take your date to. :D
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 12, 2016, 06:14:14 PM
Seems like the perfect movie to take your date too. :D
I actually am going to! :joy:
They made two more!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYemDMLUQAAsvlf.png)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYesrpnUkAE1eVl.png)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYnZGyCU0AEGySC.jpg:large)
I'm really excited for Skullfecall.
New Suicide Squad trailer. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmRih_VtVAs)
I gotta say, this one took me by surprise.
Ok, I'm going to officially stop ignoring this movie. It looks like supervillain Dirty Dozen.
Still not particularly interested, but the new trailer was definitely a lot better than the other one (and BvS'). It's the first DC movie since TDKR that I'd watch willingly, at least.
What a turkey. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZpNgE6mMoA)
I'm still stunned at what a complete whiff this movie was.
First Deadpool reviews are out.
Currently at 100% on RT.
Well, were you expecting them to hate it?
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 07, 2016, 04:41:06 AM
Well, were you expecting them to hate it?
Not really, though I have seen a lot of negativity about the film online over the past half year. Either way, I didn't expect reviewers to take as kindly to it as, say, Guardians or X-Men.
Also, there's way more than 13 reviews out and I've yet to see a single truly negative one. Guess it really is as good as I wanted it to be!
25 reviews. Still 100%
Muh vindication.
:el_hail: :el_hail: :el_hail:
We stand united. (https://youtu.be/0L7iH3foZU0)
Looking better and better.
Deadpool, X-Men: Apocalypse, Captain America: Civil War, Doctor Strange; with all four of these films, this year has the potential to be the best one yet for Marvel movies. Of course, one or more of these could also suck, but I'm going to stay positive and hopeful.
I'm hopeful. I thought that 2014 was a hell of a year for Marvel, even with ASM2, but this could top that.
This year does, however, make it clear even to a fan of the genre such as myself how over-saturated the live-action market for superheroes has become. In addition to the four Marvel movies coming out this year, we have two from DC: Batman v. Superman and Suicide Squad. And then there are eight shows, four from each, which I'm following. From DC: Arrow, The Flash, Supergirl, and Legends of Tomorrow. From Marvel: Agent Carter, Daredevil season 2, Jessica Jones season 2, and Luke Cage.
It's actually kind of nuts to see how much content we get these days.
I'd be complaining if they weren't (mostly) enjoyable. It sure beats back when superhero shows and movies were a rarity.
I say there's not nearly enough superhero movies or shows. There are so many superheroes that deserve to be household names like Invincible or Iron Fist. Luckily the latter will eventually get a show.
As long as they're good, I'm down for what Marvel has to offer. DC, I'll stick around for their shows, but it'll take a bit to get me invested in their movies.
Pretty much.
When it comes to superheroes, I'd rather have too much than too little and we had too little for too long.
:thumbup: I'll start complaining when everyone knows who Elijah Snow is.
The only trailer they should have shown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8)
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 11, 2016, 11:32:56 PM
The only trailer they should have shown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8)
Way better than the others. Eisenberg is still horrible, but the rest looks pretty solid. The first bit with Batman especially.
Based on what I've seen, though, it's going to take a lot more than a well-edited trailer to convince me that this movie is any good. I have absolutely no faith in Zack Snyder as a writer or director, at this point.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on February 12, 2016, 07:53:40 AM
Based on what I've seen, though, it's going to take a lot more than a well-edited trailer to convince me that this movie is any good. I have absolutely no faith in Zack Snyder as a writer or director, at this point.
Yeah, I think I have to agree.
Or a producer. He wants to be the anti-Kevin Feige so bad, but he doesn't seem to know how to make a good super hero movie.
At this point, Marvel should just make a movie where Moon Knight and Sentry fight each other to further fuck with DC. Like get Matt Damon as Moon Knight, whoever was opposite Henry Cavill in the Tudors as Sentry, have Lady Sif come back because why not, and haggle with the guys who own the Namor rights so you can have Grey Worm from Game of Thrones play him.
And to top it all off, Michael Cera as Norman Osborn.
Quote from: Foggle on February 11, 2016, 11:58:33 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 11, 2016, 11:32:56 PM
The only trailer they should have shown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8)
Way better than the others. Eisenberg is still horrible, but the rest looks pretty solid. The first bit with Batman especially.
This left me very excited about a standalone Batfleck movie. Earlier I was thinking, "this trailer would be even better if it had better music and someone else's voice doing Eisenberg's lines" :D
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 11, 2016, 11:32:56 PM
The only trailer they should have shown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_iASz1Si8)
Batman very effectively blocking Superman's punch at the end of the trailer - Nice!
My expectations are not high for this movie, however.
I think it could be watchable. Of course, I'll see it any way..on Netflix.
Saw Deadpool today and it was THE greatest! My favorite superhero film by far! Action scenes were awesome, and I laughed my ass off from start to finish. :el_hail:
Spoiler
Did you notice his Bea Arthur shirt in the skeeball scene?
That's amazing! :D
I'm so pissed off that I had to get sick now of all times. I was planning to see Deadpool on day one, but I came down with a virus, and while it's not too terrible, I have a pretty rough cough that would undoubtedly disrupt anyone else's viewing experience, and additionally I'm not so irresponsible as to spread my cold to anyone else. I'll still be seeing the movie in a week or two, but this is really shitty timing. :-\
Aw man! That's awful. :(
Get better soon!!!!
In DC news, things really aren't looking good for BvS. (http://www.cinelinx.com/movie-news/item/8981-warner-bros-may-be-very-worried-about-batman-v-superman-due-to-early-viewing-responses.html)
Hope you feel better!
Quote from: Avaitor on February 15, 2016, 08:23:21 PMIn DC news, things really aren't looking good for BvS. (http://www.cinelinx.com/movie-news/item/8981-warner-bros-may-be-very-worried-about-batman-v-superman-due-to-early-viewing-responses.html)
Get rid of Snyder already.
This isn't hard.
EDIT:
QuoteMcWeeny says that Zack Snyder's future as the main guy in the DCCU may also be in jeopardy. He points out that there are "tonal problems" in the DC films and he'll be "surprised" if Snyder ultimately ends up directing the Justice League film. He and Roth feel that DC needs an overall DCCU mastermind to oversee everything, the way Marvel has Kevin Fiege. If DC's plans don't work out, "no one has the master vision" to fix it.
That thumping sound is my head hitting the wall. Because no one saw this coming! Siiiiiigh.
Saw Deadpool last Saturday.. Holy shit! :e_hail: :el_hail: :h_hail:
(I-I really don't know what else to say!)
McWeeney? *giggles*
Quote"My guess is, based on what I'm hearing, is the Justice League will be moved back and that Ben Affleck Batman movie is going to end up in that spot. My guess is that they're going to throw whatever money it takes at Ben Affleck to make that Batman film happen sooner rather than later."
They would be smart to do this if BvS underperforms. That Batfleck sequence did rock.
I wish they got guys other than the Zombieland writers to make the Deadpool movie, because the humor felt too much like the former film's.
Good thing that I love that movie :D
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 17, 2016, 05:33:46 PM
I wish they got guys other than the Zombieland writers to make the Deadpool movie, because the humor felt too much like the former film's.
Well, I like Zombieland, so....:bleh:
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 17, 2016, 05:33:46 PM
I wish they got guys other than the Zombieland writers to make the Deadpool movie, because the humor felt too much like the former film's.
I thought it was fairly accurate to the way Fabian Nicieza writes the character (but with more swearing).
Here's a slight reassessment of how I rank the MCU movies and shows so far:
Love:
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. Captain America: The First Avenger
3. Daredevil (Season 1)
4. Guardians of the Galaxy
5. Jessica Jones (Season 1)
Really Enjoy:
6. Iron Man
7. Agent Carter (Season 1)
8. Avengers: Age of Ultron
9. The Avengers
Like:
10. Thor
11. Ant-Man
12. Iron Man 3
Meh:
13. Thor: The Dark World
14. The Incredible Hulk
15. Iron Man 2
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. is non-canon, and not even worth ranking, as far as I'm concerned. Agent Carter season two isn't done yet, so I can't rank it yet. That said, the way it has been going right now, I think it's safe to call it good, but lacking something that made the first season so great. I'd probably rank it between Thor and The Avengers.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbtorwWW0AApJW0.jpg)
:D
Who's ready for everybody's favorite supervillain?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbyWMDeUUAIYCj1.jpg)
You'll have to wait longer for that Gambit movie. (http://news.yahoo.com/fox-schedules-two-marvel-movies-182500576.html)
If it hasn't even begun filming yet, that would make sense to push it back.
I smell an X-Men Origins-level disaster on hand. I'm calling it now.
Oh, this is kind of old news, but Civil War already had some test screenings back in January, like Batman V. Superman. From what I've read and heard, reactions were pretty positive.
What in the Spider hell.. (http://nerdist.com/venom-movie-is-back-in-the-works-at-sony)
Woop-Boop Doop-ba-doop. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKrVegVI0Us)
I love the callback to the first movie:
"I could do this all day." :joy:
I kind of wish that they hadn't shown us Spider-Man in full-costume, and saved the reveal for the movie instead. Cutting right after Captain America gets his hands tied in his web would have been better as a tease.
Anyways, my hype for this movie is through the roof. The Captain America series is the best Superhero movie franchise ever, IMO.
Watching the trailer again, they clearly went for the Steve Ditko style Spider-Man with their costume design. Some people complain that it looks cheesy, but personally I approve of it. I also like how they animate the changes in his facial expression via his costume's eyes, just like they did with Deadpool. On the one hand it makes no sense, but on the other hand I don't give a fuck because it looks less ridiculous than the static look of the costumes from the previous Spider-Man films, IMO.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 10, 2016, 11:55:11 AM
I love the callback to the first movie:
"I could do this all day." :joy:
I kind of wish that they hadn't shown us Spider-Man in full-costume, and saved the reveal for the movie instead. Cutting right after Captain America gets his hands tied in his web would have been better as a tease.
Anyways, my hype for this movie is through the roof. The Captain America series is the best Superhero movie franchise ever, IMO.
Pretty much what I commented.
And yes, I remember Cap's line from First Avenger when he said that as well and went, "Yeah, that's true" lol
Okay, I'm ready for this. ;D
So Deadpool's nearing $700 million. (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=deadpool2016.htm) I knew it would do well, but I'm surprised it's getting that much.
I'm happy for the film makers, they deserve the success.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 10, 2016, 06:50:57 PM
So Deadpool's nearing $700 million. (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=deadpool2016.htm) I knew it would do well, but I'm surprised it's getting that much.
To think that this film had a lot going against it. I mean, it got released in February of all months, that and January are like the kiss of death as far releasing movies go, was released during the weekend where Hollywood mostly releases romantic stuff, it was R rated, and was banned in China. Deadpool did what he does best, defy all logic.
Why did China ban it? :srs:
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 11, 2016, 02:01:30 PM
Why did China ban it? :srs:
Overtly violent and some bits of nudity where you can see a dude's wang. China has some weird censorship law yo. Did you know you can't show skeletons in video games over there. I remember it took a few years for a certain World of Warcraft expansion to even make it into China because the premise was fighting the undead Lich King or something.
But yeah, not having access to China's market is kinda seen as a bad thing due to how huge the market is over there.
Quote from: Daxdiv on March 11, 2016, 08:52:29 PMChina has some weird censorship law yo. Did you know you can't show skeletons in video games over there.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs13.postimg.org%2F5nug8q7jb%2FDave_Chappelle_Picture.jpg&hash=63a9aefc14255a7c7db3fa27dfbe2a88dfdc3be9)
Don't the Chinese take the majority of box office sales? I could have sworn somewhere someone bringing that up in a box office thread (not here).
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toonzone.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2Fbatman-v-supermans-international-790x494.jpg&hash=3a2d5683fa4e5b272d3ff75fda8eb4e0bea7cc46)
Best thumbnail ever. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quLD7cQPOsg)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F56.media.tumblr.com%2F5599f7c706066e5d264594ffc069c662%2Ftumblr_o3voz2v1Dz1qcn3lho1_500.png&hash=5686bcc18acc7db7e3c2ff6c75424613a37d30cc)(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F56.media.tumblr.com%2F16c1eb6cdf8b111bb08996fb52febe0e%2Ftumblr_o3voz2v1Dz1qcn3lho4_r1_500.png&hash=23259621ca0d6bc0e60c7f2f20815b64bdac4f11)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F56.media.tumblr.com%2F54eb5da4ae4a0daa61e9168eac375985%2Ftumblr_o3voz2v1Dz1qcn3lho3_500.png&hash=9ba426d789ca1f972e6f7ccdc706e11b6ef775d8)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F56.media.tumblr.com%2F4f2be4e7aefee2a6e9245c2e81d35d7c%2Ftumblr_o3voz2v1Dz1qcn3lho7_r1_500.png&hash=584bf7a6ff1749879e0601a6f20009f8e6647109)(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F56.media.tumblr.com%2Fdf6c4282deb24fae56e4fb0b42f09870%2Ftumblr_o3voz2v1Dz1qcn3lho5_r1_500.png&hash=98aa7c23071fa3e0f9fdd1e4ff0b89d015df8bcc)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F56.media.tumblr.com%2Ffae8d514fff822016c12bd7e21b1bdbe%2Ftumblr_o3voz2v1Dz1qcn3lho6_500.png&hash=a2452e4686a1db53cf645871f1fa2c9fab97fbb3)
New X-Men: Apocalypse trailer: http://youtu.be/PfBVIHgQbYk
If this is even half as good as Days of Future Past, then this year can officially be considered FOX's redemption for Fant4stic.
I didn't know or forgot that The Mask was a comic book movie. I heard about that in a thread about whether The Mask or Deadpool is the funniest comic book movie of all time.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 17, 2016, 08:16:32 PM
New X-Men: Apocalypse trailer: http://youtu.be/PfBVIHgQbYk
If this is even half as good as Days of Future Past, then this year can officially be considered FOX's redemption for Fant4stic.
Haven't really been digging the trailers to be honest, but I felt the same way about Days of Future Past and ended up being blown away by it, so I'll give this one the benefit of the doubt. As long as we get a classy performance from Oscar Isaac as Apocalypse, I'll probably love it. :)
Honestly, I like the trailers well enough, myself. My only gripe is that it seems to focus a bit too much on Mystique, but from a marketing standpoint it makes sense since Jennifer Lawrence is insanely popular right now.
I really just trust Bryan Singer when it comes to X-Men movies, though. So far, every single film in the franchise which he's been involved with has been great, IMO.
Also, this is the second X-Men film to utilize a major Game of Thrones actor, so there's that as well.
I've been avoiding just about anything about it until it comes out. Partially because I've always loathed Apocalypse, but also because this is the last core X-Men movie until they take it away from Singer, so I figure I might as well wait until it comes out. DOFP was such a good ending point for the series, though. It's got a lot to live up to.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 17, 2016, 10:16:28 PM
Honestly, I like the trailers well enough, myself. My only gripe is that it seems to focus a bit too much on Mystique, but from a marketing standpoint it makes sense since Jennifer Lawrence is insanely popular right now.
I really just trust Bryan Singer when it comes to X-Men movies, though. So far, every single film in the franchise which he's been involved with has been great, IMO.
I don't think they're bad or anything, but they haven't really grabbed me like the Civil War trailers do. Certainly better than Batman v Superman's, though...
And yeah, all four Bryan Singer X-Men movies have been fantastic.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on March 17, 2016, 10:21:55 PM
I've been avoiding just about anything about it until it comes out. Partially because I've always loathed Apocalypse, but also because this is the last core X-Men movie until they take it away from Singer, so I figure I might as well wait until it comes out. DOFP was such a good ending point for the series, though. It's got a lot to live up to.
What don't you like about Apocalypse? I don't really know anything about the character.
Well, at least this version of Apocalypse is apparently nothing like the comic book version, as any one of the pissed off Apocalypse fans could tell you. But on the plus side, that's probably more appealing to Desensitized and Avaitor.
As for the trailers, I think the problem is that marketing has gotten rather lazy these days. A few years ago this trailer probably would have been good enough to stir up a lot of hype, but now it falls under a generic formula that most superhero movie trailers follow: Have someone narrate in the background about how serious shit is getting, have the villain say some supposedly intimidating lines, and montage through quick-cuts of action set-piece moments along with characters saying potentially quotable lines out of context.
You can basically trace these tropes back by at least a decade or so, as far as movie trailers go, and they've only become more prevalent. When you're seeing something that you're overly familiar with, it's hard to get excited about it.
I recently watched the entire Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy again. The third one was easily my favorite. How times have changed! :D
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 18, 2016, 08:55:49 AM
As for the trailers, I think the problem is that marketing has gotten rather lazy these days. A few years ago this trailer probably would have been good enough to stir up a lot of hype, but now it falls under a generic formula that most superhero movie trailers follow: Have someone narrate in the background about how serious shit is getting, have the villain say some supposedly intimidating lines, and montage through quick-cuts of action set-piece moments along with characters saying potentially quotable lines out of context.
You can basically trace these tropes back by at least a decade or so, as far as movie trailers go, and they've only become more prevalent. When you're seeing something that you're overly familiar with, it's hard to get excited about it.
I think you're right. Most trailers feel like they follow one of three templates, which switch around every half-decade or so.
With the exception of the dancing scene, which is silly without containing any of the charm of Raimi's ususal brand of humor, I genuinely enjoyed Spider-Man 3 as campy fun, just like the first 2 movies. I'd actually say that the second film suffers a bit from taking itself too seriously at times.
*throws up*
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 21, 2016, 10:34:17 PM
With the exception of the dancing scene, which is silly without containing any of the charm of Raimi's ususal brand of humor, I genuinely enjoyed Spider-Man 3 as campy fun, just like the first 2 movies. I'd actually say that the second film suffers a bit from taking itself too seriously at times.
The dancing scene is amazing IMO; I laughed so hard. I agree that the second film isn't quite as good as the other two due to its occasional lack of humor, but it was still really enjoyable.
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 21, 2016, 10:55:42 PM
*throws up*
:D
39% and going all over the place, I guess. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_v_superman_dawn_of_justice/?utm_source=Tumblr&utm_medium=social&utm_content=BatmanVSupermanTomatometer&utm_campaign=Movie&adid=social_Tumblr_Movie_BatmanVSupermanTomatometer)
Who's surprised? It seems like BvS, where it has a cult following, but probably has more detractors, who will probably end up contributing to a high box-office total regardless.
"Once a colony of bats literally lifts Bruce Wayne up in the air as a Christ-like figure, you're probably watching a movie that takes itself pretty seriously." (http://uproxx.com/movies/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-review/)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 22, 2016, 09:05:27 PM
"Once a colony of bats literally lifts Bruce Wayne up in the air as a Christ-like figure, you're probably watching a movie that takes itself pretty seriously." (http://uproxx.com/movies/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-review/)
Amazing. :il_hahaha:
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.4cdn.org%2Ftv%2F1458697863646.jpg&hash=e470a8add17b845ecc4a1d1742afb96ff6a60ee7)
But I thought grit and darkness was the answer to everything!
I've heard things like Wonder Woman and Eisenberg are the best things about the movie. WHAT A TWIST!!
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 23, 2016, 01:31:28 AM
Eisenberg are the best things about the movie
:shit: :shit: :shit:
EDIT: "Diane Lane returns as the widowed Martha Kent, here abducted by Slavic dastards and threatened with blowtorch disfigurement and death. (What is this, "Taken" or "Saw"?) A terrorist bombing on a major D.C. landmark is just another tasteless, ill-timed "gotcha!" moment. Human trafficking, intimations of child abuse (Luthor mutters about suffering his father's "fist and abominations"), a hollowed-out Superman resigning himself to the notion that "no one stays good in this world" ... the film is only slightly more pessimistic than Lars von Trier's "Antichrist." You'd have to go back to Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ" to find this much Christian iconography wedded to this much sadism." (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/ct-batman-v-superman-movie-review-20160322-column.html)
Wow.
I'm attracted and repulsed by this. :joy:
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F82g6Ox8.jpg&hash=83aaf026d82f5ebf010018f00410a2baffb86e3d)
So is this strike three for Snyder, or two?
I definitely don't believe that DC will let him write or direct Justice League after two critical flops. Of course, Man of Steel made money, and regardless of the reviews, BVS will be a financial success as well. So at the very least they may still allow him to work on one of the smaller solo films.
That said, I'd personally be glad if Snyder distanced himself from future DC films. He's had his second chance and blew it. Now it's time to give someone more talented a turn.
Unless it does wonders in China and WB gives it a pass the same way Paramount does with the Transformers movies. Otherwise, I hope someone has George Miller's phone number.
Is it too late to revive Guillermo del Toro's JLD project?
Can we at least salvage Shazaam and hand it off to someone fun instead?
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 23, 2016, 07:04:34 PM
Is it too late to revive Guillermo del Toro's JLD project?
So it can be in Development Hell for 9 years and then forgotten?
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 23, 2016, 07:24:10 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 23, 2016, 07:04:34 PM
Is it too late to revive Guillermo del Toro's JLD project?
So it can be in Development Hell for 9 years and then forgotten?
It wasn't in development hell. A movie actually needs to start production to qualify for that. It never got off the ground because WB/DC sat on the idea for several years and then just dropped it because it actually sounded interesting, and we all know that they can't have that.
If only it was the alternate universe where Justice League: Part 3 was on the horizon, Chris Pratt was Mister Miracle in a New Gods movie, and we're all having fights as to whether Agents of Cadmus is canon or not.
Course, it's in the same world where Brett Ratner's Spider-Man vs Iron Man: Morning of Vengeance just came out. But they can't all be winners.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 23, 2016, 07:32:25 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 23, 2016, 07:24:10 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 23, 2016, 07:04:34 PM
Is it too late to revive Guillermo del Toro's JLD project?
So it can be in Development Hell for 9 years and then forgotten?
It wasn't in development hell. A movie actually needs to start production to qualify for that. It never got off the ground because WB/DC sat on the idea for several years and then just dropped it because it actually sounded interesting, and we all know that they can't have that.
WOOOSSSHH!
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 23, 2016, 08:27:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 23, 2016, 07:32:25 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on March 23, 2016, 07:24:10 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 23, 2016, 07:04:34 PM
Is it too late to revive Guillermo del Toro's JLD project?
So it can be in Development Hell for 9 years and then forgotten?
It wasn't in development hell. A movie actually needs to start production to qualify for that. It never got off the ground because WB/DC sat on the idea for several years and then just dropped it because it actually sounded interesting, and we all know that they can't have that.
WOOOSSSHH!
Was that a bird, or a plane?
Well, I did it. I watched Batman v Superman.
Hopefully it wasn't so bad that he suddenly dropped dead after the experience.
I wanted to drop dead after the experience.
It's not the fact that it was bad that got me. It was how unbelievably angry it was at everything. The movie felt like a fatalistic preacher bellowing out loud about the sins of the world and how it can be only cleansed through hellfire. It was as if I were a watching a despaired man's confrontation with his Messiah, and the result only made him plunge deeper into agony. Like some 14-year-old tryhard who wants to be the next Dostoevsky but with characters he watched on TV. It has all of the pathetic nihilism of a Lars von Trier flick churned through the subtlety of a YouTube video.
All that said, I laughed when Batman took a bathroom sink and then hit Superman in the head with it.
So, here's my review.
http://gregxb.blogspot.com/2016/03/zack-snyder-is-piece-of-shit_27.html
I suppose this is less a title and more a statement of fact.
I just want to mention that after a life of telling Clark to let children die and not to save him from a tornado, Pa Kent went on to farm for rocks as purgatory.
Sounds like exactly what I expected it to be and then some.
DC needs to ditch Snyder already.
Deadpool becomes the highest-grossing R-rated movie of all time. (http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2016/03/deadpool-is-now-the-highest-grossing-r-rated-movie-of-all-time)
QuoteBy close of play yesterday, Deadpool had amassed $745,974,060 to overtake the previous record holder, The Matrix Reloaded, which earned $742.1 million back in 2003.
Hmm..did not know Matrix Reloaded was the record holder.
In which I briefly take on the "Zack Snyder is a visual genius" lie.
http://gregxb.blogspot.com/2016/03/visual-genius.html
Quote from: GregX on March 30, 2016, 01:47:45 PMIn which I briefly take on the "Zack Snyder is a visual genius" lie.
http://gregxb.blogspot.com/2016/03/visual-genius.html
This is something that bothers me in general about when I hear or see people say that a movie is "beautifully shot" or "has excellent cinematography" or "brilliant visual story-telling" in regard to big-budget blockbusters which seem to confuse good special effects in and of themselves with those other labeled qualities. That isn't to say that there aren't plenty of big-budget films which have that sort of artistic value to them, but you definitely won't find those qualities in a Zack Snyder film (granted, I still haven't seen BvS, as I refuse to pay money for a ticket of my own accord, but I've seen enough of his other work). Any schmuck with a massive budget and expensive equipment to work with can make "big" or "grandiose" looking shots. It takes a lot more skill to make a visually brilliant shot, though, and that has much less to do with money than some people may think.
When I think of a film having great visuals in a manner completely separate from simply just having good special effects, I tend to think of scenes along these lines:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPAloq5MCUA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4seDVfgwOg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X05TDsoSg2Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdSKot0psNg
And going back specifically to Snyder, some people argue that at least he creates kick-ass action scenes. I disagree with this notion even more than him being a good visual story-teller. I personally find his over-use of slow-motion in films like 300, as well as his over-indulgence of chaos and destruction in movies like Man of Steel, to be highly obnoxious and honestly kind of boring to watch (though, to be quite honest, this is a problem that a lot of modern big-budget Hollywood films have, even from better directors). I'm not even going to get into stuff like John Woo's earlier Cantonese films, or classic martial arts films, or some other modern works from pure action films with better choreography, stunt coordination, and camera work which leave him and Bay and several other modern directors completely in the dust. Instead, here is a scene (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oixZxgW7C3s) from the same genre as his most recent two films, and here are two (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B66feInucFY) scenes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0CvkiPS5Ks) from a certain Netflix series which has far superior action to anything in Man of Steel.
I watched it a few days ago and still trying to absorb it and my opinion is that it was pretty meh. I didn't like it, but at the same time didn't hate it. Maybe it's because I'm not much of a DC guy and all, but it felt like something that exists. I will admit that it did feel like they were trying to cram 3 flicks into there at once, probably should have dialed that back a bit.
We're living in a world where Deadpool will potentially make more money than a movie with Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman. Let that sink in.
It needs to make well over $800 million just to break even, and it's not likely to get there. It's nose diving at the box office.
Quote from: GregX on April 02, 2016, 04:10:58 PM
We're living in a world where Deadpool will potentially make more money than a movie with Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman. Let that sink in.
It needs to make well over $800 million just to break even, and it's not likely to get there. It's nose diving at the box office.
What's the current tally?
My best friend wants to see this badly, so I'm likely seeing it at some point in theaters, unless he decides to bootleg it. At this point, I'm willing to see it just so I can have my own opinion but I'm not going in with any expectations. It does suck that the first movie we get with both Superman and Batman had to suck, but WB has always been a backwards studio. Really, there was no reason they couldn't do a new Superman film back in the 90s. Yeah, Cage's film would have likely sucked but they had to have other people who wouldn't have dropped the ball so hard like Schumacher or Snyder. We should have already had a Batman vs. Superman movie a decade ago, same with a WW movie.
It took a 68% dive this weekend, but I'm betting when the numbers come in, it will be higher than that. It's bombing overseas. It's getting awful word of mouth, it's doing hardly any repeat business...
It still hasn't made it to $700 million. And, as I said, if needs to do at least $800 million to break even... and that's the lowest estimate. It might eventually make a profit, but it won't be at the theaters. And if it does, it will be a minuscule $50 million, which for a movie like this is a disaster.
So apparently Zack Snyder is stronger than Darkseid, cause he single-handedly destroyed the DC universe.
http://deadline.com/2016/04/batman-v-superman-box-office-second-weekend-gods-not-dead-2-1201729796/
And the final numbers for the weekend came out. 69% drop.
https://twitter.com/GiteshPandya/status/717003757687611392
This is a disaster for WB.
Dang, didn't doubt it would bomb hard if the critics and non-hardcore fans hated it. Gee, you'd think those nitwit fanboys would all get together and see their precious film over and over again to boost them!
Honestly, this will hopefully be a good thing in the long run.
Most of the people I know that liked the movie don't have a desire to watch it again any time soon.
That should say something.
Maybe the next guy to be their Kevin Feige will actually like Superman.
Just a thought.
Can DC just apologize to Mark Waid or whatever that made him leave to join Marvel so he can advise a Superman movie? It could help.
I have this image in my head of Zack Snyder locking himself in his bathroom, tears streaming down his face, screaming and whining about how the world doesn't understand his genius, doesn't deserve his genius, how he is too good for all of us, all while Sarah McLachlan's 'Angel' is blasting from his sound systen. His wife is pounding on the door, in tears, begging him to come out... what will happen next, I suppose it depends on how fast "The Fountainhead" gets greenlit.
:devil:
EDIT: Please don't joke about people committing suicide. Thanks. -- Foggle
Following
BvS' overwhelmingly abysmal performance, WB/DC is doing reshoots to
Suicide Squad. (http://www.latino-review.com/news/suicide-squads-reshoots-to-last-three-weeks) Their choice of words for this decision is very interesting (via Twitter):
QuoteBrett Schulte: talking to people on set today they said the studio "made him do reshoots" because it was too dark. Interesting words.
Batman News: very cool, thanks for that info! There's a rumor that says WB wanted to add more "fun" and "lightness" with these reshoots.
I will not say I told you so.
But I can say this doesn't bode well for Suicide Squad if they have to do this.
Quote from: Daikun on April 06, 2016, 10:05:49 PM
Following BvS' overwhelmingly abysmal performance, WB/DC is doing reshoots to Suicide Squad. (http://www.latino-review.com/news/suicide-squads-reshoots-to-last-three-weeks) Their choice of words for this decision is very interesting (via Twitter):
QuoteBrett Schulte: talking to people on set today they said the studio "made him do reshoots" because it was too dark. Interesting words.
Batman News: very cool, thanks for that info! There's a rumor that says WB wanted to add more "fun" and "lightness" with these reshoots.
Great, now I want to see the dark versions of the scenes. Wonder if they went all early Chimera Ant before the reshoots.
Quote from: Daikun on April 06, 2016, 10:05:49 PM
Following BvS' overwhelmingly abysmal performance, WB/DC is doing reshoots to Suicide Squad. (http://www.latino-review.com/news/suicide-squads-reshoots-to-last-three-weeks) Their choice of words for this decision is very interesting (via Twitter):
QuoteBrett Schulte: talking to people on set today they said the studio "made him do reshoots" because it was too dark. Interesting words.
Batman News: very cool, thanks for that info! There's a rumor that says WB wanted to add more "fun" and "lightness" with these reshoots.
Here's hoping said reshoots keep it from being a disaster. Now, if they could do the same with Wonder Woman since according to her actress its still supposed to be very dark.....
As of April 10, 2016
Batman vs Superman
Domestic: $296,685,542 37.9%
+ Foreign: $486,800,000 62.1%
= Worldwide: $783,485,542
It's running out of steam surprisingly fast with no competition. WB better make some drastic changes, no other DCEU will ever have three, let alone one week without competition. WB shot itself in the foot with this mess. The other studios aren't scared anymore.
New Suicide Squad trailer. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AwUdTIbA8I)
I don't think the reshoots were done yet, were they? They were given three weeks, and it hasn't even been one yet.
No, there's no way that any of the re-shoots could have made it into this trailer. Shooting the scenes is one thing, but editing them in post-production would take several weeks.
Well, Japan's found a different way to market Civil War. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T5hnoBQzDQI)
Doctor Strange trailer is finally out! https://youtu.be/wwcSki7r9cQ
Looks trippy as hell, which is personally right up my alley.
Really, this feels like a major departure from most other MCU films up to this point in terms of its aesthetic look and tone, even more so than GOTG, but that's certainly not a bad thing.
I've been flipping through some old Doctor Strange comics to get prepared for the movie, and it's neat to see some of the similarities.
Looks really good. I like Marvel mixing it up with every new character like this. Keeps things fresh.
Rolling my eyes yet again at white people complaining that the Doctor Strange film is whitewashing or orientalism or whatever synonym for racist they're using now, as if this were another Last Airbender scenario. Like, so the fuck what if Doctor Strange is white? Focus on those upcoming Death Note and Ghost in the Shell movies instead if you really want to improve Asian representation in media.
Why is it more valid to complain about GitS or Death Note than Dr. Strange? I thought he was supposed to be Hispanic...
The Ancient One is supposed to be asian, as far as I know. Not hearing much complaining on that change.
Quote from: Foggle on April 13, 2016, 06:52:06 PM
Why is it more valid to complain about GitS or Death Note than Dr. Strange? I thought he was supposed to be Hispanic...
Because those are actually movies where Asian characters are being played by white actors, while Strange is just a white guy playing a white character. If they had Pedro Pascal or Tony Leung as Doctor Strange, then it would've been cool. But they didn't, which is just fine because it's not like Asian representation is being set back because there's yet another white superhero around. Hearing white people campaign for people of my race is appreciated if done well, but I've rarely ever seen that happen. I just see idiots complaining over every small detail. I see sycophants who think they can talk down to others while using their agenda as an excuse. And frankly, it doesn't help people of color. It makes them look bad.
What I mean is, I always heard Strange was supposed to be Hispanic. Maybe that's not true, I can't find confirmation either way, but I can see why people would complain if they did actually change him to be white, since there are almost no superheroes of that ethnicity.
It's a pretty big deal whitewashing actual Japanese stories about Japanese characters, though, yeah. And who can forget the white people complaining about kimonos at that history museum...
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 13, 2016, 06:25:18 PM
Rolling my eyes yet again at white people complaining that the Doctor Strange film is whitewashing or orientalism or whatever synonym for racist they're using now, as if this were another Last Airbender scenario. Like, so the fuck what if Doctor Strange is white? Focus on those upcoming Death Note and Ghost in the Shell movies instead if you really want to improve Asian representation in media.
Pretty much. I am not even sure I am desensitized from the similar Iron Fist debacle or I just don't care.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 13, 2016, 01:04:23 AMDoctor Strange trailer is finally out! https://youtu.be/wwcSki7r9cQ
I got a huge Christopher Nolan vibe from this trailer. Heck, most of the imagery looks like it was ripped straight from
Inception (especially the bit with the upside-down city).
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 13, 2016, 08:12:14 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 13, 2016, 06:25:18 PM
Rolling my eyes yet again at white people complaining that the Doctor Strange film is whitewashing or orientalism or whatever synonym for racist they're using now, as if this were another Last Airbender scenario. Like, so the fuck what if Doctor Strange is white? Focus on those upcoming Death Note and Ghost in the Shell movies instead if you really want to improve Asian representation in media.
Pretty much. I am not even sure I am desensitized from the similar Iron Fist debacle or I just don't care.
At first, I felt a little annoyed that Iron Fist would be played by Loras from GOT, but I just got more and more disillusioned by the arguments and inability to look at anything no matter how small without bringing racial politics to the situation. Plus, it just seemed most of those lecturing me about corrupt white people getting their hands on everything... were just more corrupt white people getting their hands on everything. It was just the next generation of pompous assholes who thought they knew everything looking down on others for abiding by every single rule of theirs. And I don't even say it as a social justice thing, because I'm pretty liberal. I think it's just an excuse for people to bully, mock, or condescend to others and then hide behind a progressive message so they look like the good guys.
The thing that gets me the most with the forced Tron Fist controversy is these nitwits think because of the setting and whatknot that he should be changed to an Asian character, when all that would do is raise a lot of grief from other nitwits because of how stereotypical Asian Kung Fu Guys are. These people make no sense.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 14, 2016, 02:13:27 AM
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 13, 2016, 08:12:14 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 13, 2016, 06:25:18 PM
Rolling my eyes yet again at white people complaining that the Doctor Strange film is whitewashing or orientalism or whatever synonym for racist they're using now, as if this were another Last Airbender scenario. Like, so the fuck what if Doctor Strange is white? Focus on those upcoming Death Note and Ghost in the Shell movies instead if you really want to improve Asian representation in media.
Pretty much. I am not even sure I am desensitized from the similar Iron Fist debacle or I just don't care.
At first, I felt a little annoyed that Iron Fist would be played by Loras from GOT, but I just got more and more disillusioned by the arguments and inability to look at anything no matter how small without bringing racial politics to the situation. Plus, it just seemed most of those lecturing me about corrupt white people getting their hands on everything... were just more corrupt white people getting their hands on everything. It was just the next generation of pompous assholes who thought they knew everything looking down on others for abiding by every single rule of theirs. And I don't even say it as a social justice thing, because I'm pretty liberal. I think it's just an excuse for people to bully, mock, or condescend to others and then hide behind a progressive message so they look like the good guys.
That's why I hate SJWs. They claim to be anti-racists and will bring out the torches and pitchforks when the truth is none of them are any less racist than the fundamentalist Christian politicians they love to snark at on Twitter. Hypocrites, all of them.
As a Christian moderate, I feel more and more like a unicorn.
I found this quote floating around RT (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/captain_america_civil_war/reviews/):
QuoteThe Marvel Cinematic Universe on the whole is filled with great films and blockbuster gems, but between The First Avenger, The Winter Solider and now Civil War, it's been firmly proven that they have a better grip on Captain America than any of their heroes, and it can be said with confidence that the three movies come together to create the greatest superhero trilogy of all time.
I'm pretty excited.
If Captain America: Civil War is even half as good as the early reviews indicate that it is, then DC is in deeper shit than they already are now.
Having Batman V. Superman bomb with critics big time and do such a mundane job at the box office despite having virtually no competition for multiple consecutive weeks is bad enough as it is, especially after the mixed reception to Man of Steel a few years ago. But add on to that the fact that just a mere month prior to its release, Deadpool did amazing in both aspects which BVS failed with, and just over a month later, Civil War may do the same, and it'll be a case of a shitty DC movie sandwiched directly in-between two great Marvel movies. Now consider this from the general movie-going audience's point of view: a big-budget DC movie with the two most iconic superheroes of all time was shit compared to an R-rated, significantly lower budget movie about a less well-known character, as well as another Marvel movie that has a very similar "versus" set-up and does the same concept infinitely better. Despite being movies from three different studios, this will make the general public think that DC is just crap all-around, and that Marvel can do no wrong.
You see, most casual viewers don't care about or pay attention to details about writers, directors, and various aspects of the behind-the-scenes staff and process that goes into making these movies, so it won't register to people that a lot of DC's missteps so far can be blamed directly on people like Zack Snyder and the rest of the creative team behind DC's films. This can be more harmful to DC than just having future films from them underperform, because it will also effect important sales of merchandise and comic books, which they also heavily rely on from a financial standpoint. Every new Marvel movie attracts new people to start buying and reading their comics, and the toys and licensed material associated with that universe and those characters. If the movies sucked, then the fandom would dwindle to only the more serious fans, who make up a much smaller percentage of all of the people who pay money for Marvel-related products. This is basically what could happen to DC if they don't get their act together fast.
It'll be very telling to see how Sucide Squad performs now that BVS has already started off DC's year with insanely shaky footing.
Well, here's a very... interesting review of Batman v Superman that attempts to defend the film. (https://flawfinder.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-the-superhero-movie-that-hates-superhero-movies/)
An interview with Zach Snyder from 2008 about Watchmen that reveals a lot more about his mindset:
QuoteENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: First 300, now Watchmen — have you always been a comics fan?
ZACK SNYDER: I came to comic books through my mother. I loved fantasy art — I love Frank Frazetta [the famed illustrator known for adult-oriented, sword-and-sorcery, and sci-fi imagery]. I went to boarding school. You weren't allowed too many posters up, and everything I set up was slightly inappropriate. Frazetta's naked girls, ripped up guys — the kids were like, "What the hell?!" They had their Boy George posters up, I had crazy Frazetta. My mother saw I was into this comic called Heavy Metal magazine, so she got me a subscription. You could call it "high-brow" comics, but to me, that comic book was just pretty sexy! I had a buddy who tried getting me into "normal" comic books, but I was all like, "No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn't really doing it for me." I was a little broken, that way. So when Watchmen came along, I was, "This is more my scene."
And the funniest part in hindsight:
QuoteEW: Several filmmakers have tried to turn Watchmen into a movie and failed. One issue Hollywood has always had with the material is that it requires an intimate familiarity with the superhero genre in order to fully appreciate it. Does the fact that Watchmen is finally being made into a movie indicate something has changed in the culture?
ZS: The average movie audience has seen — well, I can't even count the amount of superhero movies. Fantastic Four, X-Men, Superman, Spider-Man. The Marvel universe has gone nuts; we're going to have a fricking Captain America movie if we're not careful. Thor, too! We're on our second Hulk movie. And Iron Man — $300 million domestic box office on a second tier superhero! And not to demean Iron Man — my point is that we all know about superheroes now. I can ask my mother, "Mom, when the Hulk isn't the Hulk, who is he?" "Bruce Banner. Why? What a weird question." I could ask her, "What happened to Bruce Wayne's parents?" "They were killed at an opera." You're getting to that saturation level where superhero movies, it's hard for them to figure out what more to do.
EW: Well, one new point of difference is make them more grim and gritty, like Hancock or The Dark Knight, which seems to also work in Watchmen's favor —
ZS: Everyone says that about [Christopher Nolan's] Batman Begins. "Batman's dark." I'm like, okay, "No, Batman's cool." He gets to go to a Tibetan monastery and be trained by ninjas. Okay? I want to do that. But he doesn't, like, get raped in prison. That could happen in my movie. If you want to talk about dark, that's how that would go. I believe that pop culture is just, like, so ready for Watchmen. We tried so hard to ride that wave between satire and reality, and all the things that make you still care about the character, but you don't miss the commentary about them. Nite-Owl is Batman. The guy has a fricking cave under his house! No doubt a fanboy will look at the movie and not get it. "He looks just like Batman!" Precisely. When people saw our version of the Ozymandias costume on the Internet, some were like, "It's like a Joel Schumacher Batman movie! The costume has nipples! That's crazy!" And I'm like, "Yeah, but that's the point!" With their comic, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons were saying, "Superheroes are kinda funky, aren't they?" We build upon that with a movie that acknowledges that superhero movies have affected pop culture.
Dude's a hack.
QuoteI had a buddy who tried getting me into "normal" comic books, but I was all like, "No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn't really doing it for me." I was a little broken, that way. So when Watchmen came along, I was, "This is more my scene."
Quotewe're going to have a fricking Captain America movie if we're not careful.
QuoteBut he doesn't, like, get raped in prison. That could happen in my movie. If you want to talk about dark, that's how that would go.
We've got Edgy McEdgerson, the eternal eighth grader, over here.
Whoever decided this was the right guy to even touch superheroes really has no idea what they're doing. But considering this is WB's movie division, I'm fairly convinced there's nobody there who does.
Still think Watchmen was good, but at this point that was probably only because Zack didn't have final say-so over everything.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on April 26, 2016, 02:41:39 PM
QuoteI had a buddy who tried getting me into "normal" comic books, but I was all like, "No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn't really doing it for me." I was a little broken, that way. So when Watchmen came along, I was, "This is more my scene."
Quotewe're going to have a fricking Captain America movie if we're not careful.
QuoteBut he doesn't, like, get raped in prison. That could happen in my movie. If you want to talk about dark, that's how that would go.
This is one of the worst things I've ever read. :whuh:
Now literally everything about Zack Snyder's filmography makes sense, except for just one thing: How the hell does he keep getting work? He's like the Jai Courtney of movie directors.
Incidentally, Jai Courtney is cast as Captain Boomerang in Suicide Squad. That instantly makes it a bad movie.
Also, on the subject of comparing Zack Snyder to Michael Bay, I found out two interesting tidbits of information:
1. Snyder started out his career by directing music videos and commercials, much like Bay.
2. He met and befriended Bay as a classmate at the same film school.
It's actually scary how much sense his makes, now.
Funnily enough, Alan Moore is basically the anti-Snyder.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChEGSRpW0AEoGnd.jpg:large)
He's even fully aware of how Watchmen ended up bogging comics down, too.
Still waiting for Snyder to get the greenlight to make TDKR into a movie regardless. I have no faith in WB at this point.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on April 27, 2016, 04:59:55 PM
He's even fully aware of how Watchmen ended up bogging comics down, too.
Still waiting for Snyder to get the greenlight to make TDKR into a movie regardless. I have no faith in WB at this point.
There's already TDKR movies and I hear they're great.
Quote from: gunswordfist on April 27, 2016, 10:21:15 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on April 27, 2016, 04:59:55 PM
He's even fully aware of how Watchmen ended up bogging comics down, too.
Still waiting for Snyder to get the greenlight to make TDKR into a movie regardless. I have no faith in WB at this point.
There's already TDKR movies and I hear they're great.
They are. I'm talking about a live action one with all the fun sucked out like all his other movies.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7o0xlGQ.jpg&hash=6fb0ad9ffa65fd28eedeec9daaf9787e1b2d1de7)
But that's not his scene.
"Sources at WB tell me that this is just one part of what's going on behind the scenes at the DC movieverse. Zack Snyder and Geoff Johns were taken aback at critical and audience reaction to Batman v Superman, I'm told, and WB execs have found themselves at odds with Snyder over his vision for Justice League and the DC movieverse going forward. Of course Justice League was scheduled to start shooting mere days after BvS was released, which meant WB couldn't take any definitive action – like removing Snyder or delaying the movie to make changes – without poisoning the box office for BvS. The result? Lots of fights between Snyder and the WB execs, and lots of pressure from Burbank on Snyder, who is shooting in London."
batman-news.com/2016/04/30/zack-snyder-warner-bros-fight-justice-league/
Uh oh, sounds like there's trouble in paradise!
Interested at how muted the hype is for X-Men Apocalypse. No extreme anticipation like Civil War and Deadpool or disgust that it exists like Dawn of Justice and Fant4stic. I guess that's what happens when Marvel takes a militant "Fuck Mutants!" stance across all media, but I'm not even hearing many X-Men fans or people who liked the past two movies shout about how they're excited or anything.
The same thing happened when The Wolverine was coming out a few years ago and nobody was talking about it. That had a lot to do with Man of Steel and Iron Man 3 taking a lot of attention away from it. People showed more interest in DOFP because at the time only TASM2 was there to draw people's attention away from it (ironically enough), while people weren't initially expecting much from The Winter Soldier (because they're brainless idiots who wouldn't understand how awesome Captain America is unless the movie also has lots of action in it) or Guardians of the Galaxy (because apparently The Avengers meets Star Wars was too hard of a sell for them).
This year already brought us two huge superhero films in Deadpool and Batman V. Superman (actual quality notwithstanding), and is also bringing us Civil War, so that's three big movies in close proximity to it which are distracting people from thinking about it as opposed to one. And while you could make the argument that people lack interest due to the underwhelming trailers, you should keep in mind that all X-Men films have had a pretty poor track record with cutting exciting trailers.
I'm not particularly excited for Apocalypse, but I'll definitely be seeing it in theaters unless it gets really horrible word of mouth or something. To be honest, the only recent superhero films I've actually anticipated for months beforehand are Guardians of the Galaxy and Deadpool. Civil War is probably the most excited I've been for one of these movies otherwise, and that's because the first two Captain America films were so good and the trailers have proven that it won't have much to do with the godawful comic book.
There's also the fact that practically half of the wold has already seen it and said that it was amazing and is simultaneously a great conclusion to the Cap Trilogy while also being the best Spider-Man movie that we've ever had, so it's a no-brainer that we should be excited to see it.
As for Apocalypse, I'm a fan of Bryan Singer so I have much more faith in this film than Foggle does. As I already pointed out, it's not like this series has ever really had great trailers to begin with, even for the better movies, so I can only judge whether it's any good or not once I see it for myself. While it could always potentially suck or be mediocre, the track record of the people behind this movie tends to reveal better results, more often than not.
Either way, it's supposedly the last X-Men movie (before they reboot/revamp/whatever it) so it should have some hype. And since I've seen the other movies in theater, including the bad ones, I'll probably see this too. My lack of hype is mostly because I have always hated Apocalypse in every single form he's ever been in, so it's hard to push past that.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 03, 2016, 02:06:18 PM
There's also the fact that practically half of the wold has already seen it and said that it was amazing and is simultaneously a great conclusion to the Cap Trilogy while also being the best Spider-Man movie that we've ever had, so it's a no-brainer that we should be excited to see it.
Well, yes, but I've been excited for it since before then. :P
And I do have faith in Apocalypse! I think it will be a great movie, I'm just not itching to see it.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 03, 2016, 02:39:19 PM
Either way, it's supposedly the last X-Men movie (before they reboot/revamp/whatever it) so it should have some hype.
The last few movies are already a soft reboot for the first trilogy, and Singer hints he wants to play the long game and allude to a Dark Phoenix movie, (http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/x-men/news/a790334/is-bryan-singer-turning-jean-grey-into-dark-phoenix-again/) so nothing's ending yet. It might not even be the last time Mystique appears ever since Jennifer Lawrence flip-flopped on that position.
The X-Men movies are somehow under the radar in comparison to the MCU, Spider-Man, or even DCCU.
I'm still surprised by how many people I know who haven't seen a non-Deadpool movie in the franchise to date.
I think there are some people hyped for the film it just feels like its muted because its coming out between Batman vs. Superman and Capt. America: Civil War. Deadpool wouldn't have half the hype it had if it and X-Men switched places.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F66.media.tumblr.com%2Fd3a5bf5c013d76e01ca7b387d656989b%2Ftumblr_o6ofgstA5L1rhuguao1_1280.png&hash=2138c338a38a09bfa80aa8e9f156df9e54e31cd7)
That tweet is hilarious. Well played.
The Russos talk to Honest Trailers about the Winter Soldier. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpk1TE2_Gcc)
It's pretty informative about the movie.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 17, 2016, 05:07:20 PM
Well, here's a very... interesting review of Batman v Superman that attempts to defend the film. (https://flawfinder.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-the-superhero-movie-that-hates-superhero-movies/)
QuoteI have no particular reason to prefer Snyder's DC adaptations to Disney's Marvel ones other than the fact that the former are actually good whilst the latter are not because Disney are money-seeking whores.
QuoteZack Snyder understands this mentality that I love his superhero films so much. He understands that portraying characters accurately and with a sense of fun should never be a priority compared to telling an actual story, and he understands that the concept of the superhero itself is inherently stupid.
QuoteWith Watchmen, Snyder transformed the most well-regarded comic book of all-time into a tribute/criticism of the genre's "recent-at-the-time" turn into faux-grittiness with those X-Men/Spiderman films and Nolan's stuff whilst ditching the Cold War metaphors that wouldn't really connect with today's audiences.
QuoteI've read a lot of criticisms regarding Batman v Superman and it's pretty much just the reaction to Evangelion 3.0 all over again: some valid ones in regards to the performances and such, but most of them come off to me like they're reaching. More specifically, the complaints regarding the presentation and how confusing it is to follow. Maybe it's because I've seen Jodorowsky, Bergman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and am currently watching Concrete Revolutio as of this moment of writing, but Batman v Superman and its multiple out-of-nowhere dream sequences were as easy to follow as the 1989 Batman film if you ask me.
QuoteThen there's the criticism that this movie is a big advertisement for the Justice League movie, which I just had to laugh at upon hearing that that complaint was a thing. Whilst it may be true that Batman v Superman's main reason for existing – besides getting Batman to fight Superman of course – was for WB to advertise the thing, that doesn't automatically negate everything else you can read from it. Also, when have any of the other superhero movies not been more than long advertisements to a much bigger movie? Did the first Iron Man have any purpose in its plot other than to promise a future gathering of superheroes? Was Winter Soldier more than the characters getting betrayed by their organization and preparing to fight them in the future?
QuoteFrom the dour mood to the "stupid" characterization of our leads, everything is done for that purpose. And destroy, Batman v Superman does, to the point that it might even be considered Snyder's End of Evangelion
QuoteBatman v Superman doesn't just exist to introduce another big player in today's current trends. It wants us to question whether or not what we're getting right now is really all that satisfying.
QuoteIn fact, I can just see the board meeting for the writing process of Batman v Superman right now. "Sorry fanboys, but Jimmy Olsen has no place here and we're not going to keep him around just to satisfy your desire for comic loyalty like that other company would do. However, I think we found a way to integrate him into our story naturally for a few moments. Boom! Headshot!" *laughter all around*.
QuoteThis film is completely unapologetic about how much it refuses to play by the rules of what the mass market considers acceptable, and whilst that's often a bad thing because it tends to lead to nowhere but shallow hipster-ism, Batman v Superman has a goal and a reason to use its rule-breaking for said goal. And as a post-modern critique of our current pop culture and how it treats superheroes, I'd say Batman v Superman always stays on course with few – if any – deviations and comes together very well at making its point by the end.
QuoteAt the end of the day, I think the meta-narrative that pervades the film's runtime is strong enough to overcome those flaws and narrative holes. I'd even advise people who like what Disney is doing to watch this movie with my viewpoint in mind. Hey, if they can't take criticism, then they shouldn't be criticizing movies to begin with. Batman v Superman is easily the best film I've seen this year and I doubt I'll see better unless Sion Sono has some unannounced project coming out soon that actually has a chance 0f getting subbed. I'd even go so far as to say it surpasses Snyder's previous attempts at superhero storytelling, and given how much they push the bar to begin with, that's saying a lot. With the movie not performing as well as Warner Brothers hoped, I can't say for sure whether the DC universe has a bright future ahead. But I'd rather take a good thing that's short-lived over one that overstays its welcome to the point of indifference. Dear lord, The Force Awakens is a lot lamer on rewatch; and if the following films don't try much harder, Star Wars is going to end up like the Indiana Jones franchise – a popular series we all love that we want no more of, and yet we're getting more anyways.
QuoteMinor Quips
So how about the recent positive response to that Captain America: Civil War film, huh?
:fuzz:
Yeah, it's a pretty awful review.
The money quote:
QuoteI'd even advise people who like what Disney is doing to watch this movie with my viewpoint in mind.
Because he
gets it, don't you know? The only reason you hate it is because you just aren't smart enough to
get it. It's one of those "You have to watch it the right way to understand its brilliance" folks that are more interested in appearing smart and sophisticated than actually being so. It only fits that the reviewer is one of
those NGE fans.
Dude probably hangs out at the modern art museums and heaps praise on the stack of broken toilets as the peak of human achievement, too.
Was that review maybe meant to be published on April 1st by any chance?
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 05, 2016, 07:58:09 PM
Yeah, it's a pretty awful review.
The money quote:
QuoteI'd even advise people who like what Disney is doing to watch this movie with my viewpoint in mind.
Because he gets it, don't you know? The only reason you hate it is because you just aren't smart enough to get it. It's one of those "You have to watch it the right way to understand its brilliance" folks that are more interested in appearing smart and sophisticated than actually being so. It only fits that the reviewer is one of those NGE fans.
Dude probably hangs out at the modern art museums and heaps praise on the stack of broken toilets as the peak of human achievement, too.
Ugh, there is no such thing as "watching something wrong". That has got to be THE most pretentious argument on the entire Internet. This guy's just a stuck-up jock strap.
"Captain America: Civil War was pretty bad. In addition to the usual Marvel problems, there wasn't a single action scene without shaky-cam." (https://twitter.com/MrFlawfinder/status/728440578619232256)
Just watched Civil War. I really liked it, but there's a few things to note:
-It really is more of an MCU film than a stand-alone Captain America film. Despite being a huge Cap fan, though, I don't mean that as a bad thing. It's still an incredibly well-made film in its own right. I would even say that it's in my top five MCU films.
-This film is definitely very continuity heavy, so be sure that you remember past MCU films well enough, because a lot of characters and big events come back and play a crucial role in this movie.
-Spider-Man is awesome. This is the best live-action incarnation of the character to date, IMO, especially if you're a fan of TSSM, but don't expect to see all that much of him in this film. He plays a relatively small part in it.
-The first third of this movie is surprisingly slow, but does a great job of setting everything up.
Putting those things aside, I really enjoyed just about everything in this film. Incidentally, my theater decorated half the seats with Iron Man's logo and the other half with Captain America's. Guess which side I sat on? :sly:
Anyone up to do a talkback for it this time?
I'm a little too busy right now to set it up.
Here's an interesting video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqMGa4QoqCI) about the behind the scenes of the entire Spider-Man movie franchise.
In Sony tradition, it's quite the glorious mess.
Deadpool Blu-Ray trailer. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiYazotcgjg)
Comments on the new X-Men movie seem pretty lukewarm.
Quote"Compared to the energetic, bold Days Of Future Past, it all seems so leaden. How many times can Professor Xavier remind us that there is good in Magneto — by now a mass-murderer several times over — before one of them pulls a lightsaber? How many overly familiar exhortations to heroism can Mystique really deliver and expect to be taken seriously? And did they need to replay entire scenes we've seen multiple times before? Aside from a few moments with Nightcrawler — in his achingly perfect Thriller jacket and Flock Of Seagulls hair — there's no levity here, no tonal variation. The more the film harks back to other X-instalments, the more you'll wish you were watching those instead."
That's not going to help my lack of hype much.
Meh, I still don't care about reviews and also don't have any pre-conceived want to dislike this movie since I don't really know anything about Apocalypse.
Granted, I never quite expected to like this movie as much as X2, First Class, or DOFP, mostly due to the new cast, but I feel that I'll at least enjoy it as a fun popcorn flick.
The weak reception is making me a little sad, but I'm still going to give it a go anyway. I'm not an Apocalypse fan, but I'm willing to check in on Bryan Singer's Xverse one more time.
Just for the sake of a little bit of contrast, here is one of the more positive reviews that I found: https://youtu.be/Az4FhLchHsk
Also, reading some of the negative reviews of the movie, I'm finding that very few actually call it an outright bad film. It seems that the mixed reception ranges from underwhelming at worst to pretty entertaining for what it is at best. I have a feeling that my opinion will fall into the latter camp, but this certainly seems to be the weakest Singer-directed X-Men film to date.
Forbes nailed it!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2016/05/09/captain-america-civil-war-shows-exactly-why-batman-v-superman-failed/#4cd7e65946bb
Quote from: GregX on May 10, 2016, 10:45:27 AM
Forbes nailed it!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2016/05/09/captain-america-civil-war-shows-exactly-why-batman-v-superman-failed/#4cd7e65946bb
Any spoilers in this review?
An Honest Trailer for Deadpool featuring Deadpool himself (for real): https://youtu.be/_qIRtFE6aIc
Quote from: Peanutbutter on May 10, 2016, 12:10:05 PM
Quote from: GregX on May 10, 2016, 10:45:27 AM
Forbes nailed it!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2016/05/09/captain-america-civil-war-shows-exactly-why-batman-v-superman-failed/#4cd7e65946bb
Any spoilers in this review?
Yes.
The MCU is now worth over $10 billion. (http://comicbook.com/2016/05/15/marvel-cinematic-universe-passes-10-billion-mark-at-worldwide-bo)
Harley Quinn may get her own solo movie. (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/margot-robbies-harley-quinn-movie-894486)
Geoff Johns has taken position as DC's Kevin Feige, claiming he will give "hope and optimism" to future movies. Perhaps he can save us in these dire hours. (http://www.vulture.com/2016/05/geoff-johns-dc-films.html?mid=twitter_vulture)
Geoff Johns is a very good choice.
QuoteOne phrase came out of his mouth over and over again as he talked about DC's comics: "hope and optimism."
QuoteDC's nascent cinematic universe has so far depicted Superman as an angry god; a violent, alien entity that needs to be kept in check. This morning, Johns offered a vastly different take on the character's archetype. "I think people make a mistake when they say, 'Superman's not relatable because he's so powerful,'" he said. "I'm like, 'Are you kidding me? He's a farmboy from Kansas who moves to the city and just wants to do the best he can with what he's got.' That's the most relatable character in the world."
QuoteJohns was never the flashiest writer, opting for traditional story structures and plain prose, but he had an undeniable reverence for DC iconography (some have said too much reverence) and a willingness to think big when the company wanted to do something world-shaking.
QuoteAs such, he wrote for the CW's Arrow and helped launch its spinoff The Flash, where he acted as a writer, developer, and executive producer. He advised game developers. He became part of a brain trust responsible for mapping out the contours of the nascent DC cinematic universe. Last year, it was announced that he and Ben Affleck were co-writing the screenplay for a standalone Batman movie. There's no real equivalent to Johns in the Marvel org chart: Unlike Marvel Studios chief Kevin Feige, Marvel TV head Jeph Loeb, or Marvel chief creative officer Joe Quesada, he has his fingers in virtually every medium the characters show up in.
QuoteWhatever he does next, it'll be rooted in a belief that DC needs to understand the deep-seated warmth and love that people feel toward its pantheon. "There's a lot of emotional underpinning of the characters and the stories," he said. "It's not that people take it for granted. They're just not as aware of it. But when it's not there, you really feel that emptiness."
DC has needed what Johns has brought to other mediums. Now, to reset the universe and start on better footing.
Maybe he'll be able to unite the film and TV divisions and wake Marvel up from their stupidity regarding that.
Let's hope so.
Vague rumor as far as concerned, but we might actually get some crossover between the shows and the movies if Kingpin shows up in Spider-Man Homecoming. (http://www.screengeek.net/2016/05/19/marvel-considering-adding-kingpin-to-spider-man-homecoming/)
If they add Kingpin and it's D'Onofrio, I will forgive their shenanigans in regards to the TV/movie split.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 20, 2016, 07:03:00 AM
Vague rumor as far as concerned, but we might actually get some crossover between the shows and the movies if Kingpin shows up in Spider-Man Homecoming. (http://www.screengeek.net/2016/05/19/marvel-considering-adding-kingpin-to-spider-man-homecoming/)
This would make me want to see it. :o
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 20, 2016, 07:03:00 AM
Vague rumor as far as concerned, but we might actually get some crossover between the shows and the movies if Kingpin shows up in Spider-Man Homecoming. (http://www.screengeek.net/2016/05/19/marvel-considering-adding-kingpin-to-spider-man-homecoming/)
Oh man, YES! Please let Denofrio be the main villain. Spider-Man Homecoming will be un-freakin-believable if that happens.
Quote from: Foggle on May 20, 2016, 12:13:24 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 20, 2016, 07:03:00 AM
Vague rumor as far as concerned, but we might actually get some crossover between the shows and the movies if Kingpin shows up in Spider-Man Homecoming. (http://www.screengeek.net/2016/05/19/marvel-considering-adding-kingpin-to-spider-man-homecoming/)
This would make me want to see it. :o
Tom Holland and Marvel making it doesn't? ;)
This would be the cherry on top for me. Especially if there's a chance of a Matt Murdock cameo.
By the way, saw Civil War with my brother the other day. He didn't know Spider-Man was showing up, so his reactions to all of his scenes were priceless! By the end, I think he was already enjoying him a lot.
As far as I'm concerned, Baron Zemo has just topped Loki as the best MCU villain. Thank God like Loki he wasn't killed off. I hope next time he gets to wear a modified version of his traditional costume.
Well now you have my attention, Spider-Man Homecoming.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 20, 2016, 12:32:19 PM
Tom Holland and Marvel making it doesn't? ;)
I'd never heard of Tom Holland before they announced him as Spider-Man, to be honest. I absolutely love the character, SSM, several of the comic runs, and a few of the other Spider-People, but I've been kind of burned out on live action incarnations since this is now the second reboot. Still, hoping for the best, and D'Onofrio being in it would be amazing.
Did you see Civil War yet, Foggle?
I'm not sure if D'Onofrio is showing up for Homecoming, but it looks like we're getting Michael Keaton for the Vulture. I can't argue about that casting, but this is nothing compared to how crazy the new Thor's casting is right now.
Kind of ironic to have Michael Keaton in a superhero movie after starring in another movie which outright ridiculed them. :sly:
Quote from: Avaitor on May 21, 2016, 08:52:43 AM
Did you see Civil War yet, Foggle?
Not yet. :(
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 21, 2016, 09:30:11 AM
Kind of ironic to have Michael Keaton in a superhero movie after starring in another movie which outright ridiculed them. :sly:
And he's playing a... bird man.
The Spider-Man in Civil War reminds me of the Spider-Man from TSSM. Personally, I find that to be awesome since Josh Keaton does my favorite Spider-Man portrayal by far.
Our favorite cinematic critic discusses the similarities between western and eastern entertainment. (https://flawfinder.wordpress.com/2016/05/13/marvel-is-the-western-equivalent-to-most-anime/#more-21439)
Quoteand as long as the technical quality and representation of the hero is sound and we do a big crossover every once in a while, people aren't going to care that absolutely none of the films work as their own standalone thing and that Black Panther was a poorly written extra who we never got to know, and I don't want to know about because he doesn't seem very important.
QuoteBut Ant-Man was the real killer. Good god did I hate that film. Paul Rudd's character was nothing but Tiger from Tiger & Bunny with all the character flaws and relationship with his daughter stripped away, the heist plot was unimaginative
Quotehere are two big reasons. One is that my family is so big into the thing that I couldn't escape even if I wanted to. The second aka the more personal one is that they're pretty much the Western equivalent of watching anime – or to be more precise, the worst aspects of anime. And there's just something about having a Western equivalent to my main hobby that's really comforting, mostly because when my friends ask me why I dislike what they do, I can point at these films and go "because it's worse than this shit!". It's actually really funny how almost none of my anime colleagues keep up with the MCU the way I do because of the very thing I can say about the anime they like, only with superheroes. "I can forgive a weak story because I like the character so much". "I want to see this character in her own solo film/series". "Best girl". These are the exact same defenses I've seen for stuff like 90% of what gets popular in anime, and yet for some reason when your story has a guy in a silly costume and his name isn't Zero, somehow it's not okay. You never see me saying that shit for my preferred genres, if only because I have one preferred genre and it's called "good".
QuoteAnd as Jojo/Monogatari/Detective Conan has shown, I'm also against the idea of a franchise running on forever and trying so hard to connect everything. What can I say? I don't read superhero comics, I've been burned too many times with sequels in the past, and I've been surprised too many times with new experiences to settle for staying in a comfort zone.
QuotePersonally, I'm all in favor of the 90s sequel being as offensive as possible just so that we can get the discussion boards as long as Batman v Superman's. It'd definitely be a lot easier than making Apocalypse or The Last Stand. Just have it be nothing but two hours of Jean Grey blowing up a bunch of lesbians, inside-out. And if you're feeling suicidal, make them all a bunch of white women wearing black face.
QuoteAny X-Men creators who may be reading this blog, please don't be that suicidal.
I'm still worried about Apocalypse, but I'm going home for a few days this week, where the tickets are still $6. Totally down to give it a look for prices like that.
Speaking of the X-Men movies, Best Buy currently has the Blu set with the pre-DOFP movies on sale for $30. I got that a week or two ago, which goes well with the Rogue Cut copy that I got for $10 during FYE's Black Friday. I should probably rewatch a couple of these before I go home.
A good sum up of the Spider-Man deal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNMU0ji2wp8)
Feige apparently stated that he would like Spider-Man to cross-over into the Netflix properties if possible, but it's ultimately Sony's call. Can't say it wouldn't be great to see him show up on Daredevil. I just hope the whole movie/TV business gets settled soon.
Sony's had an awful record regarding both Spider-Man and other attempts at franchises, so I can't say I'm hopeful about the situation. Unless some North Koreans hack into Sony's computers again.
aahahaha
Chris Evans is confused.
This just makes me want to see all of the actors react to the dumber exploits of their respective characters. (https://twitter.com/ChrisEvans/status/735696011172012033)
We're all confused.
They could just make this a new character. But no, they have to entirely change Steve Rogers personality instead.
Alongside the "Watchmen is a prequel!" revelation, this has certainly been a fun week to talk about comics.
So this is making the rounds. (http://epicstream.com/news/Joss-Whedon-Wants-To-Direct-A-Female-Focused-Marvel-Movie)
I still don't understand why so many people hate the Black Widow plot in AOU (I hear that it was forced, but no one ever explains why they think so. Also, I don't think that those who complain realize that the director is usually the fourth or fifth most important person in a MCU project, so I really don't get why everyone focused their venom on Whedon as opposed to Feige or Perlmutter for the movie), and most of my favorite Natasha moments are still in the first Avengers, and even in parts of AOU as opposed to what little we get of her in TWS and CW. That said, I would also prefer a female director for a Natasha movie, and I'm not sure if his vision is totally right for it, either. I can also do without the knock against Supergirl.
I also find it funny that the article is acting like the Captain Marvel movie was just announced. It's been known for a while that we're getting Carol in Phase 3.
Also, here is Vox's MCU ranking. (http://www.vox.com/2015/5/6/8558387/marvel-movie-ranking-captain-america-civil-war) I do think that The First Avenger is a little low, and I'd still rank The Dark World over the first Thor and Iron Man 3, but I think the biggest faults that I have with the list is that Guardians isn't in the top 5. I'd easily swap it out with Ultron, and would put it a bit higher.
The top 3 is pretty hard to top, though. And I do agree that Winter Soldier is superior to Civil War.
So, after much thought and deliberation, I have now redone my rankings for both the X-Men and MCU film series' to reflect my current thoughts:
First up is X-Men:
9. X-Men Origins: Wolverine- Interestingly enough, I did remember kind of enjoying this film when I first saw it in theaters (I had much lower standards back then, though), but upon re-watching it a few years ago I understood why so many people hated it, and aside from the obvious problems, it has absolutely no redeeming qualities to even keep other parts entertaining. There is nothing of value in any single scene within the film aside from Hugh Jackman's typically great performance as Wolverine to really latch onto, and even then he isn't given much to work with, here.
8. The Wolverine- Ranking it this low may be an unpopular opinion, but this movie just does nothing for me. It's not that it has a plethora of atrocious issues like Origins, but neither does it have anything noteworthy to keep it interesting. It's actually somehow even more boring that Origins, if truth be told, but I rank it above if only because it doesn't get anywhere near as ridiculously stupid as that film did.
7. X-Men 3: The Last Stand- While I did used to enjoy this movie, and while even now I don't absolutely hate it like most other people do (and yes, I have read the Dark Phoenix Saga), I also completely agree with all of the criticisms that it gets. It has a few good scenes in the mix to keep it above the other two movies, but it ultimately falls flat on every other level.
6. X-Men: Apocalypse- So, upon letting it stew on my mind for some time, I do admit that this movie is a bit of a mess. Well, more than a bit: it has too many characters and the plot is all over the place. I agree with these criticisms. Even so, I still stand by my opinion that it's an enjoyable mess. It's not so much that I simply forget about the film's problems, but rather I don't forget to also acknowledge its strengths, and I still feel that there were a lot of good aspects about the movie to counteract the bad ones. Most of the performances are really strong, and I enjoyed the new portrayals of characters like Scott and Jean. The Quicksilver and Weapon X scenes are also some of my favorite set-pieces from any X-Men film, period. The movie is heavily flawed, but still fun for what it is.
5. X-Men- The original is....a solid movie. To be honest, while I do really like the movie, it's kind of hard for me to find much to say about it other than that it helped pave the way for what modern superhero movies should be like, and while it's by no means perfect, I would argue that its influence can still be seen to this day, even with the MCU films.
4. X-Men: First Class- This one is definitely the most "fun" X-Men movie in terms of tone and style. Matthew Vaughn's direction is clearly the reason for this, and for that reason it has always stood out to me from other movies in the series, and in a good way. While it lacks the depth and nuance of the two best X-Men films, it makes up for it in pure entertainment value.
3. Deadpool- Yes, I'm counting Deadpool since it's set in the same universe, and since the character himself had his origins in an X-Men comic. And, what can I say, this is easily the funniest superhero film to date, and the best comedy of the past few years by far. It's also one of the best action movies in a while, for that matter. It's both a great mockery and celebration of the entire superhero movie genre. I love the film, and it's still my favorite comic book movie of the year (yes, even more than Civil War, and I really liked Civil War). Not ranking it as #1 is nothing against the movie on my part. I just happen to hold a really special place for my top two X-Men movies.
2. X-Men: Days of Future Past- So, I previously ranked this one as my favorite. Upon re-watching all of the main X-Men movies, I still enjoyed this movie as much as I did before. The writing is sublime and on-point, the acting is top-notch across the board, and the story is very gripping with a real sense of weight to everything. I also just love a good time-travel film, and this is one of my favorites in the genre in addition to being one of my favorite superhero movies. The only reason that I don't rank it as my favorite anymore is because I also re-watched another X-Men film which turned out to be my favorite after all.
1. X2: X-Men United- And finally we come to the best of the best. Yes, it is an early 2000's superhero film, but it transcended most other movies in that genre back then, and it still does to this day. Back when I had ranked DOFP as my favorite X-Men movie, I admittedly hadn't seen this movie in over half of a decade. When I re-watched it last year, and thought about it quite a lot, I came to realize just how damn well this movie holds up after all of these years. It got the perfect way to do a team-based superhero film down nearly a decade before The Avengers did, and while it may be an unpopular opinion, I think that it still does it even better than The Avengers (and I say that as someone who really enjoys The Avengers and liked Age of Ultron much more than most other people did). To me, this is the perfect blend of having nuanced and interesting characters and drama combined with great summer blockbuster-style action and fun.
As for the MCU films, I won't write about each of them right now, but here are my rankings:
13. Iron Man 2
12. The Incredible Hulk
11. Thor: The Dark World
10. Iron Man 3
9. Ant-Man
8. Thor
7. The Avengers
6. Avengers: Age of Ultron
5. Iron Man
4. Captain America: Civil War
3. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. Captain America: The First Avenger
1. Captain America: The Winter Solider
I've already talked at length about why I love TFA and why I believe that it's a much, MUCH stronger film than most people give it credit for. It really stands out to me among all of the movies in the MCU, and I consider it to be the perfect superhero period piece. Fuck everyone else's opinion as far as I care, that movie is great. Of course, Winter Solider is the perfect follow-up and still my favorite superhero movie to this day. As for Civil War, I really, REALLY enjoyed it. It's probably the best "Avengers" movie even though it really isn't technically an Avengers movie. However, it's also not really a Captain America movie despite the title. Steve Rogers has a big part in the movie, but he's not really its main focus. The conflict between him and Tony Stark is, and my point is that if Marvel had instead titled this movie Iron Man: Civil War, nobody would have batted an eye and it would make just as much sense. This movie's central focus is about the conflict between those two characters and The Winter Solider is in the middle of it. It is not simply just a continuation of Captain America's story from the first two movies, and for that reason I don't consider it a Captain America movie. That said, it still does a remarkably excellent job of telling the story that it's trying to tell, and it still boggles my mind how this movie not only juggles so many characters without making a complete disaster out of the pacing and plot, but that it also executes it excellently at that. While I don't like it quite as much as TFA or TWS, I still find it to be one of the best entries into the MCU to date.
8- The Last Stand
7- Origins
6- First Class
5- The Wolverine
4- X-Men
3- Deadpool
2- Days of Future Past
1- X2
As of now. I do still need to see Apocalypse, but I probably will this week. I will say that Deadpool has risen up for me after my first viewing. I actually thought that it sticks too close to the generic origin beats of your average super hero movie, only making fun of them when needed, but I mean, that's pretty fair for a beginning. What matters is that the comedy is as close to pitch-perfect as possible, and that everyone involved with the movie understood the character and made it work, which is why it holds up to repeat viewings. But I'm really excited to see how the sequel turns out.
And I still like The Wolverine. It's a better adaptation of Claremont and Miller's miniseries than I was expecting, and it has some really cool action scenes, especially in the unrated cut. I'm pretty interested in seeing how the last solo Wolvie will be, now that it's going to be rated R.
8- X3
7- Origins
6- First Class
5- The Wolverine
4- Deadpool
3- X-Men
2- X2
1- Days of Future Past
It's really the only non-Marvel Studios superhero series that has managed consistency. That said, I'd still like to see the '90s team together in a film. Every other era has gotten its chance. Now that Apocalypse is out of the way, we can hopefully move on to other X-Men villains and never see him ever again.
Minor spoilers for Apocalypse:
Spoiler
If you want to see an X-Men movie with some of the 90's cast, then you'd probably love the tease from the final scene of Apocalypse, regardless of the rest of the film's inconsistent quality. ;)
While I did enjoy Apocalypse, it is Bryan Singer's weakest X-Men film to date. That said, I heard somewhere that, interestingly enough, among all of the "non-fans" of Apocalypse, Bryan Singer is one of them. I can't verify if this is true or not, but I heard that he didn't like the character and didn't really want to do this movie, but the studio pushed for it and he decided to do it and get it out of the way so that he could then do the X-Men film that he really wanted to make after it. I hope that Apocalypse's poor critical reception doesn't hurt the franchise enough to prevent FOX from continuing it. Despite its missteps, I'm still glad that I saw it, and I do feel that Bryan Singer could make a much better film out of source material that he would be more passionate about adapting.
As far as X-Men being the only non-Marvel series to maintain some general level of quality aside from one or two bad movies in the mix, what about Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy? I'd argue that it's pretty consistent, unless you are also counting all other DC Batman films as part of the same "series" as well.
X-Men is Fox's flagship superhero series now. Fantastic Four is scorched earth, and they have nothing else. Worst comes to worst, they'll simply reboot with a brand new universe and tone. X-Men ain't going anywhere.
But that's good to hear if he doesn't like the villain. Because he's an awful villain, easily the worst in the X-Men franchise.
I've never been a fan of the all-knowing, all-powerful, invincible villain who is simply over-powered in a bad attempt by the writers to make them intimidating, and who's motivations come down to "I'm doing evil things for....reasons." For that matter, I've never liked any iteration of Darkseid that I've ever seen in any medium. I will admit that Thanos was kind of cool in Infinity Gauntlet, but I don't know anything else about him besides that, and I could easily see him falling into the same camp in less exciting stories.
Meruem from Hunter X Hunter, who may be a joke in the power scale compared to those other characters of this type, but who is insanely overpowered compared to other characters in his own fictional universe, is maybe the only example that I can think of in which a seemingly unbeatable villain is actually an interesting character. And what makes Meruem interesting is his humanity. Pretty much any other character of this type that I have seen lacks any sort of personality or interesting features.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 31, 2016, 05:59:19 PMAs far as X-Men being the only non-Marvel series to maintain some general level of quality aside from one or two bad movies in the mix, what about Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy? I'd argue that it's pretty consistent, unless you are also counting all other DC Batman films as part of the same "series" as well.
I wouldn't call them consistent.
Batman Begins was good, but forgettable (I honestly keep forgetting large chunks of that movie).
The Dark Knight is the true outstanding movie of the trilogy.
The Dark Knight Rises flat-out sucked.
That's fine if that's your opinion, but I disagree with it for the most part. Furthermore, most people like all three movies. Both critically and financially, the series has done consistently well. That's what I mean when I say that it's a consistent series.
I thought I read before that Singer was going to leave the franchise again after Apocalypse, but I can't find any proof of that anymore. I'm not an Apocalypse fan either, so I can buy that he didn't put his all into this one.
But you'd think that with all he's done for the franchise, he wouldn't be forced to use a character he didn't want to like this. I know the same thing happened to Sam Raimi with Venom, but Singer's done more for the X movies by comparison at this point.
The movie was locked in before Deadpool happened and surprised everybody. Apparently that movie loosened the grip on the franchise. I'd like to think he would have more creative freedom in the next one.
From what I have come to understand, Bryan Singer has been wanting to do a proper adaptation of the Dark Phoenix Saga, so I definitely believe that he has further interest in continuing on in the franchise beyond Apocalypse.
A build up to a proper Phoenix Saga this time would be quite cool. Especially since it could potentially have many characters.
I've heard quite a few people who unironically want an Onslaught movie. Not sure why.
My only exposure to Onslaught was as the final boss of Marvel Vs. Capcom. Based on that alone I hate him, and will never read a comic featuring him. He's a cheap-ass motherfucker.
So let's deal with the hard question for these movies: What happens when they eventually reboot the MCU? Like make an Ultimate Marvel Cinematic Universe, I guess. There's only so many C-list and D-list Marvel heroes they have left to adapt before some exec up at Disney decides they want a new Tony Stark. So what do they change? What would they keep? And most of all, what would anybody like us want from a new MCU that the current one doesn't give us?
Better villains, for one thing.
Really though, so long as they approach the characters from a different angle and don't re-tread the overarching story beats, I feel another MCU would still produce entertaining movies. As the '89 Batman and The Dark Knight Trilogy have shown, there's multiple approaches and stories you can tell using the same character. How they'd build up to an Avengers film and create an entirely new overarching story between the movies would be a difficult challenge, but in the right hands it could still be pulled off. Though, the one-of-a-kind and novel feeling that characterized The Avengers when it first came out wouldn't be there, so I doubt another MCU's version would ever recapture that feeling.
Allow the TV series to become part of the movies.
They still have Captain Marvel and Black Panther, Spider-Man's film could boost MCU's popularity and we still have the Thor sequel and GOTG 2 coming. Out of all I listed, that's 3 new MCU movie series, just 2 sequels and only Capt/Miss Marvel is C list. I don't know when a reboot will happen but it won't be from MCU looking like its on its death bed from adapting C and D listers. Especially since the only films like that in the last forever were Ant-Man and GOTG. And C or lower tend to be go to tv, with Daredevil and Punisher being the only exceptions, afaik.
As for what I want when they do reboot, I'd love to see a far bigger cosmic universe with heroes on that level.
Quote from: gunswordfist on June 03, 2016, 11:21:17 AM
They still have Captain Marvel and Black Panther, Spider-Man's film could boost MCU's popularity and we still have the Thor sequel and GOTG 2 coming. Out of all I listed, that's 3 new MCU movie series, just 2 sequels and only Capt/Miss Marvel is C list. I don't know when a reboot will happen but it won't be from MCU looking like its on its death bed from adapting C and D listers. Especially since the only films like that in the last forever were Ant-Man and GOTG. And C or lower tend to be go to tv, with Daredevil and Punisher being the only exceptions, afaik.
Phase 3 is probably going to be awesome. The question was more angled to an eventuality than for the near future.
Personally, I think the lack of strong villains (even though the Netflix shows and Civil War have had awesome ones) and the Netflix shows not crossing over have been the biggest weak points. There was really no reason Peter Parker couldn't have mentioned a Devil in Hell's Kitchen that inspired him to be a superhero. Locking them out of the movies is counterproductive and against what the MCU is supposed to be.
That said, an MCU reboot would be incredibly hard considering how strong this current one is.
Why even entertain the notion of a reboot right now? The MCU is going really strong as it is, and I don't see it letting up any time soon. Just like Desensitized said, there only major problem right now is not letting their Netflix shows crossover with their movies. Having Wilson Fisk appear in the next Spider-Man movie would actually give us a villain that we already know is great.
If any Universe could use a reboot right now, it's DC. Fuck whatever irreparable damage Snyder did to Batman and Superman, and instead start fresh and new with a much more appropriate vision for the characters and story-lines. And maybe even get one up on Marvel by setting it up so that the good CW shows like Arrow and The Flash can actually crossover with the movie characters. Not to knock Ezra Mller in any way, but I'm already perfectly happy with Grant Gustin's portrayal of Barry Allen, and I believe that most people in general are as well. I don't need to see another take on the same character if they have already been done about as good as they possibly can be.
I agree, the lack of tv show crossover and good villains are MCU's weak points. I say the villains are the biggest problem since Netflix Marvel did just start last year so it's actually understandable why Kingpin, Punisher and Daredevil have yet to show up. Unlike DC, it doesn't seem impossible, it just looks like tv shooting schedules are delaying it, with Punisher looking like the one who'll be the most tied up by them now. But you all knew that, I just like ranting :blush:
Agent Carter's show is at least fitted in a bit thanks to her appearances in Captain America 2 and Ant-Man. I have a feeling if Agents of Shield didn't end up royally sucking they'd have done some references to it by now. I think between that and what Gunswordfist said are the reasons why the Netflix shows haven't crossed yet. They have at least mentioned the movies events in Netflix, and to be fair they could just be bidding time. At least there's a lot of rumors that Kingpin will appear in Spider-Man. Hopefully that happens.
I caught Apocalypse tonight, and yeah, it's kind of a mess. Actually, it's kind of really a mess. The horsemen's roles weren't defined nor, outside of Magneto, were their motives. Moira had no need to be there at all, just as Xavier felt surprisingly underutilized here, almost as much as Apocalypse himself, whose motive was also thin. The continuity is a mess, but I guess with such a big time traveling mess in DOFP, the timeline is allowed to be a little screwed up. And I felt that Magneto's side story could have held a stronger movie, as well as the time Cyclops, Jean and Nightcrawler had.
But I still enjoyed it well enough. There were some good moments all around, and like I mentioned, I do like the younger mutants here. This is definitely Singer's weakest X-Men film, but he's allowed to have a lesser entry.
You know, the original and new casts have the same level of consistency, in that they have a solid, but not-too-impressive debut, a killer second act, and a weaker third. The Wolverine movies seem to have messed with that, by having a weak first and a solid but far from A-tier sequel. This makes me excited for the next one. I wouldn't be surprised if the Deadpool movies follow the X-Men flick's trajectories.
Fially saw Deadpool on Saturday. I thought a lot of the humor tried too hard up until Colossus came. Then it got great.
This movie did so much right. They got in Al, Ajax, Bob, Weasel, made Weasel a lot more interesting by replacing his role with some old guy no one cares about and they retold DP's origin very well.
Spoiler
I am so surprised Vanessa lived. I thought she was going to die from the flashback, all the way up to the end. I wonder if she'll be a mutant in the sequel.
There's so many characters I want to see in the sequels. Unfortunately there's zero percent chance we'll get Spider-Man or Bullseye (Bullseye's DP appearances are what put him in my top 30 villains list, believe it or not.) Oh and no Thanos. I don't know who owns Taskmaster but chances of him showing up probably aren't good.
Anyway, I wonder if T-Ray is next. If they do the plot twist..yeah, that's going to be confusing as fuck and make the first movie very existence make people's head hurt...lol I hope they di it but keep it ambiguous.
Here's the Justice League logo.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Foyster.ignimgs.com%2Fwordpress%2Fstg.ign.com%2F2016%2F06%2Fjustice-league-logo-720x360.jpg&hash=65ee59e436ca8a2afd4ae75b5579728342f57f64)
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13537519_10154297269833615_2043545812010769908_n.jpg?oh=8059d11fe1f54f76bb04169e60bf0289&oe=580D615E)
I'm highly amused by the irony of the Die Hard director saying movies like Captain America are too macho. (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/comics/marvel_comics/die-hard-director-john-mctiernan-says-comic-book-movies-are-a143365)
Only having that one quote to go off of, it really sounds like he hasn't actually seen any of the movies that he's criticizing. It feels like he just looked at a poster of one of the Captain America movies and based his opinion of an entire genre of film on that alone. This guy from the comments section even points out how a Captain America movie of all things basically disproves his entire statement about the superhero film genre:
QuoteI'm not gonna insult him because he gave me The Predator; but I wish he actually watched the movies before judging them so harshly. I mean, Cap: TWS basically went against the very notion of the hyper americanized hero by making him question his govt.
oh well.
But what's also striking is this choice quote right here, which is the height of hypocrisy:
QuoteA kid used to be able to learn how a man or woman should act by watching films
So, the guy goes on about superhero movies and modern movies in general being fascist, and then goes on to praise how older movies used to teach people about how they "SHOULD" act, and on top of that these role-models had to be gender specific? Either that's a severe mis-translation, or Mr. McTiernan doesn't actually know what the definition of fascist actually means.
Furthermore, this is coming from the guy who's movies almost exclusively featured male leads saving the day, and women serving as little more than damsels needing to be rescued.
Don't get me wrong, I love movies like Predator, The Hunt for Red October, and Die Hard to death. They are all some of my favorite movies of all time. But me thinks that a certain director has gone rather senile since the 90's ended and he lost all relevance. Either that or he's just trying to stir up some attention for himself.
He also called Fury Road corporate filth while giving praise to Argo, a movie literally about Hollywood producers saving the day. (http://theplaylist.net/john-mctiernan-dismisses-mad-max-fury-road-corporate-product-says-comic-book-movies-made-fascists-20160712/)
Well, for what it's worth I really like Argo. It's my favorite 2012 film. What John Mctiernan said is still stupid, though, and I have a hunch that he knows it. I can't believe that the guy who made Die Hard is this idiotic. I really do think that he's just after the attention that this will give him, for whatever reason.
I sometimes wonder when directors bemoan about comic book movies, they do so out of jealousy. Emmerich said something similar recently, and of course there's Snyder's bitterness towards the MCU.
So the trailer for Justice League has been released................................................
...........................................................................and it actually LOOKS FRICKING GOOOOD!!!!! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gglkYMGRYlE
I like this Flash.
Your Harley, sir. (https://youtu.be/nhhqmRJ8CD8)
The trailer for Justice League alone was better than any of Snyder's movies. He's clearly not in charge of this one despite officially directing it.
Eh, The final Batman V Superman trailer and the last couple of Suicide Squad trailers also had a similar tone. To me, all it shows is that DC is responding to the criticism of their movies being too up their own ass in grimdark bull-shit.
This Justice League trailer compiles some footage from a movie that has just barely begun filming. It'll take a lot more than some slap-dash humor thrown together to convince me that this movie will be any good, especially with Snyder's name still attached to it.
According to Midnight's Edge (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mdfm0cTl10A), Ben Affleck has far more pull with this movie than he did with BvS. He's involved in the script writing and production as well as being an executive producer. It might be because his films have been successes while Snyder's have been disappointments critically and financially, and he was really disappointed with BvS.
But we'll have to see. The sooner Snyder is quashed, the better things will get.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 25, 2016, 09:32:12 AM
The trailer for Justice League alone was better than any of Snyder's movies. He's clearly not in charge of this one despite officially directing it.
Yes, that trailer was excellent!!!
Snyder is apparently getting an increasing amount of input into Wonder Woman, so I don't think Warner's done with him yet.
Wow. The trailer looks good, but it doesn't look like a Justice League movie. It looks like a crime/heist film.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 25, 2016, 03:32:03 PM
Snyder is apparently getting an increasing amount of input into Wonder Woman, so I don't think Warner's done with him yet.
According to who? Because the trailer for her movie actually had some good humor in it too that doesn't suit Snyder's style.
Quote from: Peanutbutter on July 25, 2016, 11:43:50 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on July 25, 2016, 03:32:03 PM
Snyder is apparently getting an increasing amount of input into Wonder Woman, so I don't think Warner's done with him yet.
According to who? Because the trailer for her movie actually had some good humor in it too that doesn't suit Snyder's style.
Well, he appears to be a writer (http://www.slashfilm.com/wonder-woman-screenwriters/).
Quote from: Avaitor on July 26, 2016, 01:54:36 AM
Well, he appears to be a writer (http://www.slashfilm.com/wonder-woman-screenwriters/).
Wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be a rape/revenge film tbh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7eU_VnCFbk
34% for Suicide Squad.
And yet people are still talking about Justice League and speculating about future DCEU movies like any of it actually matters....
Why? :-\
Honestly, I feel sorry for the DC fans who actually like the source material and are way too smart to defend crap like this.
Well, another round of some arthouse connoisseurs claiming DC films are better than Marvel's because they're less mainstream and piss off the simple-minded critic. Because I sure loved when people kept explaining to me why Dawn of Justice was a misunderstood classic, and that any faults are because the audience were too dumb to appreciate it.
I can only hope the other films are better due to Geoff Johns involvement, but I can't say I'm very optimistic for them.
These movies should not be this bad.
My friend and I want to see it, so I'll let y'all know how it is later on. Definitely disappointed with the amount of bad reviews, BvS wasn't doing this bad at this point earlier. Hopefully they'll listen to Johns and Affleck going forward.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKIMEiex.jpg&hash=f9319290430b8600f55e8aad3c26e4b41c8db8d5)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.revolutionsf.com%2Fimages%2Fcontent%2Fsuicidesquad-joker.jpg&hash=7513c23c36561cc596ddc33d31a789475a7405a8)
General consensus is that this is an overall worse experience than BvS. That's astonishing.
I remember not really caring for TDKR all that much when it came out.....and now that is a literal gold standard of filmmaking compared to everything WB has put out since. Quite a run they're on here.
That's sad on multiple levels. Especially since Dark Knight Rises was mediocre.
There's also the fact that there were three different cuts of the film. That shows a lack of faith in the whole project.
Johns is really going to have to work hard to save this sinking ship.
THREE?! Jeez...
Quote from: Kiddington on August 09, 2016, 02:49:32 AM
General consensus is that this is an overall worse experience than BvS. That's astonishing.
I remember not really caring for TDKR all that much when it came out.....and now that is a literal gold standard of filmmaking compared to everything WB has put out since. Quite a run they're on here.
General consensus where? The critics thrashed it but in other places I've seen a number of people that love it. Some hated it, but there aren't as many. I didn't like BvS that much so SS could be bad, but its not as clear-cut among the public online like with it was with that.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 09, 2016, 03:12:25 PM
There's also the fact that there were three different cuts of the film. That shows a lack of faith in the whole project.
Johns is really going to have to work hard to save this sinking ship.
At least he seems to be repairing some badly-burnt bridges with Mark Waid, so there's that. (https://twitter.com/MarkWaid/status/763213931108106240)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 10, 2016, 06:27:46 AM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on August 09, 2016, 03:12:25 PM
There's also the fact that there were three different cuts of the film. That shows a lack of faith in the whole project.
Johns is really going to have to work hard to save this sinking ship.
At least he seems to be repairing some badly-burnt bridges with Mark Waid, so there's that. (https://twitter.com/MarkWaid/status/763213931108106240)
And that right there already gives me more hope. No reason for these "whose pee stream goes the longest" contests.
The Roast of Captain America (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6jLhu0FRWE)
So since DC created DC films and put Johns in charge, there's been a shake up. Nobody posted this, so I will. This is the list of rumors that has come out:
QuoteCyborg is out, folks. Expect a full Titans flick with Deathstroke as the main antagonist. Nightwing is in it, though, if that's any consolation. Cyborg will be in the Flash movie. Barry and Vic knew each other in school.
Deathstroke was offered to a bunch of actors but it ultimately went to Joe Manganiello.
Sequel to Man of Steel will be released in 2020 (the name Superman will not be in the title). Villain is Braniac. They're trying to court several directors including J.J. Abrams and Duncan Jones. Other characters being considered include Supergirl and Superboy. Lex Luthor will be a key character in Brainiac's new origin. I believe the origin they have planned at the moment is Lex uses Kryptonian and alien tech to enhance LexOS and it becomes Brainiac. From what I've seen though, they DEFINITELY want Brainiac in a physical comic book-y form, not as some AI controlling drones or machines or something.
Edgar Wright is also being courted for a DCEU project.
They're trying not to make Justice League feel overcrowded but it's very clear that there is a lot they're working with already. Looking to be a long movie. They know they can't cut out a ton of stuff and repeat past mistakes.
Justice League's villain is Steppenwolf as you all know. The League fights Parademons for a good chunk of the film. Lex is let out of prison and gets the public to love him. He tries to manipulate the public into hating heroes like Batman and Superman but it doesn't work. Lex helps Steppenwolf come to Earth in exchange for technology and knowledge. Lex is very manipulative and much calmer than he was in BvS. He's also much scarier in my opinion. There's a funny scene after the League is assembled where Joker and Harley are committing a crime and they expect Batman to show up...when the whole League arrives. It's really funny and Joker and Harley just stand there, not knowing what to do now. Kind of like a "Well...shit" moment. Later, the League get their asses kicked by Steppenwolf but then Superman returns and weakens him. The full Justice League then works together to defeat Steppenwolf in an awesome climactic fight reminiscent of the big fight scene in The Avengers. Superman has a beard, long hair, tattered/scorched-looking black suit, and is thin at first (not as thin as Flashpoint Superman but still thin). During the fight with Steppenwolf, you see his full strength return with each swing and with each second he's in the sunlight. Green Lantern shows up at the very very end of the film (may even be moved to mid/post-credit scene). There's a full Darkseid tease at the end buuuuut...
Justice League 2 may or may not use Darkseid as the villain. The biggest concern is comparisons to Thanos. They may hold off and use him further down the line once the dust has settled following Infinity War. Other villains being considered are the Injustice League, the Crime Syndicate and The Society. They really want multiple villains for the sequel for some reason. Tower of Babel is also being discussed as a possible plot.
Justice League 2 will be pushed back to the end of 2019 to make room for Justice League Dark (which will have a different title to not confuse moviegoers).
Aquaman will release August 2018. The villain is Black Manta, though as far as I know he has not been cast yet. The concept sketches do show the full suit which made me very excited. They want Black Manta to be a Darth Vader-esque character, in that his voice and presence is intimidating and terrifying even when he's not fighting. Aqualad is in it and serves his father for a good chunk of the film. He eventually switches sides and helps Aquaman. There's a cool fight scene planned where Aquaman and Aqualad fight Black Manta's army before Aquaman goes off to fight Black Manta at the end.
Flash's release date is March 2018. Villains are the Rogues, led by a really...creepy Captain Cold. The film is going to be really fun but Captain Cold is...strange. Creepy is really the best way I can describe it. I'm not entirely sold on the concept so hopefully it'll work better on the big screen. He wears a sleek mechanical suit that has the same color scheme and pattern as his comic book incarnation. They noticed how fan's loved the Speedforce scenes in the show and hope to put their own spin on something similar.
The Batman film (right now called The Batman though they're considering other titles) will release October 5 2018. Current plot has Black Mask as the main villain breaking other villains out of Arkham to kill Batman. Joker and Harley have a subplot involving a bomb to blow up all the inmates once Batman recaptures them all that results in Harley leaving the Joker because of the abuse and Batman trying to rehabilitate her. Deathstroke is sent in by Waller to help contain the situation so she can use them for her own means but Batman fights Deathstroke and promises Waller that he's coming for her next. Deadshot is also in it but leaves the Asylum to be with his daughter instead of getting his revenge on Batman. There's a really cool scene where Black Mask lines all the villains up and asks who will join him to get revenge (this scene will focus a lot on Deadshot's reactions, making it clear he wants only freedom). Many of the villains get away in the end, with Batman promising to hunt them all down. The film will end with Batman overlooking Gotham and seeing one of the B-List villains (has yet to be decided) committing a crime.
Luke Evans was approached to play Sinestro in Green Lantern Corps. Not sure if he agreed. The film will be lighthearted and fun. They're modeling the tone after old cheesy sci-fi serials. As of right now, the villain will be Sinestro with a tease of Atrocitus towards the end (subject to change however). They want to explore the various Lantern Corps with this film and the sequels.
They want to do something fresh and new to revamp Black Adam in Shazam. From what I've heard, Dwayne Johnson has been in constant communication about what they could do to make this film better. Billy is also a huge Justice League fan and he meets them at the end of the film as Shazam.
Misha Collins, Channing Tatum, Milo Ventimiglia, Steven Yeun, and Jake Gyllenhaal have been approached for various roles.
Rob Lowe was approached to play one of the villains in the Flash film. They apparently really want him to play a villain.
Emily Blunt, Rosamund Pike, Alexandria Daddario, and Jessica Chastain have also been approached.
Expect full trailers for both Wonder Woman and Justice League emphasizing the "fun" of these movies. The Wonder Woman trailer shows the villain a little. Also expect a bunch of announcements regarding casting, release dates being moved, a few new films being added to the slate, plans for DCEU shows and DCEU animated movies (no shows or movies will be announced, just that they will make stuff that tie in), and more.
Going off that last bit, they're planning on bringing the DCEU shows to HBO exclusively. Ideas being tossed around include Birds of Prey, Nightwing, The Question (heavily being considered as being the first, last I heard), The Phantom Stranger, Zatanna, and Doctor Fate.
The animated films will show what some of the characters are up to during the events of the other films.
Suicide Squad 2 will happen though after 2020, likely to be 2021. Will have a slightly altered roster. It also will not be directed by David Ayer.
The DCEU has been mapped out to about 2025.
The Booster Gold/Blue Beetle movie is up in the air right now. They're leaning on the edge of approving it after the success of Deadpool but may use it as an HBO show.
That's a lot of different irons in the fire, but I do hope they can straighten it all out.
They do need to fire Snyder, though. He's clearly not the right fit for what they need.
Here's hoping the Rock's top advice for Shazam is to make it fun and lighthearted. I'm also expecting the Question to be modeled after Daredevil's Netflix series, which would be the best tone for it. Nightwing has potential. Really, those are the three I'm most interested in. I'll have to wait and see on the others.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on September 20, 2016, 08:50:49 AM
So since DC created DC films and put Johns in charge, there's been a shake up. Nobody posted this, so I will. This is the list of rumors that has come out:
QuoteCyborg is out, folks. Expect a full Titans flick with Deathstroke as the main antagonist. Nightwing is in it, though, if that's any consolation. Cyborg will be in the Flash movie. Barry and Vic knew each other in school.
Deathstroke was offered to a bunch of actors but it ultimately went to Joe Manganiello.
Sequel to Man of Steel will be released in 2020 (the name Superman will not be in the title). Villain is Braniac. They're trying to court several directors including J.J. Abrams and Duncan Jones. Other characters being considered include Supergirl and Superboy. Lex Luthor will be a key character in Brainiac's new origin. I believe the origin they have planned at the moment is Lex uses Kryptonian and alien tech to enhance LexOS and it becomes Brainiac. From what I've seen though, they DEFINITELY want Brainiac in a physical comic book-y form, not as some AI controlling drones or machines or something.
Edgar Wright is also being courted for a DCEU project.
They're trying not to make Justice League feel overcrowded but it's very clear that there is a lot they're working with already. Looking to be a long movie. They know they can't cut out a ton of stuff and repeat past mistakes.
Justice League's villain is Steppenwolf as you all know. The League fights Parademons for a good chunk of the film. Lex is let out of prison and gets the public to love him. He tries to manipulate the public into hating heroes like Batman and Superman but it doesn't work. Lex helps Steppenwolf come to Earth in exchange for technology and knowledge. Lex is very manipulative and much calmer than he was in BvS. He's also much scarier in my opinion. There's a funny scene after the League is assembled where Joker and Harley are committing a crime and they expect Batman to show up...when the whole League arrives. It's really funny and Joker and Harley just stand there, not knowing what to do now. Kind of like a "Well...shit" moment. Later, the League get their asses kicked by Steppenwolf but then Superman returns and weakens him. The full Justice League then works together to defeat Steppenwolf in an awesome climactic fight reminiscent of the big fight scene in The Avengers. Superman has a beard, long hair, tattered/scorched-looking black suit, and is thin at first (not as thin as Flashpoint Superman but still thin). During the fight with Steppenwolf, you see his full strength return with each swing and with each second he's in the sunlight. Green Lantern shows up at the very very end of the film (may even be moved to mid/post-credit scene). There's a full Darkseid tease at the end buuuuut...
Justice League 2 may or may not use Darkseid as the villain. The biggest concern is comparisons to Thanos. They may hold off and use him further down the line once the dust has settled following Infinity War. Other villains being considered are the Injustice League, the Crime Syndicate and The Society. They really want multiple villains for the sequel for some reason. Tower of Babel is also being discussed as a possible plot.
Justice League 2 will be pushed back to the end of 2019 to make room for Justice League Dark (which will have a different title to not confuse moviegoers).
Aquaman will release August 2018. The villain is Black Manta, though as far as I know he has not been cast yet. The concept sketches do show the full suit which made me very excited. They want Black Manta to be a Darth Vader-esque character, in that his voice and presence is intimidating and terrifying even when he's not fighting. Aqualad is in it and serves his father for a good chunk of the film. He eventually switches sides and helps Aquaman. There's a cool fight scene planned where Aquaman and Aqualad fight Black Manta's army before Aquaman goes off to fight Black Manta at the end.
Flash's release date is March 2018. Villains are the Rogues, led by a really...creepy Captain Cold. The film is going to be really fun but Captain Cold is...strange. Creepy is really the best way I can describe it. I'm not entirely sold on the concept so hopefully it'll work better on the big screen. He wears a sleek mechanical suit that has the same color scheme and pattern as his comic book incarnation. They noticed how fan's loved the Speedforce scenes in the show and hope to put their own spin on something similar.
The Batman film (right now called The Batman though they're considering other titles) will release October 5 2018. Current plot has Black Mask as the main villain breaking other villains out of Arkham to kill Batman. Joker and Harley have a subplot involving a bomb to blow up all the inmates once Batman recaptures them all that results in Harley leaving the Joker because of the abuse and Batman trying to rehabilitate her. Deathstroke is sent in by Waller to help contain the situation so she can use them for her own means but Batman fights Deathstroke and promises Waller that he's coming for her next. Deadshot is also in it but leaves the Asylum to be with his daughter instead of getting his revenge on Batman. There's a really cool scene where Black Mask lines all the villains up and asks who will join him to get revenge (this scene will focus a lot on Deadshot's reactions, making it clear he wants only freedom). Many of the villains get away in the end, with Batman promising to hunt them all down. The film will end with Batman overlooking Gotham and seeing one of the B-List villains (has yet to be decided) committing a crime.
Luke Evans was approached to play Sinestro in Green Lantern Corps. Not sure if he agreed. The film will be lighthearted and fun. They're modeling the tone after old cheesy sci-fi serials. As of right now, the villain will be Sinestro with a tease of Atrocitus towards the end (subject to change however). They want to explore the various Lantern Corps with this film and the sequels.
They want to do something fresh and new to revamp Black Adam in Shazam. From what I've heard, Dwayne Johnson has been in constant communication about what they could do to make this film better. Billy is also a huge Justice League fan and he meets them at the end of the film as Shazam.
Misha Collins, Channing Tatum, Milo Ventimiglia, Steven Yeun, and Jake Gyllenhaal have been approached for various roles.
Rob Lowe was approached to play one of the villains in the Flash film. They apparently really want him to play a villain.
Emily Blunt, Rosamund Pike, Alexandria Daddario, and Jessica Chastain have also been approached.
Expect full trailers for both Wonder Woman and Justice League emphasizing the "fun" of these movies. The Wonder Woman trailer shows the villain a little. Also expect a bunch of announcements regarding casting, release dates being moved, a few new films being added to the slate, plans for DCEU shows and DCEU animated movies (no shows or movies will be announced, just that they will make stuff that tie in), and more.
Going off that last bit, they're planning on bringing the DCEU shows to HBO exclusively. Ideas being tossed around include Birds of Prey, Nightwing, The Question (heavily being considered as being the first, last I heard), The Phantom Stranger, Zatanna, and Doctor Fate.
The animated films will show what some of the characters are up to during the events of the other films.
Suicide Squad 2 will happen though after 2020, likely to be 2021. Will have a slightly altered roster. It also will not be directed by David Ayer.
The DCEU has been mapped out to about 2025.
The Booster Gold/Blue Beetle movie is up in the air right now. They're leaning on the edge of approving it after the success of Deadpool but may use it as an HBO show.
That's a lot of different irons in the fire, but I do hope they can straighten it all out.
They do need to fire Snyder, though. He's clearly not the right fit for what they need.
Here's hoping the Rock's top advice for Shazam is to make it fun and lighthearted. I'm also expecting the Question to be modeled after Daredevil's Netflix series, which would be the best tone for it. Nightwing has potential. Really, those are the three I'm most interested in. I'll have to wait and see on the others.
Hmm, most of those sound like better ideas than what they've been doing recently. Good to hear the words "fun" and "light-hearted" being emphasized which is certainly at least one good sign. Doubt they'll fire Snyder, but hopefully it might really be Affleck directing it with Snyder just doing the cinematography direction. Not that I think Snyder is as good at that as his fans claim he is, but he does give some images that are good optics and if he's stuck to just that role he might can deliver something really good on that end.
As for Shazam, I imagine Rock did tell them to go lighter with the movie. Most of his success has been from lighthearted movies and I don't see him wanting to use a comic book movie to deviate away from that.
GOTG 2 teaser! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WhQcK-Zaok)
Perfect for a summer movie.
Yay!
Logan trailer just dropped: http://youtu.be/Div0iP65aZo
With the exception of a few shots, this doesn't look anything like a normal X-Men movie. Hell, it doesn't even look like a comic book movie, and in all honesty....that's kind of a good thing here. It looks different than what I expected, but in a really good way, like it could work as its own story of some grumpy bad-ass old dude and another old dude who he considers his friend and mentor embarking on one last mission to protect someone else's future. Personally, I dig it, and this is coming from someone who found the first stand-alone Wolverine movie to be outrageously stupid and the second to be dreadfully boring.
This one actually perked my interest more than the GOTG2 teaser, which is a movie I'm sure that I'll love, but the angle for that movie seems to be playing it pretty safe whereas this movie feels like it'll be something completely different. X-Men as a film franchise is woefully uneven in quality, but what I've seen here leads me to believe that this movie at least has a chance at being one of the better ones.
As long as it doesn't end like the comic it's based on, anyway.
It would be better if it was
Doctor Strange is currently at 90% on RT. What I've skimmed of it makes it sound like it's similar to the core MCU formula, but also kind of different at the same time. If that's possible?
I'm getting a little more excited to see it now, but I have to wait until Sunday. I'm not sure how well it's going to do commercially, but its opening gross from where it opened this weekend has exceeded expectations, so we might have another Guardians here.
Just got back from seeing Doctor Strange. Overall, it was really fun. I also give it props for having a really clever ending that elevates it a step-up from your typical final action set-piece from these types of movies.
So it sounds like there are still issues with the DCCU. (http://uproxx.com/movies/warner-bros-ben-affleck-batman/3/)
It really is apparent that they don't care.
To be more specific, the executive producers and people behind the international business of these movies don't care as long as they make money. I have a feeling that the creative people behind the DCEU are very frustrated with this. I won't be surprised to see many of them jump ship before long.
I have no faith in Batfleck whatsoever, but Bret Easton Ellis is hardly the best source of gossip.
Don't know anything about Brad Ellis, but this doesn't sound too out there to be true to me. The expansion into foreign markets like China I think is part of why a lot Hollywood's input the past few years has seemed even more lacking.
Ellis has backtracked on those comments. (http://uproxx.com/movies/bret-easton-ellis-batman-ben-affleck/)
I still don't have much faith or interest in this one.
So I really liked the part in Doctor Strange where the Ancient One went into the multiverse and discovered Barry Allen having a private moment. (https://youtu.be/m2w3uZTEvPE) Really proved how different Marvel and DC truly are when she opened that door and peered into their madness.
Oh yeah, so I caught Doctor Strange as planned. I was going to make one of our traditional talkback threads for it, but do we really need those anymore?
Anyway, it was good. The visual effects, especially, are out of this world, and the cast was strong. Even Cumberbatch worked well as Strange, but he's kind of playing type at this point. At the same time, this isn't one of the greats, since the MCU formula is getting increasingly stale and the comic relief is among the weakest of these movies. I'd still say that Phase 3 is off to a good start, but aside from some fantastic sequences that use great visual construct, there isn't much that will make this stand out.
I'll probably end up waiting for DVD to see this one. Not a lot of money, and I'm in no rush to see it. Glad to hear it's good.
I'm honestly more hyped for the movies coming out next year.
As far as the three "side-character" MCU movies go (so far), those being Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man, and Doctor Strange, I'd say that I like Doctor Strange a bit more than Ant-Man but not as much as Guardians. It's solid entertainment and arguably the most visually impressive MCU film to date, but it doesn't quite reach the level of greatness of the best MCU films out there.
I'd probably rank it below Ant-Man, as I actively noticed the formula a bit more with this film and that did take me out of it a little. I do wish I had listened to all the critics and seen the movie in 3-D, because those visual and special effects felt legit immersive and I could totally see how the film would be even better through the 3-D experience.
It certainly was worth seeing in 3D, and I rarely ever say that.
The formula was definitely there, but I noticed it just as much in Ant-Man, myself. Why I put it slightly above, despite liking the former movie, is Scott Derrickson's keen directing style which gave the mysticism a legitimate other-worldly feel (thanks in no small part to Derrickson's background as a horror movie director) despite the actual story being very familiar, and I also felt that the ending went against expectations and was legitimately clever, having Strange outthink the big-bad rather than overpower him.
I'm really just glad that Derrickson got the chance to get some recognition through a major blockbuster film, but I would personally like to see him return to his horror routes with his next project.
I can see that. Really, they're both around the same level for me, but Ant-Man's style as a heist film was something I really dug just cause I like those sorts of movies. But I absolutely loved the ending with Strange outwitting Dormamu. That was a really refreshing change of pace from the massive-scale beat-em ups Marvel movies have tended to end with. I am actually looking forward to seeing more Dr. Strange films than Ant-Man & Wasp because I'm really excited to see how they'll take the other-wordly feel of the film's magic to the next level and go balls-to-walls crazy with the concept narratively, without the safety and trappings of an origin story formula.
Batman will be in Spider-Man: Homecoming. (http://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/michael-keaton-to-play-villain-in-upcoming-spider-man-reboot/ar-AAk5Y6b)
I do think that Ant-Man would have been better if Edgar Wright's influence was more pronounced than Adam McKay's, instead of the 50-50 split between their writing styles. I actually do like McKay, but they don't really mesh.
I'd put Ant-Man below Doctor Strange, but both are definitely behind Guardians.
Spider-Man Homecoming trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNE0zRNyXuc)
Not another origin story. Huzzah!
It reminds me a lot of SSM, which is a very good thing. Now we just need him trying to sell pictures to JJJ.
The first trailer for Deadpool 2 is out! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5ezsReZcxU)
So who's excited for Spider-Man to splinter away from the MCU? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glpcj-oQEN0) I can't wait for that R-rated Venom movie and Silver Sable film. And maybe they'll do that Sinister Six movie. The one Sony thought would be as successful as the first Avengers film.
Eh, Amy Pascal hasn't worked for Sony Pictures since 2015. She serves as a producer for Spider-Man Homecoming through her independent firm Pascal Pictures. While she probably knows a fair amount of behind the scenes stuff because she is a producer on the film, I wouldn't take her assertion on Spider-Man's future in the MCU as definitive. Especially since she didn't say anything definitely, only very briefly postulating a possibility.
Though even if Spider-Man does return to Sony, with DC's failures at the box office and critical reception with their own attempts towards a cinematic universe, and Sony's own failed attempt at starting one for Ghostbusters, I'm unsure that they would go forward with any of their former plans for a Spider-Man one. Then again, they are Sony.
R-rated Venom can easily work given the characters nature, especially if they plan on using Carnage as its villain. Considering it's Sony they'll probably find a way to screw it up, but it's not as ridiculous or groan worthy as people are making it out to be.
If you've seen Midnight Edge's videos or the Sony hacked e-mails then you know the less she has any say over Spider-Man the better. She really has no clue about superheroes or storytelling at all.
Deadpool 2 casting news: Josh Brolin is Cable. (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/deadpool-2-josh-brolin-play-cable-993232)
So now we have two actors from two obscure and disliked DC movies coming back for Marvel roles. :light:
To be fair, DC just got Joss Whedon, who was behind two good Marvel movies (Age of Ultron was flawed but fun, bite me), so I'd say that it pretty much evens out.
Yeah, I was going to comment on that- isn't DC losing Affleck? It's weird that they're signing up a Batgirl film without having a dedicated Batman.
The DCEU has at least 4 Batman-related movies in development before they even have a concrete solo Batman film completed. I don't even know what Affleck's deal with WB is. The idea that they couldn't fully contract a Batman down for the DC universe is bizarre, even for this franchise's standards.
Quote from: Avaitor on April 13, 2017, 10:16:33 AM
Yeah, I was going to comment on that- isn't DC losing Affleck? It's weird that they're signing up a Batgirl film without having a dedicated Batman.
I thought that they were just losing him as a director on the solo Batman film. If he's dropping out as an actor as well then I'm rather behind on my superhero-related news.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 13, 2017, 10:33:20 AM
Quote from: Avaitor on April 13, 2017, 10:16:33 AM
Yeah, I was going to comment on that- isn't DC losing Affleck? It's weird that they're signing up a Batgirl film without having a dedicated Batman.
I thought that they were just losing him as a director on the solo Batman film. If he's dropping out as an actor as well then I'm rather behind on my superhero-related news.
There are reports that he wants out of his contract, and it's been implied that DC/Warner were a pretty significant contributor to his rehab stint.
I wouldn't be surprised if Justice League is the last we see of Batfleck.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-I9EcAUwAEubGM.jpg:large)
What's sad is this isn't even the most warped diatribe about why Dawn of Justice is a masterpiece.
I don't think I've done this in a while so...
GREAT TIER:
Winter Soldier, Civil War, Daredevil S1, Luke Cage S1
GOOD TIER:
Jessica Jones S1, Iron Man, Captain America, Guardians of the Galaxy
OKAY TIER:
Agent Carter, Doctor Strange, Iron Man 3, Thor, The Avengers, Ant-Man, Daredevil S2
BACKGROUND NOISE TIER:
Iron Man 2, Incredible Hulk, Age of Ultron
SHIT TIER:
Thor the Dark World, Agents of SHIELD
M&MS TIER:
Iron Fist S1
I can agree with most of that. For me it's specifically:
Great Tier:
The First Avenger, The Winter Soldier, Civil War, Guardians of the Galaxy, Daredevil S1
Good Tier:
Iron Man, The Avengers, Age of Ultron, Jessica Jones S1, Luke Cage S1, Daredevil S2, Agent Carter
Okay Tier:
Ant-Man, Iron Man 3, Thor, Doctor Strange
Background Noise Tier:
The Icredible Hulk, Thor: The Dark World
Shit Tier:
Iron Man 2, Iron Fist S1
Abomination Tier:
Agents of SHIELD
The two oddities on my list would probably be how high I rank The First Avenger and Age of Ultron. To the former, I personally find it to be a brilliant take on both golden age comics as well as classic 1940's action and adventure film serials, whereas with the latter, I still feel that it does quite a few great things that it doesn't get enough credit for, if you can look past some of its flaws and shortcomings, which I still insist are blown way out of proportion.
And just for fun:
The DCEU:
Great Tier:
N/A
Good Tier:
N/A
Okay Tier:
N/A
Background Noise Tier:
N/A
Shit Tier:
Man of Steel, Suicide Squad
Doomsday (AKA- Zack Snyder's Wet-Dream) Tier:
Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice
I was going to try this, but I realized that I've only seen a lot of the more recent films just once, when they were in theaters, and haven't thought much of them since.
All I know is that Iron Fist really is as bad as everyone's said, I may give AOS another shot after its likely end, and I've cooled on Doctor Strange a little since it came out. Not that my opinion on it was glowing, but it's really kind of samey.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 25, 2017, 09:09:46 PM
I don't think I've done this in a while so...
GREAT TIER:
Winter Soldier, Civil War, Daredevil S1, Luke Cage S1
GOOD TIER:
Jessica Jones S1, Iron Man, Captain America, Guardians of the Galaxy
OKAY TIER:
Agent Carter, Doctor Strange, Iron Man 3, Thor, The Avengers, Ant-Man, Daredevil S2
BACKGROUND NOISE TIER:
Iron Man 2, Incredible Hulk, Age of Ultron
SHIT TIER:
Thor the Dark World, Agents of SHIELD
M&MS TIER:
Iron Fist S1
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: If you have Winter Soldier as your number one. I might even like it more than DD S1 or Luke. need to rewatch.
The reception to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is rather odd. If you were to go by Rotten Tomatoes, the movie seems to be doing quite well with critics, albeit not quite as well as the first film. However, actually reading these reviews shows that opinions are a lot more "meh" about the movie then the actual scores would let on.
The real consensus seems to be that it's alright, and not much else.
It doesn't look like a game changer or all that different from the first one. That's what I was expecting, but if it's at least half as fun as the original, I'm sold.
Spoiler
So what's the deal with Starhawk's team in the post credits scene? I guess it might be another cameo like Howard the Duck, show some nerds the original Guardians, but it seems like a waste to get Stallone, Ving Rhames, and Michelle Yeoh out for only a few minutes of screentime.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 08, 2017, 04:16:34 PM
Spoiler
So what's the deal with Starhawk's team in the post credits scene? I guess it might be another cameo like Howard the Duck, show some nerds the original Guardians, but it seems like a waste to get Stallone, Ving Rhames, and Michelle Yeoh out for only a few minutes of screentime.
Spoiler
I've read that Gunn is interested in using the original team in some capacity later on. Possibly in Vol 3, or maybe even Infinity War, since he is a producer.
Spoiler
I'd be down for a Ravagers film myself. But cameos in Vol. 3 or Infinity War would be cool too.
They're rebooting Hellboy without Perlman or Del Toro, and Jeffrey Tambor says what many people think. (https://twitter.com/jeffreytambor/status/861969698316894209)
Well, there goes my unrealistic dream of ever seeing Hellboy 3 fully realized. :imnothappy:
While I can understand that this is the only real option for a franchise like this (which has had two films both underperform at the box office) to have another feature green-lit, It's hard for me to imagine them working without Ron Perlman in the role. It may be bold of me to say this, but I associate Perlman with Hellboy in the same way that I do RDJ with Tony Stark/Iron Man or Jackman with Logan/Wolverine. I just can't imagine anyone else in the role.
I would've much preferred an animated movie, or even an entire animated series if it meant having Perlman back as Hellboy, even if it was CG. No GDT is understandable due to having other commitments, but no Perlman is an outright crime.
I'm in the minority of people who didn't like del Toro's take on the franchise. Perlman was fine, but he's not that big of a loss to me. I'm interested to see a new take on the character.
I really enjoyed them, personally. Easily some of the most unique films in the genre, and personally I feel that they were ahead of their time. Back when movies like The Dark Knight and Iron Man, while great in their own rights, were tiptoeing around the more outlandish elements and lore of their source material, the Hellboy films truly embraced the absurdity and weirdness of comic books in a way that we never really saw again until Guardians of the Galaxy. And to be honest, I feel like hey hold up better for that very reason.
I can see that, but I never really clicked with the films when they were out, and I found out why when I read the comics- I much prefer Mignola's original stories. That, and frankly, I think del Toro is better in theory than in actuality.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C__BQ4TVoAEHBkv.jpg:large)
I found an old NeoGAF thread from 2005 regarding Marvel movies.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNujHPy0.jpg&hash=6cfa44643a61e7bcba99889c312ddaa4e44e5a9e)
There are reasons nobody takes NeoGAF seriously.
Zack Snyder steps down from final Justice League shoots, leaves Whedon in charge (http://www.msn.com/g00/en-us/movies/news/zack-snyder-steps-down-from-justice-league-to-deal-with-family-tragedy/ar-BBBphWa?OCID=ansmsnnews11&i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com%2F).
Before anyone makes jokes, read the article. I feel so very sorry for Snyder.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 10, 2017, 03:12:54 PM
They're rebooting Hellboy without Perlman or Del Toro, and Jeffrey Tambor says what many people think. (https://twitter.com/jeffreytambor/status/861969698316894209)
I wouldn't put it like that, unless there's something I don't know. I do think it'll probably suck. On the bright side, we did get 4 or 5 Hellboy movies with Ron Perlman. I'll just go watch those.
Edit: Nevermind on the loyalty thing. I can see what Jeffrey means. I didn't pay attention to who that was lol
Quote from: Avaitor on May 23, 2017, 03:39:28 PM
Zack Snyder steps down from final Justice League shoots, leaves Whedon in charge (http://www.msn.com/g00/en-us/movies/news/zack-snyder-steps-down-from-justice-league-to-deal-with-family-tragedy/ar-BBBphWa?OCID=ansmsnnews11&i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com%2F).
Before anyone makes jokes, read the article. I feel so very sorry for Snyder.
My heart goes out to him.
Rewatching Dawn of Justice right now, sort of as my way of paying respects to him, and some scenes after a rewatch aren't as bad as I remember. The "Granny's Peach Tea" quip actually has foreshadowing, for instance. Still not a particularly good movie, but there's some things I admire from a second viewing.
Not the way I wanted him to step down from these movies. My prayers go out to him.
It's so bizarre that the same guy has his hands in both Justice League and the Avengers. Almost as odd as JJ Abrams being involved in both a Star Wars and Star Trek revival.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 23, 2017, 10:24:03 PM
Not the way I wanted him to step down from these movies. My prayers go out to him.
Yeah, it's really heartbreaking. He tried to continue working but couldn't, and let someone else take over rather than delay the film while he left to be with his family. Dude is a class act, regardless of the content in his movies.
That's outright tragic. The death of anyone's close family member is a heavy burden on anyone's heart and emotional state, and regardless of what I think of his filmmaking, I'm genuinely sad to see any filmmaker have to step down from their position for such a devastating event in their life. Hopefully Snyder and the rest of his family are able to recover from this.
As far as the DCEU goes, in a bit of potential good news, early buzz for Wonder Woman from legitimate sources seems to be genuinely positive, including from critics who haven't liked any of the previous DC films to date. Could this finally be their turning point?
It's a tragedy when someone so young commits suicide, and hits close to home for me. I respect Synder for taking the time he needs to grieve, and wish him and his family well in this difficult time.
Following the success of Deadpool and Logan, Fox continues to keep experimenting with their X-Universe in unconventional ways.
New Mutants will be a horror movie. (https://www.comicbookmovie.com/x-men/new-mutants-details-revealed-will-be-a-horror-movie-with-no-superhero-costumes-a151392)
Um, okay.
I can see this one go either way, tbh.
Quote from: Avaitor on May 27, 2017, 03:31:33 PMUm, okay.
I can see this one go either way, tbh.
Fox seems to be better at breaking away from the superhero formula than making straight-up comic book movies. That seems to be where their strengths lie.
I'm pretty optimistic for this. I wanna see them milk this idea for all it's worth. They can truly stand out and compete with Marvel now instead of stagnate like they used to in the past.
I don't know. The last time we got a "No costumes, we're going horror!" route from Fox, it was a disaster crafted by inebriated Trank hands. And this film will be directed by the Fault in our Stars guy.
That said, I do appreciate Fox and WB trying to do something different since they know copying the MCU formula without understanding how it works is a doomed idea.
It's a weird idea to be sure, but I feel like FOX knows that they have to take risks in order to keep up with Disney's Marvel output. X-Men: Days of Future Past was basically the best that they could do with the more formulaic and predictable superhero movie approach. By the time that we got to Apocalypse, the cliches and tropes were far too abundant and the set-up felt bland and uninspired (and I say that as someone who didn't even dislike the movie that much).
FOX's best recent Marvel projects have been the riskier ones like Deadpool, Logan, and Legion. Of course, that doesn't mean that they will all work, as Fant4stic has already proven, but if you have one dud and three great products out of four attempts, than clearly there is greater potential for something interesting even if the risk for fucking it up is higher as well. I don't mind taking a a spectacular dud every now and then in order to get more interesting movies like Logan, whereas churning out a bunch of safe and mediocre X-Men sequels like Apocalypse would probably be the worst thing that FOX could do at this point.
While I'm skeptical about this New Mutants movie concept, I still have to give the execs at FOX some major props for not being afraid to try new things for a genre that a lot of people have started becoming burned out on.
The superhero genre is sort of like a phoenix, because it always had a down period every few years before rising back up. Batman & Robin pissed people off, only for them to come back for X-Men and Blade. Spider-Man 3 and Rise of the Silver Surfer burned them out again, only for The Dark Knight and Iron Man to reel them back in.
Superhero movies will only ever disappear when there's something to replace them. Unfortunately, there's nothing offering what they do right now for audiences so if you don't like them, you're out of luck.
If people like John McTiernan don't like it they could always make a new Die Hard or Predator style movie. Superhero movies didn't stop John Wick 2 from being a huge hit.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 27, 2017, 06:52:51 PMI don't know. The last time we got a "No costumes, we're going horror!" route from Fox, it was a disaster crafted by inebriated Trank hands.
Did that movie really go the horror route? I just thought it was a poorly lit drama.
Quote from: Daikun on May 28, 2017, 10:12:03 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 27, 2017, 06:52:51 PMI don't know. The last time we got a "No costumes, we're going horror!" route from Fox, it was a disaster crafted by inebriated Trank hands.
Did that movie really go the horror route? I just thought it was a poorly lit drama.
Trank said he wanted to go with a Cronenberg route for the Fantastic Four, and some parts like Doom exploding people's heads and Ben Grimm turning into a military slave imply that.
My heart goes out to Snyder's family. Never hated the guy and always thought that while a number of his choices in his work were questionable, the guy seemed to actually enjoy himself even if his output wasn't what a lot of fans wanted. No matter what, it's horrible that his daughter's suicide was what drove him off the JL film.
I hate that Whedon had to get it, he's already doing BatGirl and him coming on to JL makes me concerned that JL will be two movies meshed together like Suicide Squad. Plus, Whedon's buffoonery online has turned me off from wanting to support him I'm likely going to end up watching JL at home unless someone pays for my ticket.
The moment of truth has arrived: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/wonder_woman_2017
It looks like DC finally managed to not fuck something up for the first time since the last Nolan movie. Congratulations, guys. Now could we maybe keep this up for more than just one film? Because I'm still fairly skeptical about Justice League.
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/b62e34a507b51b71dedda0bbea66589b/tumblr_inline_oqyzkuT7VG1r22udw_540.jpg)
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FROU1Po1.jpg&hash=fa4edd5c79875beee6a79eabce57051e7eff5e21)
The Black Panther trailer is out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxWvtMOGAhw
This is personally my most anticipated Marvel movie right now. I loved the character in AEMH and what little I've read of his comic books. It's such a unique set-up to have the literal leader of a country also be a superhero. And the fact that the extremely talented Ryan Cooglar is behind this has me all the more excited to see what the film has in store.
I couldn't tell if Phase 3 started off a little lacking or if I've been losing interest in the MCU. I enjoyed Civil War, but found it a little overrated and just not that fun, while Doctor Strange just didn't do much for me until the last act. But Guardians Vol. 2 really got my attention, while this and Thor look terrific. I'm getting back into the swing of things.
I just hope that Spider-Man doesn't suck.
Quote from: Daikun on June 10, 2017, 04:16:40 AM
The Black Panther trailer is out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxWvtMOGAhw
10 out of 10 trailer. And they spoiled nothing!
Quote from: Avaitor on June 10, 2017, 10:32:48 AM
I couldn't tell if Phase 3 started off a little lacking or if I've been losing interest in the MCU. I enjoyed Civil War, but found it a little overrated and just not that fun, while Doctor Strange just didn't do much for me until the last act. But Guardians Vol. 2 really got my attention, while this and Thor look terrific. I'm getting back into the swing of things.
I just hope that Spider-Man doesn't suck.
Yes, Thor also looks very interesting. I found the first two films to be decent but disappointing. I do think Civil War is overrated as well, namely the big battle that did little for me. Not a bad movie though. Cap still has the best movie trilogy is superhero history (thank you for sucking, Dark Knight Rises :whuh: ).
I have yet to see Doctor Strange, Guardians 2 or Ant-Man.
The reviews for Spider-Man: Homecoming are coming out as great. I have to admit, I was pretty worried about this one, since Spidey's been done to death and the previous attempts to make films out of him haven't been to my liking. But if this is going to be the one that finally does him justice, and doesn't mess with the characters to the point of unrecognizability while simultaneously being a good movie, I'm really happy.
I do still need to see Wonder Woman, though. Chances are that I might get to see both this week, but considering my new work schedule, I wouldn't be surprised if I can't catch Homecoming after all.
Yeah, the marketing for this film was awful. Kept shoving Tony Stark in every second of footage while showing that shot of Ned/Ganke dropping the Death Star in each and every trailer.
I like Spidey's marketing, outside of the selfie cam.
The marketing, the interviews with Pascal and Feige together, (https://youtu.be/IvR8oFYSlLQ) and all the spinoff movies Sony announces that immediately get disavowed by Marvel Studios make me think the Sony/Marvel arrangement for Spider-Man's a clenched teeth thing. If so, I really hope this doesn't meddle with the movies like what Perlmutter did.
I've been avoiding everything around this movie because Sony is in charge of all that, and they're an awful studio.
The actual movie itself is what I want to see because that is all Marvel Studios.
Oh shit, Noah Hawley. We might actually get a good Doctor Doom movie. (http://variety.com/2017/film/news/doctor-doom-1202502084/)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 20, 2017, 09:03:13 PM
Oh shit, Noah Hawley. We might actually get a good Doctor Doom movie. (http://variety.com/2017/film/news/doctor-doom-1202502084/)
If it doesn't fall into Development Hell or he isn't replaced halfway into production. Staying cautiously optimistic on this one.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLjalAdh.png&hash=fb67d16112b22051f0724b3dd2a17f5a6459d06b)
I'm excited for Avengers: The Phantom Pain.
I think I know why Sabretooth was cut out of Logan.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fy4gYuOK.jpg&hash=681eb3432b42850129fdb16c6c24bbebaabc5dda)
So apparently at one point in time Quentin Tarantino had envisioned making a Luke Cage movie: https://youtu.be/qpX2XZBShPc
I just found that little tidbit to be interesting.
So I wasn't expecting much from Whedon doing reshoots for Justice League. It happens all the time, and doesn't affect things too much, even with different circumstances like this. But it looks like he's changing some big stuff. Like no Luthor (https://moviepilot.com/p/joss-whedon-cut-a-major-character-from-justice-league/4375740).
Not a big loss tbh.
Yeah, the Whedon JL news seemed to shift from "Whedon doing tiny reshoots" to "Whedon doing tens of millions of dollars worth of reshoots" to "Whedon replacing the soundtrack, cutting out characters, and basically rewriting and refilming most of the movie". How much Snyder footage will be left? And would that mean there would be alternate cuts of Justice League? Like a Whedon cut then a Snyder cut a few years from now, just like when they made Lester and Donner cuts of Superman II?
I can't imagine this will turn out to be anything other than a mess of the movie with so many drastic changes this late in the game.
I'm honestly expecting this to be a trainwreck, but I'm just hoping at this point that it's the amusing kind of trainwreck.
The DCEU is good as dead. (https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16387706/wonder-woman-batman-dc-expanded-cinematic-universe-warner-bros-standalone)
I think this is a good call, the half-and-half venture. Keep the mainline movies still around for those who want them, but allowing standalones to be their own thing is a great call, and can allow for more experimentation like Fox has been trying with Deadpool and Logan.
Guess even Warner Bros. was bound to learn something. Will we get any good movies from both divisions is the real question.
Quote from: Daikun on September 30, 2017, 09:00:59 PM
The DCEU is good as dead. (https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16387706/wonder-woman-batman-dc-expanded-cinematic-universe-warner-bros-standalone)
Sounds like the MCU but much more flexible. Of course I severely doubt they'll use that potential right though.
Thor: Ragnarok is doing exceptionally well with the early reviews. Like, better than anyone expected from it. If the buzz is to be believed, then we may have finally gotten ourselves a genuinely good Thor movie after the mediocre first film and the outright bad Dark World. It's nice to know since I always did really enjoy Hemsworth's portrayal of Thor. It was just unfortunate that he never got any strong material to work with outside of the first Avengers movie (whereas the second inexplicably cut him out from a large chunk of the plot).
BvS with pro-wrestler commentary. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMBjWWGtsz0)
Hemsworth and Hiddleston were very well-casted, but yeah, they've never gotten the movie they've deserved. It's sounding like a lot of fun, and another good addition to the MCU.
Thor: Ragnarok was a lot of fun. I know that tends to sound redundant when describing Marvel movies, but to be honest I don't see a problem with that myself. I notice a lot more snobby reviewers that like to put down MCU films for just being casual entertainment, but watching a movie like this reminds me of why it's fine to have movies of this nature as long as they are executed well, and this one most certainly is.
I didn't expect to see Hulk's asscheeks.
(https://i.imgur.com/E10SEh4.jpg)
Deadpool 2 trailer! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-Cjsnq8kVU) (Also read the description.)
Release date: June 1, 2018
And just as expected, the reviews for Justice League range from mixed to negative, with the most praise that I've consistently seen for the film being boiled down to "Eh, well at least it's not as bad as BVS or Suicide Squad."
At any rate, regardless of your feelings on it, this officially marks the end of the Snyder-verse. If nothing else, hopefully these can serve as an example for future DC films to learn from the mistakes of the past and not repeat them.
I can't believe that it happened, but it did- I walked out of an MCU film.
I was suspecting that I wasn't a fan of Taika Waititi. I absolutely hated What We Do in the Shadows. Not my kind of humor at all.
Quote from: Avaitor on November 17, 2017, 08:18:57 PM
I can't believe that it happened, but it did- I walked out of an MCU film.
I was suspecting that I wasn't a fan of Taika Waititi. I absolutely hated What We Do in the Shadows. Not my kind of humor at all.
What made you walk out?
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on November 17, 2017, 08:20:48 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on November 17, 2017, 08:18:57 PM
I can't believe that it happened, but it did- I walked out of an MCU film.
I was suspecting that I wasn't a fan of Taika Waititi. I absolutely hated What We Do in the Shadows. Not my kind of humor at all.
What made you walk out?
Every single gag annoyed me. I could tell that Hemsworth was having fun, but I could tell that this wasn't going to click with me, so I decided to make a peaceful exit.
Well, while I did enjoy the film myself, I'm not surprised to see some people have that response. The humor can go a bit too overboard for some people, which is understandable. Humor is a very subjective thing after all and if a movie bases its entire entertainment value on comedy and you don't find it funny, then it's just going to be an aggravating experience.
I'd still say it's miles better than the previous two Thor films, myself, though (especially the second, which is flat-out terrible upon a re-watch). The gags may not work for you, but I personally felt a lot of them were played off in really clever ways. There were a few that fell flat for me, though.
Having not seen the new Thor movie, I will say that I thought What We Do In The Shadows was absolutely hilarious and Hunt For The Wilderpeople made me cry.
Yeah, I thought Ragnarok added some spirit the past two Thor films severely lacked. Sure, it was quippy, but I've gotten used to that in Marvel films.
Um yeah, it's impossible for Ragnarok to be worse than the first two Thor films.
Quote from: gunswordfist on November 18, 2017, 01:26:24 AM
Um yeah, it's impossible for Ragnarok to be worse than the first two Thor films.
Sure it can. It can be Iron Man 2.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on November 19, 2017, 09:08:07 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on November 18, 2017, 01:26:24 AM
Um yeah, it's impossible for Ragnarok to be worse than the first two Thor films.
Sure it can. It can be Iron Man 2.
It can be the Inhumans series premiere that inexplicably aired in theaters.
Speaking of disasters, I found a really good Twitter thread analyzing just why the DCEU failed and why they get such controversy compared to other superhero films. (https://twitter.com/Acidic_Heart/status/932348475756466176)
Found an interesting video that attempts to place the entire MCU in chronological timeline order, including all of the shows and one-shots: https://youtu.be/y_tJffqZtFs
The list goes as far as Thor: Ragnarok, so The Punisher is not included here, though presumably it would go at the end of the list or somewhere close to it.
I personally couldn't care less about AOS or Inhumans, but it's still interesting to see a list that takes those shows into account as well in regard to the timeline.
(https://i.imgur.com/qdhb8Hb.jpg)
I found out Chinese theaters used this as the poster for Justice League.
Speaking of, I watched the movie earlier today. And while it wasn't BvS bad, it was still trash. Almost none of the characters are handled well. Batman's still an idiot like he was in his last movie. Steppenwolf has no personality even compared to the worst MCU villains. But Barry. God, I hated Barry. I don't know if it was Snyder or Whedon, but they gave him awful quips like "my stomach is a black hole, a snack hole!" while contributing nothing to the rest of the team. Not even sure why they made him Barry since he acted more like Bart/Impulse instead. The plot reeks so much of the first Avengers movie that I think you could play clips of both movies together and they'd be mirrors. Plus, the Frankenstein-nature of the film means there's so much whiplash. Immediately after a grisly battle between Parademons and Amazons, there's a goofy newsclip of a housewife ranting about her husband fucking an alien. Some scenes even appear to be missing, like Cyborg spontaneously joining the team and Batman somehow calculating how to resurrect Clark without prior tests.
On the other hand, and even with all the bad CGI messing up his mouth, I think Henry Cavill finally found some footing in his Superman portrayal. He finally gets to act optimistic and friendly instead of bored and done with everything. And I guess the Chad Aquaman played by Khal Drogo was the least annoying of the new superhero recruits.
I like to nickname this movie as Justice League: Crisis of Infinite Identities.
While I generally have mixed opinions on TCVH's videos, this one was pretty cathartic for me: https://youtu.be/PraUjsClgDM
It'd be a great response to that blatantly misinformed bit of SEW's video about what makes a hero feel real wherein he spends a good chunk of it down-talking western superheroes while making it incredibly obvious that he's never picked up an actual comic book in his life. I don't even think that he read Watchmen, given how he seems to miss the entire point of Dr. Manhattan's character. I actually do enjoy a lot of SEW's content, but seriously, that video was trash.
The video makes good points, but I don't really like that "The Dark Knight Returns was made to peel off Adam West's mark on Batman" argument. Since I'd argue that Batman comics had already drifted away from the 60s series via Dennis O'Neil and Neal Adams, and that TDKR wasn't the only Batman comic responsible for the character's shift in tone.
I don't believe that he specifically made the point that TDKR was responsible for causing a shift in tone in the comics, but rather that it was responsible for inspiring the shift in tone in media adaptations of Batman.
Particularly, I like how he points out that Bruce from TDKR is not representative of the character as he normally is. Because so many people read that story first some people tend to mistake that for his character when the whole point of that story is to show how cynical and jaded he has become toward the rest of the world over time causing him to somewhat skew his morals (and even then he's far from a murdering psychopath like in Snyder's version of the character).
I decided to give Ragnarok another shot. Part of my distaste for the film came from a bad attitude that I had that day, which turned into a depressive episode that I'm still overcoming.
I admit, Waititi's humor still isn't 100% my favorite, and I particularly didn't care for his character. But I don't think Homecoming held onto the title of being my favorite solo MCU film for long. This has what I might have to consider the franchise's most exciting fight scenes and best score, as well as might be the prettiest film of theirs. The emotional weight that I felt was missing from Peter in Homecoming is present in the core characters, which not only gives Hulk and Banner some of his best stuff since the first Avengers, but makes me eagerly excited to see Valkyrie's return. Hela didn't leave as much of an impression as I was hoping for, but that's a problem with recent super hero movies in general, and to be fair, Cate Blanchett's acting has always rubbed me the wrong way.
Everything else more or less works for another strong addition to the MCU, with Phase 3 quickly shaping up to be the best Phase.
Somebody get this man a shield! (https://youtu.be/6ZfuNTqbHE8)
Now to officially start playing the game of predicting which characters Marvel might have the balls to kill off this time.
Trailer looks great, be nice if they have the Netflix heroes show up.
Honestly, while that idea used to excite me, it may actually be for the best to keep The Defenders out of it. The movie is already crowded enough as it is with the Guardians involved, and the difference in tone between the movies and the Netflix shows is just too different for them to really mesh well together. I mean on the one hand seeing The Punisher and Rocket Raccoon mow down a bunch of aliens together would be all kinds of stupidly awesome. But it also would be rather odd considering that one character is meant to be a serious representation of the horrors caused to troops by PTSD from their time spent at war, while the other is supposed to be a fun cartoon character to entertain kids and make their parents chuckle with a bit of hidden adult humor every now and then. Not exactly the kinds of messages you want to be mixing up for a casual moviegoing audience.
Perhaps a brief cameo from the Netflix characters would be a neat little nod to fans, though. But, that's really about as far as it should go, IMO.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPzswRRVoAA4b_a.jpg)
So the odds of Disney/Marvel getting back the X-Men and Fantastic Four rights are growing. (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-04/fox-is-said-to-favor-disney-as-buyer-for-studio-media-assets)
Quote from: LumRanmaYasha on March 17, 2014, 04:49:48 PMHow do they forget Cameron's work on the first two Terminator movies and Aliens. :whuh:
Also, the fact that he apparently wants to make a Battle Angel Alita live-action movie makes him a-ok in my book (I haven't even read much of BAA, but I do know that it is a great series).
It's time... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aj8mN_7Apcw)
Already my most anticipated movie of the year
Spoiler
because Robert Rodriguez
Teaser Trailer for the new animated Miles Morales Spider-Man movie: https://youtu.be/6yPsDcKeXQ4
It's not much to go on, but I'm really digging that animation, and this trailer has at least got me more curious about this film.
Well, this gets me nostalgic in all of its cheesy goodness, but I'm glad that this is back: https://youtu.be/y6wdHF4r8O0
So what's the current list of Marvel characters that aren't allowed to be in the MCU, now that said list has considerably shrunk in light of recent events?
Updated MCU Rankings:
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. Captain America: The First Avenger
3. Guardians of the Galaxy
4. The Avengers
5. Iron Man
6. Thor: Ragnarok
7. Spider-Man: Homecoming
8. Avengers: Age of Ultron
9. Captain America: Civil War
10. Doctor Strange
11. Ant-Man
12. Thor
13. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
14. Iron Man 3
15. The Incredible Hulk
16. Thor: The Dark World
17. Iron Man 2
For Age of Ultron, I still feel that the movie gets way more flak than it actually deserves. I've re-watched it several times and it has issues but also more merit to it than most people give it credit for. Civil War dropped a bit for me. I still do really like it, but I can't help but feel that certain aspects of the film stagnate its plot and hold it back from feeling as impactful as it's meant to feel. My top three I consider to be great films not just within the comic book movies genre but in general as well (some of my personal favorite blockbusters, at that). As for 4-9, I think of them as generally great genre flicks with a lot of re-watch value, just lacking the same connection that I was able to develop with my top three picks. With 10-14 I consider them to be decent for a single viewing but which I'm not all that eager to jump back into, and the bottom three I consider to simply just be bad movies. Not nearly the worst that I've seen, but the worst that the MCU has to offer so far.
https://twitter.com/LeeColston2/status/942986177191317505/video/1
Quote from: Daikun on December 24, 2017, 06:22:36 PM
https://twitter.com/LeeColston2/status/942986177191317505/video/1
:thumbup:
Finally, a Cable trailer! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZNBFcwd7zc)
Venom Trailer: Does not include Venom. (http://ttps://youtu.be/dzxFdtWmjto)
Just got back from seeing Black Panther. I may be biased because I'm a fan of Ryan Coogler, but this is easily a top 3 MCU movie for me, and Michael B. Jordan as Killmonger is easily my favorite MCU villain up to this point. The end of the film actually managed to reach me on an emotional level as well, which I haven't felt from any movie since Logan.
Black Panther might be the best MCU film. Maybe? I'll need some time to grow on it, especially after Homecoming dropped a little bit for me in hindsight. But on first viewing, I feel like it got almost everything right.
Interestingly, Homecoming actually rose a bit for me in hindsight (as did Guardians 2), whereas Civil War, while I still enjoy it, did actually drop a bit for me.
As for Black Panther, I'm pretty comfortable saying that it's either my second or third favorite MCU movie to date (The Winter Soldier is still my favorite). For comparison, Wonder Woman was a movie that was massively overhyped and I called it out on that as soon as I saw it (I still liked it). I was wondering whether the same would be true of Black Panther but Ryan Coogler once again proves that he's got talent, and that Fruitvale Station and Creed weren't just flukes.
Seriously, man, that Killmonger flashback alone puts it pretty high up there for me.
That one guy who admitted to wanting to have sex with dogs reviewed Black Panther. (https://youtu.be/urBtAEObqoQ)
Saw that. I'm not surprised since Adum has flat-out made it apparent for years that he is mostly not a fan of superhero movies aside from maybe the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies, and he hates Marvel Studios for the whole Edgar Wright incident (which is understandable, but he won't ever let that go). Even so, he gave movies like Guardians, Civil War, and Homecoming fairly positive reviews by his standards.
With Black Panther, though, while I disagree with his opinion, I'd be fine with his viewpoint on it in the same way I am with his stance on the last three Planet of the Apes films despite those being among my favorite science fiction flicks from this decade. What really rubbed me the wrong way was when he showed anger towards this movie and outright insulted the MCU fanbase for this film getting so much attention and claimed that films like 12 Years A Slave and Moonlight get largely ignored....You know, two films that both literally won best picture in their respective years and had critics praising them for months afterward.
This is exactly what my point was on what bothers me about the MCU hate. People seem to act like audiences who enjoy Marvel movies don't know any better about more artistic films. News flash, lots of people, including myself, have seen and talked about films like 12 Years a Slave, Moonlight, and other films that he and other film buffs like, while still casually enjoying fun comic book films. Those kimds of pictures are more niche than big-budget blockbusters, but that has always been the case, whether super heroes were involved or not.
I also wonder, just for shits, if he realizes that John Ridley, the writer of 12 Years a Slave, has actually written a superhero comic book before (and is currently in the process of writing a sequel to it).
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on February 17, 2018, 01:42:24 AM
Interestingly, Homecoming actually rose a bit for me in hindsight (as did Guardians 2), whereas Civil War, while I still enjoy it, did actually drop a bit for me.
The thing that put me off of Homecoming a little is that I don't think that it showed enough of Peter's struggles being Spider-Man. It's there a little, but he mostly gets off pretty easily. I especially don't like that Uncle Ben isn't acknowledged at all.
While Marc Webb's movies still made it seem like Captain Stacey was more important to Peter, Ben wasn't entirely ignored in those, like he was here. At the end of the day, that's still at least part of what drives Peter to do what he does, and it would've helped to make the movie feel a little whole.
Still though, Tom Holland is a damn fine Spider-Man AND Parker, while Tombs is still among the best villains the MCU has to offer.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on February 17, 2018, 01:42:24 AMFor comparison, Wonder Woman was a movie that was massively overhyped and I called it out on that as soon as I saw it (I still liked it).
Yeah, I definitely still think Wonder Woman was overhyped. I'd still give it a 4 out of 5, but that's about it, as opposed to the full 5 stars I'd give Black Panther and Logan, or even the 4 1/2 for Ragnarok (which in case I didn't mention before, I gave another shot and got why it clicked). Homecoming and Guardian Vol. 2 might just be 4's, but they're closer to that extra half star than WW was IMO.
I thought Black Panther was all right. But it felt like a movie where the supporting characters were more interesting than the lead. Man-Ape, Shuri, Claw, and especially Killmonger were well-written, but it just made T'Challa look a little bland by comparison.
I don't think that I'd call T'Challa bland, myself. On the contrary, I'd say it's a strength of the film that its supporting cast was so memorable instead of this just being a one-man show. I still felt that T'Challa had an interesting arc to go through himself, though.
As for Adam's review, he lets his smugness cloud his vision too much to see superhero movies as anything more than children's fare, that when a film actually does something above and beyond, he's unable to comprehend it. Instead falling back on his usual complaints whether or not they actually apply.
The thing about this one is that he didn't really even point out any actual flaws in the movie other than the lack of blood in scenes where there clearly should have been some; granted, it's a PG-13 movie, but that just goes to show how heavily censored anything under an R-rating has become these days (I still remember when the PG Poultergeist was allowed to show the imagery of a dude ripping his own face off).
Other than that, he mostly just repeats that he found the movie to be boring and dumb, that all Marvel movies are boring and dumb, and gets pissed that people are treating the film as topical when it's meant to entertain kids while the Best Picture-winning 12 Years a Slave and Moonlight are somehow largely ignored.
It's at that point that I have to question why he would even bother spending money on watching more Marvel movies and reviewing them (even for a quickie) if he already knows full well that he doesn't like them.
I think the archetypal angry youtube critic has run out of things to complain about, so they're just stretching for things and criticizing superficial elements or people because they're unable to find legitimate issues, all the while letting their reputation become their personality and mutating into a stereotype in and out. Same thing with RLM or Moviebob. These people have run out of new things to say, so they've taken to making the "How dare people enjoy things?" argument instead of making an entertaining video.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 18, 2018, 05:11:16 PM
I thought Black Panther was all right. But it felt like a movie where the supporting characters were more interesting than the lead. Man-Ape, Shuri, Claw, and especially Killmonger were well-written, but it just made T'Challa look a little bland by comparison.
There's nothing wrong with that. MCU's problem is the villain and/or supporting cast is usually dull.
To be fair to YMS, while I highly disagree with his Black Panther video or general outlook on Marvel, he doesn't beat this topic down like a dead horse as Mother's Basement does with Sword Art Online or RLM does with Star Wars. As I said, I'm not sure why he even watched Black Panther in the first place, but his superhero rant videos both begin and end with a few quickies. The vast majority of his content is still the thing that he built an audience off of in the first place, which is making fun of obscure bad movies, along with the occasional blockbuster like The Hunger Games.
The video itself doesn't really bother me. I'm just sick of the anti-superhero film mentality in general because for one thing plenty of other great movies still get made every year and for another thing nobody is actually being forced to watch MCU movies.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 18, 2018, 10:37:52 PMI think the archetypal angry youtube critic has run out of things to complain about, so they're just stretching for things and criticizing superficial elements or people because they're unable to find legitimate issues, all the while letting their reputation become their personality and mutating into a stereotype in and out. Same thing with RLM or Moviebob. These people have run out of new things to say, so they've taken to making the "How dare people enjoy things?" argument instead of making an entertaining video.
When does MovieBob do that? He tends to be pretty positive in his videos.
Quote from: Daikun on February 19, 2018, 12:10:00 AM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 18, 2018, 10:37:52 PMI think the archetypal angry youtube critic has run out of things to complain about, so they're just stretching for things and criticizing superficial elements or people because they're unable to find legitimate issues, all the while letting their reputation become their personality and mutating into a stereotype in and out. Same thing with RLM or Moviebob. These people have run out of new things to say, so they've taken to making the "How dare people enjoy things?" argument instead of making an entertaining video.
When does MovieBob do that? He tends to be pretty positive in his videos.
He made a 3-hour rant about BvS that could have been only 30 minutes, several videos telling people they were wrong for thinking Marvel comics were going downhill while painting them all as bigots, and just comes off as pompous even when I agree with what he's saying.
Been thinking about how Days of Future Past and Logan work so well as finales to the X-Men movie universe, that the later installments, even the ones I like such as Legion, come off as afterthoughts. It's why I don't feel particularly hyped about the Dark Phoenix movie. The curtains have been set, and the leads have bowed to the audience.
I also like to think DOFP and Logan are parallel to each other instead of taking place in the same continuity, so DOFP functions as the good end of the X-Men where everybody's alive and Logan has another chance to be together with Jean. And Logan's the bad end where the future of the Mutants is only a ray of light rather than a definite path. Mostly because of how even though both films are wonderful, the latter movie's existence sours the happy ending of the other.
So, apparently Avengers: Infinity War has had its release date moved up a week earlier to April 27th.
Kind of odd and out of nowhere, but hey, I'm not complaining. I suppose one could assume that they don't want an Avengers film and a Star Wars film (two properties both owned by Disney) potentially competing with each other in the same month, especially since Solo looks like ass and could use as little competition as possible after The Last Jedi failed to meet Disney's lofty financial expectations.
Really though, I just feel bad for any films releasing on the same week that were looking to get a little head-start over the summer blockbuster juggernaut competition. That's really got to throw a wrench in their plans.
I'm curious to see the New Mutants film, but as a whole I'm kind of done with that strain of X-Men film. They already had good endings, there's no point in milking it more.
I think this is going to be the first time since Disney started releasing Star Wars movies that (at least one) Marvel will beat SW in the box-office.
Err, domestically and worldwide. I forgot that Civil War did beat Rogue One globally. It helps that China doesn't give a fuck about Star Wars.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 01, 2018, 03:30:31 PM
So, apparently Avengers: Infinity War has had its release date moved up a week earlier to April 27th.
Kind of odd and out of nowhere, but hey, I'm not complaining.
This is how they made the announcement:
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/0d0693720bba64d67b3e2e9662dec683/tumblr_p4yypczKr41r6toezo2_540.png)
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/2e44ad87cde52e8ab3612e4e521fb2d8/tumblr_p4yypczKr41r6toezo1_540.png)
They really know how to use social media to market.
That was so amazing. I also believe in the theory that the Fantastic Four will show up in Infinity War.
Spike Lee is making a Nightwatch film for Sony. (http://thathashtagshow.com/2018/03/cheo-hodari-coker-set-to-scribe-spike-lees-spidey-spinoff-nightwatch)
Maybe Sony should wait if Venom does well before announcing all these movies for their pseudo-MCU.
I'm smelling an Amazing Spider-Man 2 level debacle coming up again. Sony doesn't ever seem to learn from their past mistakes.
They should have just stuck with Lord and Miller's Spider-Verse movie for this year, and taken the time to plan out future films.
I'm pretty sure Kevin Feige and other head executives at Marvel Studios won't allow Sony to make any direct references connecting their movies to the MCU unless their films do well enough critically (which they won't if Venom is any indication).
That reminds me that Ryan Coogler wanted Kraven to show up in Black Panther, but Sony vetoed him.
Sony Pictures is basically the Capcom of the film industry.
Granted, I'm fine with Killmonger, as he was the best part of the movie, IMO, but it does just go to show you how the toxic greed of big corporate heads leaves them blind to any sort of logic: "No, don't let a talented director use one of our licensed characters that we can collect royalties off of; but instead let's save him for a future movie that will never get made because we have no idea how to get a franchise off the ground."
Joke's on them, since Black Panther broke a billion dollars at the box office and is still topping the charts.
I'm surprised by how many people want Sony to take back Spider-Man because they hate Homecoming and believe this will take Spidey back to the Raimi days. Like, did they forget how the Raimi days ended?
Those people are in the vocal minority anyways. Most people enjoyed Homecoming. In fact, TCVH who's typically pretty "meh" on most MCU films praised it, and even YMS gave it a relatively positive review compared to his ususal thoughts on Marvel movies.
I will say that in retrospect, I think the case could certainly be made for Spider-Man 2 still being the best film in the series, but Sony's response to that success is exactly why they shouldn't be handling a beloved Marvel property like this. Instead of allowing a director who's proven himself for them twice (both critically and financially) that he can turn out a good product with the right creative freedom to carry out his vision, they instead exert more control over the franchise, contradict Raimi's decisions every step of the way, and end up killing the series with the third installment (and this is coming from the one guy who doesn't even particularly dislike Spider-Man 3).
God knows what would have happened if Sony bought the rights to all the Marvel characters back in 1998. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/what-sony-bought-marvels-movie-rights-1998-1085272)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 13, 2018, 11:35:13 PMGod knows what would have happened if Sony bought the rights to all the Marvel characters back in 1998. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/what-sony-bought-marvels-movie-rights-1998-1085272)
I could see it being a double-edged sword.
Pro: We'd probably get a better Fantastic Four movie than the three turds that Fox made. Heck, I'd imagine all of Fox's bad Marvel movies would've been made better by Sony.
Con: We likely wouldn't have Marvel Studios doing their own thing if Sony's run turns out successful enough. The movies and characters we have now either won't exist or be completely different.
Ava DuVernay to direct New Gods for DC (http://variety.com/2018/film/news/ava-duvernay-superhero-movie-new-gods-dc-1202725043/). At least she is for now, but I'm not sure if this one is gonna stick. I expected Whedon to leave Batgirl, and I was right (although I've also heard that was a red herring announcement, to hide that Snyder was fired for Justice League and Whedon was hired to replace him).
Still, I like that DuVernay is still being given a big production even after A Wrinkle in Time seems to be a dud. I really like her other work, and hopefully this will make up for that one.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 13, 2018, 09:43:36 PM
I'm surprised by how many people want Sony to take back Spider-Man because they hate Homecoming and believe this will take Spidey back to the Raimi days. Like, did they forget how the Raimi days ended?
Yeah, Spider-Man 3 was absolute garbage.
The funny thing is that it's not even the worst Spider-Man movie. Not only did Sony fail to learn from their mistakes in that movie's production, but they somehow managed to fuck up even worse without even making it through three films in their next series.
And now Venom....well, let's just say that if you were to tell me that they can go even lower than TASM2, I might actually be inclined to believe you.
The end is near: https://youtu.be/QwievZ1Tx-8
Or, at least half of it is anyways.
You know, I've just been thinking about it after recently re-watching Thor: Ragnarok on Blu-Ray, but if you strip away the comedic tone and look at these films both as a cohesive trilogy as well as looking into Thor's grander character arc in the context of the MCU as a whole, it's incredibly dark and twistedly cruel knowing what's going to happen in Infinity War (probably at the very beginning). I mean, his whole personal journey from the beginning was to learn to be a proper leader and succeed his father as the ruler of Asgard, which sees him learn humility in the first movie, how to work with others to solve problems too great for one being in the Avengers movies, realizing that he can't truly ever bring himself to hate his brother despite also knowing that they can't ever truly have the relationship that they once did (and also after losing his mother) in TDW, to finally maturing enough as a person to be a fitting ruler of his subjects....except he loses his father, a good portion of his subjects, and all of Asgard. Even through that, he knows that they can relocate and rebuild, and is finally ready to step up to the position of King and lead what's left of his people....for all of maybe a few hours at best. That post credits scene shows them being intercepted by Thanos's ship not long after starting their journey to Earth, and we've seen in both trailers for Infinity War that Loki is walking over the fallen corpses of the remaining Asgardians. Likewise it seems most likely that Loki will be killed off at the beginning of the film once he gives Thanos what he wants, after sort of redeeming himself and reconciling with his brother.
So basically we have the story of a guy who goes through all of these hardships to fulfill his destiny and learn how to be a leader, and everything he knows and loves will be taken from him just moments after he finally reached that point in his life. That's actually incredibly tragic once you stop to think about it. I mean, essentially he'll be like Drax in that his main motivation will be to avenge those that he lost, but in this case it's even worse because he doesn't have a surrogate family who are always around him like with The Guardians of the Galaxy. Even if Thor survives this movie and the next Avengers film, I'm not even sure that he has anywhere or anyone to go back to that even remotely resembles his home or family.
Also, considering Valkyrie's character arc of facing her fear to overcome a tyrannical ruler, it's pretty cruel irony that she'll also probably meet her end to yet another tyrannical ruler literally moments after encountering the other one.
That's some pretty fucked up stuff right there, Marvel. :imnothappy:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYhnXuTWAAEYD1c.jpg)
There are rumors that Zack Snyder would have adapted Final Crisis for Justice League 2. That and the above picture sound like such a mess of an idea.
I'm kind of wondering if Infinity War will recreate the scene in which Thanos's shockwave wrecks entire landscapes, among which Trump Tower is submerged into the sea. It'd be pretty ballsy of Marvel. :sly:
It'd be as ballsy as the second season of Punisher recreating this scene.
(https://i.imgur.com/AE3oeSP.jpg)
JL is the lowest-grossing DCEU movie so far. (https://io9.gizmodo.com/justice-league-is-officially-the-lowest-grossing-dc-uni-1823902130)
So in preparation for Infinity War I've been revisting some of the phase one and two Marvel movies that I haven't seen in a while to both refresh myself on where we started from to get to this point, as well as to assess how well they hold up (or in some cases how poorly they've aged). I'm not doing the phase three movies since they are still fresh enough in my memory (and I've also re-watched all of them at least once, except for Black Panther). I haven't gotten around to all of the other movies yet, and I'm not doing them specifically in order, so I'll just keep updating which ones I re-watch as I re-watch them:
Iron Man- Holds up surprisingly well. It's funny in that it sets up much of the formula that MCU films still use to this day, but also still has some lingering bits of early 2000's superhero films in its DNA, so it still feels unique among the other movies of the MCU canon. It's far from perfect and does show its age in a number of ways, but for the most part it's still a solid combination of action and comedy.
The Incredible Hulk- So, fun fact: I haven't actually ever re-watched this movie since seeing it in theaters until now. While I still have yet to re-watch Iron man 2 and Thor: The Dark World (the latter of which I also haven't seen since it's theatrical run), I may just have to adjust my stance on those two films being ranked below this one. I must have been a lot more forgiving ten years ago, because while I always considered this to be one of the weakest entries into the MCU, seeing it in retrospect to all of the movies we've gotten up until now really puts into perspective just how bad this movie is. Ed Norton is OK as Banner, and the guy who does General Ross is also pretty good. That's about the most positive thing that I can say about this one. The story is uninspired and boring. The effects are pretty terrible even by 2008's standards, and I love me some Tim Roth, but he's pretty lousy in this movie (and really doesn't have anything to work with). It's very telling that Marvel has since tiptoed around ever directly referencing or acknowledging this film in any of their future movies past that one scene in Iron Man 2 at the end.
Thor: This one....hasn't aged so well, either. It's miles better than The Incredible Hulk and probably Iron Man 2 whenever I get around to re-watching that one, but here's the issue: The movie had two primary strengths- Thor and Loki and the chemistry between them. Hemsworth and Hiddleston were perfectly cast in these roles, and it's a saving grace of this film and it's sequel. However, everything surrounding them is bland and forgettable, and past this movie's first act, Loki is mostly sidelined and Thor is stuck with a bunch of boring Earth characters that pretty much drag down the entire middle act of the movie. And then the final act is pretty standard stuff. Had the film really worked more with the chemistry between the two brothers, it really could have stood out more, but the need to have Thor's story tethered to Earth really didn't do it any favors, IMO.
Final Deadpool 2 trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D86RtevtfrA)
Zack Snyder's been posting more shit about his DCEU work on his Vero, and um...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZ96n9SXkAA2KEp.jpg)
Thank you, Zoe Saldana: https://www.cbr.com/saldana-marvel-actors-sellouts-elitists/amp/
It's refreshing to hear someone from the industry talk about how bull-crap some of these Hollywood elitists are.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da23DsdXcAEmrJY.jpg)
So Tom Holland's using mo-cap and CGI as Spidey, yet Nebula, whose costume I'd argue is more intricately detailed than Spider-Man's and requires countless hours for the makeup and effects artists to put on Karen Gillan, is done through practical effects? I don't understand.
In Tom Holland's case his character is almost certainly using the Iron Spider costume in those scenes, which I imagine will have a lot of complex special effects associated with it (much like Iron Man or Black Panther's costumes), so having it be CG is probably necessary. Looking at the behind-the-scenes footage of Spider-Man: Homecoming he did use a practical suit for several scenes, so it's not like Marvel won't utilize those when they are appropriate.
As far as Nebula goes, it's because her look is so finely detailed that it needs to be practical. Unlike the more technologically intricate costumes, though, there are no real moving parts on her get-up, so there's no reason to CG it.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 21, 2018, 12:24:38 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da23DsdXcAEmrJY.jpg)
So Tom Holland's using mo-cap and CGI as Spidey, yet Nebula, whose costume I'd argue is more intricately detailed than Spider-Man's and requires countless hours for the makeup and effects artists to put on Karen Gillan, is done through practical effects? I don't understand.
Holland suit has tech/is basically a lo-fi Iron Man suit.
Venom trailer is out. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Mv98Gr5pY)
So, the reviews for Infinity War are out and to the surprise of absolutely no one, they are mostly pretty favorable; though I have no doubt that the mobie snobs will start tearing into it once it gets its wide release this weekend.
However, what has me the most excited beyond the unanimous praise for Josh Brolin's Thanos is how many people have remarked about how emotional the movie gets for longtime fans and how devastating it all feels by the end, which is exactly what I wanted to hear about a movie built-up this much for as long as it has been. I'll be seeing it tomorrow night at my local theater, so I'll let you all know what I think of it after my viewing.
If I'm lucky, I will be able to see Infinity War on Saturday. I didn't set up anything earlier, and I work the next few days, but I get off early enough on Sat that it might work out for my girlfriend to meet up with me. We'll see.
At my local trivia tonight, we were asked to rank our top 10 MCU films. It took me a minute to agree on the rankings, but I think I'm happy with how this one turned out:
10- Avengers: Age of Ultron
9- Captain America: Civil War
8- Iron Man
7- Spider-Man Homecoming
6- Captain America: The Winter Soldier
5- Captain America: The First Avenger
4- Thor Ragnarok
3- Guardians of the Galaxy
2- Avengers
1- Black Panther
Kind of wish that I could have also put Guardians Vol. 2 in, but I'm still team Pro Ultron, and thought that it deserved at least one slot. And I may still be running on a Black Panther high, but it still hits all of the right check boxes to be a good comic book flick. You could probably switch #'s 4-6 around and I'd still be pleased.
And just for fun, here's my friend's list (I might also share my girlfriend's later).
10- Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
9- Captain America: Civil War
8- Avengers: Age of Ultron
7- Avengers
6- Spider-Man: Homecoming
5- Doctor Strange
4- Black Panther
3- Thor Ragnarok
2- Iron Man
1- Guardians of the Galaxy
Or granted, the list she made with a couple of coworkers. The top four are very likely her very favorites, but I know that Doctor Strange was added on because it's one of their absolute favorites. She doesn't fully lineup with his taste, though. I know that she's also not a big Ultron fan, but that went on because both of the coworkers she was talking to really like it. She said that if it was her own unaltered list, First Avenger would have made it on.
Really glad to see some First Avenger love on your list. I still consider it to be the most underrated MCU movie. It'd personally rank as my second favorite, right behind The Winter Soldier.
Black Panther is pretty great, IMO. While some people can definitely go overboard with the praise, the backlash to its critical and commercial success is equally ridiculous. I can understand not liking the movie, but to insist that this is just another factory churned out Marvel product without any heart or personality to it is just flat-out wrong, IMO. The movie has earned its praise.
Anyways, as for Infinity War, I see it tonight, so I'll be sure to post my initial thoughts on it later in the evening.
Just got back from seeing the movie. I still need time to process how I feel about it, but as a first reaction I personally loved it. Marvel didn't pull their punches here, and you really feel the weight of 10-years worth of movies building up to this event. That said, regardless of calling them two separate films, this definitely still does feel like part one of two, IMO.
I'll post my more detailed thoughts on the weekend, but for now I'm tired and need to go to bed to get up for work tomorrow.
Oh, BTW, if you're also a big fan of Captain America: The First Avenger like I am, there is a REALLY cool easter egg reference to that movie in here. It completely caught me off guard when I saw it.
Glad to know! It looks like Infinity War is living up to the hype so far.
Anyway, here's the cumulative top 10 MCU films. The host also took from the internet besides from regulars.
10- Captain America: The First Avenger
9- Captain America: The Winter Soldier
8- Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
7- Iron Man
6- Spider-Man: Homecoming
5- Captain America: Civil War
4- Thor: Ragnarok
3- Black Panther
2- Avengers
1- Guardians of the Galaxy
So for this category, we had to guess how many of these would rank, and we got 9/10. I put Ultron instead of the First Avenger, but I was glad to get that wrong. It's nice to see the first Cap get a spot. It's a pretty solid list, all in all. It says a lot that Phase 3 is the most represented thus far. I would not be surprised to see Infinity War make it in soon enough.
Spoiler
I don't like her in the comics at all, so I don't know what to feel about Carol saving the day in the next film.
Anyway, some parts I really liked. I loved the fight scenes. Thought Brolin was great as Thanos. I liked Thanos having his own evil team, with Maw being Strange's counterpart, Proxima being a "what if Gamora stayed evil"-like character, and so on. And getting to see guys like Bucky and Rocket interact was nice. I was annoyed by the portrayal of the Guardians though. Something felt a little off. They were too gaggy, even for their own standards.
Spoiler
And how it was ultimately Quill fucking up that allowed Thanos to get all the Stones. I know he did it because of Gamora, but when they were only seconds away from pulling the gauntlet off, and Quill goes berserk and ruins everything, it was hard not to get annoyed by him. I was also a little peeved by Thor Ragnarok's bittersweet but hopeful ending getting overwritten, and how Thor gets a new hammer along with a new eye.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 27, 2018, 01:21:53 PMSpoiler
I don't like her in the comics at all, so I don't know what to feel about Carol saving the day in the next film.
Spoiler
I know next to nothing about the character in question, but the MCU has a track record of improving on some of the less than stellar elements of the comic books which inspire it's movies, Civil War being a prime example. At any rate, I don't think that the next Avengers movie will be centered around Danvers, but just that she will play a key part along with other Avengers in the next movie.
QuoteAnyway, some parts I really liked. I loved the fight scenes. Thought Brolin was great as Thanos. I liked Thanos having his own evil team, with Maw being Strange's counterpart, Proxima being a "what if Gamora stayed evil"-like character, and so on. And getting to see guys like Bucky and Rocket interact was nice. I was annoyed by the portrayal of the Guardians though. Something felt a little off. They were too gaggy, even for their own standards.
Spoiler
And how it was ultimately Quill fucking up that allowed Thanos to get all the Stones. I know he did it because of Gamora, but when they were only seconds away from pulling the gauntlet off, and Quill goes berserk and ruins everything, it was hard not to get annoyed by him. I was also a little peeved by Thor Ragnarok's bittersweet but hopeful ending getting overwritten, and how Thor gets a new hammer along with a new eye.
Supposedly James Gunn had a lot of say in how The Guardians were portrayed in this movie, and honestly it kind of falls in line with their portrayal in Vol. 2 and my problems with that movie as well. I feel as though Gunn doubled-down on the comedic personality traits of the characters with the Russo brothers just following through, but in the process they lose some of the nuance from the first movie, with the exception of Gamora and Nebula, both of whom I feel have gotten pretty strong treatment in this movie.
Spoiler
As for Quill I do agree with his fuck-up going a bit too far, but I'm actually less bothered by that and more bothered by how Doctor Strange didn't take any measures to prevent it since he clearly knew that it would happen when he looked into the future. Even if he was knocked out at the time he still could have done something beforehand to prepare Quill for the surprise or at least keep him incapacitated as well for the central conflict. I mean, I get what they're trying to go for, in that Strange clearly has Adam Warlock's role of allowing Thanos to get all of the Infinity Stones and believe that he has won only to have his hubris be his own undoing. But, considering how close they were to getting the gauntlet off of Thanos in this scenario, it'd seem an awful lot easier to just tweak the strategy a bit more to make that ploy successful and then use the power of the Gauntlet to kill him than to go for this insanely risky longplay.
Of course, there are other issues besides this. The movie isn't perfect by any stretch. But, as easy as it is to be cynical about these sorts of things, to me that's the nature of event comics and event comic book movies like this. The same issues are present in both Avengers films and Civil War, but what makes those movies, as well as this one, work for me is what they represent on a larger scale, which is why I came out of this one loving a lot of stuff about it. None of the big crossover films are my favorites in the MCU, but each one does still hold a special place for me.
I actually went and saw the movie a second time today. I noticed a couple more flaws, namely that the pacing could struggle in some places (I was too hyped up the first time to really notice that), but likewise I also noticed a lot of well-placed details that I missed the first time around.
At any rate, my opinion still stands the same as before, and I consider it to be a really great crossover event. It's not my favorite MCU movie, since I prefer solo superhero stories at heart, but it's probably my favorite Avengers movie.
Spoiler
So my initial theory was that everyone who evaporated will survive, and the characters who weren't will die come part two, but I'm not so sure about the latter part. It was definitely deliberate that most of the survivors were the OGs, and we might get something similar to the end of Cadmus in JLU with the next film. Not sure about Rocket's place, though. Although personally, I do think that people were getting a little annoying with attempting to estimate how trigger happy this was going to be. Especially since it feels like some forget that this is a two-parter.
As for Quill screwing up the plan, I can't help but wonder if Strange was aware of this the entire time, and this was him recognizing that this is the only possible scenario.
I did think that the pacing wasn't perfect, but you have to give them credit, they fit a lot of character in. There have been memes about this being the most ambitious crossover in history, but there's more than twice as many characters and a lot more galaxy trotting than the first Avengers. It's really cool to see where we've come since then.
The fact that this movie is as coherent and easy to follow as what we got is a testament to the Russo Bothers' skills as directors along with Stephen McFeely and Christopher Markus as writers (who also wrote all three Captain America movies). While the movie itself is clearly a spectacle film without a whole lot of depth or nuance, being able to balance everything that it does while telling a story that is both fun and intense is no easy feat, and to me what we got was well worth ten-years of build-up (at least assuming that they don't seriously fuck up the follow-up film). It really is quite amazing how far we've come since Iron Man.
Also, I'm curious what each of you guys considered to be your favorite moments. In particular, I know Avaitor has always been a huge fan of Thor, who I myself felt got rather underutilized in previous Avengers movies despite having some pretty cool scenes. That said, I'd say that he tied with Thanos as my favorite character in Infinity War (second favorite for me would he a toss-up between Gamora and Doctor Strange), and one scene in particular got the biggest cheers and applause from the audience which I saw my first screening of the movie with (you'll know which scene I'm referring to if you've seen the film). This may be the first time where I really felt Thor's bad-assery lived up to the status of being a genuine God.
Quote from: Avaitor on April 29, 2018, 12:29:48 AM
Spoiler
So my initial theory was that everyone who evaporated will survive, and the characters who weren't will die come part two, but I'm not so sure about the latter part.
Spoiler
I know Disney's Star Wars movies have been surprisingly bloodthirsty by killing off Han, Luke, and every main character in Rogue One. But I can't imagine Marvel doing that. I can picture them killing off either Cap or Tony, but not the entire roster from the first film.
Infinity War officially just dethroned The Force Awakens to having the biggest opening weekend ever (and just barely at that): http://money.cnn.com/2018/04/29/media/avengers-infinity-war-box-office-opening/index.html
The furry passes his judgement on Infinity War: https://youtu.be/5HwvcV4UFbQ
The thing of it is that his opinion on the movie is perfectly valid (he thought it was alright, BTW), but what irks me is his condescending attitude towards the audience that enjoyed things that he didn't. Like, I get not finding the humor in this movie to be any good (I myself felt that they relied a bit too heavily on meaningless pop culture references), but does that really warrant making the audience seem inferior simply because they clearly had a different sense of humor than him?
After watching it twice and letting it stew for a bit, here's my updated MCU rankings with Infinity War included:
Excellent:
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. Captain America: The First Avenger
3. Guardians of the Galaxy
4. Thor: Ragnarok
5. Avengers: Infinity War
Very Good:
6. Black Panther
7. Spider-Man: Homecoming
8. The Avengers
9. Iron Man
10. Captain America: Civil War
Decent:
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron
12. Doctor Strange
13. Ant-Man
14. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
15. Thor
16. Iron Man 3
Meh:
17. Thor: The Dark World
18. Iron Man 2
19. The Incredible Hulk
As someone who's handled a few Marvel events himself, Warren Ellis liked it.
QuoteSo. INFINITY WAR, then. No spoilers.
It is perhaps best understood as an unprecedented brand power move. It is not "a film" as that term is commonly understood. It is a sequence of connections. It's a statement from a bizarre place of popular-culture ownership. It's a statement that they have done ten years of film storytelling, often with very conventional story templates, so that everyone in the world will show up for what is often an extraordinarily unconventional story-like event with one extremely unexpected tonal shift.
It, by design, makes no sense unless you've watched most if not all of the other Marvel films. There cannot be a casual viewer of this emanation. Only a committed one. It is likely to be the largest worldwide opening of all time, as I write this, even though it's not opening in China or Russia this weekend.
The production values are near-perfect. The days of the slightly janky AVENGERS special effects are long gone, and every pixel is painted with jewelled, exquisite skill. As a visual experience, it is peak Marvel. The mocap on Josh Brolin makes Thanos a far more effective "CGI villain" than the waste of Ciaran Hinds on JUSTICE LEAGUE, which had all the performance nuance of a level boss in DOOM II.
Per the trailer, I think it was a brave choice to have the evil spaceship apparently designed by James Dyson.
The writers and the directors worked very, very hard to make something that did not feel beholden to rules. They'll stop the thing dead for sixty seconds to do a gag. There are a lot of gags. I mean, no possible joke goes unjoked. Nothing I say here should be taken to denigrate the work of those people. They have achieved a remarkable thing.
(Special nod to whoever designed the sonics for the next-to-final scene.)
It is not a movie. It is a brand manifestation that wants to have prolonged, eager and reasonably skilled cultural sex with you. It wants your experience with its content™ to be satisfying and it hopes you are pleased enough to return for further interaction with the Brand. This is a very 21C thing. I like it for that alone, to be honest.
AVENGERS 4 happens next year, of course, and I will be interested to see how they stick the landing. But, in terms of cultural power plays, this one is the pinnacle.
Colin Furze made a functional Hulkbuster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AshvBTw5Z84
Good old Zac Bertschy thinks Thanos being sympathetic was a ploy meant for the audience to identify and agree with him. (https://twitter.com/ActionZacku/status/992615735871520769) That's such a ludicrous claim to suggest the movie wants people to see themselves in Thanos and do the things he would do. That's like saying Downfall was pro-Nazi because of Hitler's portrayal. If you think the movie telling you the man killing trillions of lives is a good person, then maybe that's on you for thinking that.
He's either going to feel really dumb in about a year or find a way to spin the follow-up movie into something even nuttier.
I remember in one of those ANN anime previews, he thought a high school anime about military survival clubs was perpetuating school shooter culture, as if that was what was going on in the creators' minds. That habit of putting words in the author's mouth and bending over backwards to come up with some excuse as to how a form of media is somehow morally corrupt is the kind of failing I expect from a low-tier anime blogger, not an editor of a major anime news site.
(https://i.imgur.com/coPN8BC.png)
All I can think of is that "No, it's the children that are wrong" image macro. Also amused that his supporters don't have much (https://i.imgur.com/YO52Gou.png) reasoning to them beyond "They're just wrong. Hail Zac!" (https://i.imgur.com/LCqzZIN.png).
The way he says "Make it clear how much we need to talk about this shit" feels so pompous. As if the people who think Thanos is an interesting character need to be given an intervention and a stern talking to.
And how many terrible anime villains has this hack likely given a pass to???
This will be part of the Deadpool 2 soundtrack. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX11yw6YL1w)
Quote from: Avaitor on April 29, 2018, 12:29:48 AM
Spoiler
So my initial theory was that everyone who evaporated will survive, and the characters who weren't will die come part two, but I'm not so sure about the latter part. It was definitely deliberate that most of the survivors were the OGs, and we might get something similar to the end of Cadmus in JLU with the next film. Not sure about Rocket's place, though. Although personally, I do think that people were getting a little annoying with attempting to estimate how trigger happy this was going to be. Especially since it feels like some forget that this is a two-parter.
As for Quill screwing up the plan, I can't help but wonder if Strange was aware of this the entire time, and this was him recognizing that this is the only possible scenario.
I did think that the pacing wasn't perfect, but you have to give them credit, they fit a lot of character in. There have been memes about this being the most ambitious crossover in history, but there's more than twice as many characters and a lot more galaxy trotting than the first Avengers. It's really cool to see where we've come since then.
In my opinion, I actually wished the heroes had more down time to connect..but then again I guess they did but through a lot of forced jokes. lol
Russos explained which off-screen characters turned to dust. (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/avengers-infinity-war-directors-confirm-which-characters-died-off-screen_us_5af5f6fee4b032b10bfaa3a0) Korg, Shuri, Ned, and Jane Foster's fates couldn't be said though.
Interesting that they mentioned Jane Foster's status as being a spoiler since Natalie Portman clearly showed no interest in ever returning to the role and rather than recast her, Ragnarok opted to write her out of the story entirely. I was pretty convinced that whether she was alive or dead by the end of Infinity War, it'd be hardly worth mentioning either way, but apparently her status is important enough to keep the Russo Brothers tight-lipped about it.
I suppose that it's possible that they got Portman to agree to a brief cameo in order to give Thor's character arc some closure in the next movie, or if she died then perhaps hearing about it could have some affect on Thor.
If I recall right, the only reason Portman agreed to do the first Thor was because she wanted to work with Kenneth Branagh. You could tell how bored she was with the role in Dark World.
But maybe she had a change of heart? I recall hearing similar reports about Idris Elba earlier on, but he apparently enjoyed his work on Ragnarok enough that he regretted not having more of (or a better) role.
Also, what about Valkyrie?
Didn't seem like anybody liked working on Dark World. Elba referred to it as torture. Portman wanted to leave. Eccleston said he wanted to slit his throat. Even Hemsworth doesn't seem to hold it in any regard.
I remember Hemsworth was genuinely frustrated with how Thor's character was being handled in The Dark World and Age of Ultron, especially after listening to a Kevin Smith podcast tearing it apart. It made him more determined to get the character right with Ragnarok.
Portman did say in a recent interview that she was open to the idea of doing another Thor film, but that could just be her simply refraining from publicly insulting Marvel Studios in any way. I at least wouldn't put it past her to show up for a cameo, because you know: 'dat Marvel money is hard to turn down.
Or the Russos could just be intentionally fucking with our expectations. That's also just as likely.
If they wanted to troll us, they'd say which of the TV and Netflix characters got dusted.
I'm still holding to my theory that Thanos's snap dusted Danny Rand and if it gets undone, it'll miraculously bring him back as a different actor and ret-con the first season of Iron Fist out of existence.
This is a really good video comparing The Winter Soldier to Man of Steel and why the former works while the latter fails: https://youtu.be/KoK8tXzSIl8
The Dark World was a massive disappointment so l can see why.
Quote from: Daikun on May 08, 2018, 04:12:21 PM
This will be part of the Deadpool 2 soundtrack. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX11yw6YL1w)
Is this not the first single she's released in a long while? Wonder what the real story is behind them getting her?
Pretty cool song, movie can't come soon enough!
(https://i.imgur.com/jmswRdo.png)
Here's a video explaining how a particularly obscure and one-note villain like Ego the Living Planet was re-invented into one of the MCU's most interesting villains. (https://youtu.be/zGQ2HDYY6mY)
Deadpool 2 was really entertaining. I'd call it an improvement over the first one for the most part. That said, there were a couple of racist jokes that didn't need to be there, and it took a while for Cable to land as a character. But it's funnier than the first, has better action, and delivered its story beats in a stronger manner, which is everything you could ask for.
It was good as hell. There were some troubling aspects and cringeworthy attempts at humor but it's genuinely one of the most enjoyable movies I've ever seen and I loved every minute. It's not the Deadpool sequel I would personally have made, nor is it a particularly great adaptation of the source material in all honesty, but goddamn was it fun. Glad to see my baby get another great film, and I can't wait for whatever Fox does next with him, Domino, and X-Force!
The best scenes from Thor: Ragnarok's Japanese dub. (https://twitter.com/hiddlesbb/status/1004425497793695744/video/1)
Quote from: Daikun on June 07, 2018, 05:11:43 PM
The best scenes from Thor: Ragnarok's Japanese dub. (https://twitter.com/hiddlesbb/status/1004425497793695744/video/1)
YES
That's All Might's VA doing the voice of Thor, BTW.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 09, 2018, 11:34:20 PMThat's All Might's VA doing the voice of Thor, BTW.
Noice!
So Ant-Man and Wasp this weekend. The reception is looking strong for it, particularly in two elements I was most curious about- it is an improvement over the first one, and it will answer some things about the ending of Infinity War. I still don't know if we really needed a sequel for it, but I'm reasonably excited.
I'm hoping to see it Saturday, but I have no guarantees yet. It depends on my girlfriend's timing.
Just got back from seeing it. I liked it about as much as the first one, more or less. It was mostly fun but dragged in a few places. As far as the more comedic Marvel movies go I personally prefer Thor: Ragnarok, but this one did get in quite a few genuinely funny moments of it's own. Michael Douglas also felt like he had more to do here, so that was nice as well.
And you'll see the mid-credits scene's "twist" coming a mile away, but it still doesn't make the tie-in any less cool or satisfying to see.
:whuh: :whuh: :whuh: :whuh: :whuh:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DikpHr_U0AA0yib.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DikpIl0VQAAXQV7.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DikpJeSVMAAPkir.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DikpKL2U0AEpLlX.jpg)
:zonk: :zonk: :zonk: :zonk: :zonk:
James Gunn has been fired from the set of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 by Disney: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/amp/heat-vision/james-gunn-exits-guardians-galaxy-vol-3-1128786
I don't think they should have fired him. Yeah, those tweets are offensive, but it's clear he was doing it as a joke and not because of an actual desire to touch children. He's the director of Tromeo and Juliet, and was pretty provocative up until he got hired to do Marvel movies. And just because he was friends with Huddleston doesn't mean he should be guilty by association.
I know that this is a subject layered with controversy, which I usually tend to stay away from, but I agree. This isn't a Nobuhiro Watsuki incident where he was literally caught in the act of collecting child pornography. Gunn was clearly just trying to be shocking, which is something that happens on the Internet literally all of the time. I'm not saying that it was necessarily right of him to joke about stuff like that, but I don't believe that he actually supports child pornography and firing him over having him publicly apologize for decades-old statements that were clearly not meant to be taken seriously seems really extreme to me. However, this decision goes above Feige and it's clear that Disney doesn't want to be associated with any form of bad press or controversy whatsoever. Hell, had they owned Marvel before Iron Man came out, I doubt that they ever would have allowed Robert Downey Jr. to be cast based on his past criminal record with narcotics.
I'm not excusing what Gunn said in the past. However, I do genuinely believe him when he says that he has long moved past such disgusting, juvenile humor.
It is annoying that all it took was ages-old tweets to fire Gunn, yet Disney never kicked out Johnny Depp from those Pirates movies even after the domestic violence and drug abuse cases became public. And while one could argue that Depp is too much of a cash cow to fire, surely that should also apply to Gunn in regards to Guardians' success.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 20, 2018, 05:58:21 PM
I don't think they should have fired him. Yeah, those tweets are offensive, but it's clear he was doing it as a joke and not because of an actual desire to touch children. He's the director of Tromeo and Juliet, and was pretty provocative up until he got hired to do Marvel movies. And just because he was friends with Huddleston doesn't mean he should be guilty by association.
Turns out that bit was just a really bad coincidence, thankfully. So yeah, I agree that he shouldn't have been fired for the kind of edgelord humor everyone was doing back then.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dil9CtGW0AECFUh.jpg)
Alright, learning more about this and if there was ever any doubt before, I'm now completely against Disney's decision here. I didn't realize before just who it was that accused Gunn of being a pedophile. Turns out Mike Cernovich is a guy who has genuinely defended the act of date rape, currently runs a clear hate group, and has pulled stuff like this with other celebrities in the past without any hard evidence to back up his claims. And based on just this one idiot's accusations Disney immediately decides to fire Gunn?
Also Dave Bautista and others have stepped in to defend James Gunn: https://www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2018/7/21/17597914/james-gunn-dave-bautista-patton-oswalt-mike-cernovich-ted-cruz-michael-ian-black
Disney tries to cover up Lasseter's abusive ass for decades, but lets go of Gunn for tweets he made a decade ago when he had no association with them? There's some slimey shit in there, but I don't think it's right.
Opinions on various SDCC trailers:
I like some of James Wan's Horror films, but Aquaman looks like a pretty generic blockbuster, IMO.
Shazam! actually looks like it could be kind of fun.
Godzilla: King of the Monsters actually looks better than I expected it to. Still not sold on it, but cautiously optimistic.
Glass could go either way. I see clear traces of M. Night's laughably bad dialogue in here, but to his credit I also see a lot of great, well-composed shots and interesting story concepts in here, and the core cast looks like they are really into their roles, so it could be another surprise success like Split. Either way, it'll definitely be entertaining, because I've never seen an M. Night movie that I found boring (I bust a gut laughing watching The Happening), aside from his big studio films like The Last Airbender and After Earth.
Dragon Ball Super: Broly looks like it'll definitely deliver on the visuals and spectacle, but I'm still skeptical as to whether Toriyama's writing will be up to snuff this time around and if he can make Broly into an actually interesting antagonist. That said, what I've seen so far restores at least a little bit of my faith in this movie.
Young Justice season 3 reminds me that I need to re-watch the first two seasons, but based on what I'm seeing, while it could certainly be good, I'm worried that it hasn't learned from its mistake in season 2 trying to juggle too many characters and sub-plots.
Titans could easily be the new Gotham or Iron Fist. It looks so godawfully terrible that I kind of really want to watch at least the first episode to see how much of a trainwreck it could be.
Aquaman looks like kind of a mess, but it has a lot of potentially cool ideas that I'm interested in seeing how they adapt into the film. Too much too soon maybe, but it looks better than any of Snyder's films.
Shazam!, meanwhile, looks like fun, Maybe a bit too much on the silly side, but fuck it, DC needs this. I'll give it a go.
And Titans looks terrible. I've never gotten into the team in any manner (even the Perez comics leave me indifferent), but this looks like no good interpretation. Go really looks like a masterpiece in comparison.
I'm in love with that Godzilla trailer, and I didn't even like the 2014 film all that much.
https://instagram.com/p/Bl3OVfeF8Dc/?utm_source=ig_embed
Turd in the wind? (https://youtu.be/xLCn88bfW1o)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 31, 2018, 06:01:10 PM
Turd in the wind? (https://youtu.be/xLCn88bfW1o)
Alright, I have this theory that maybe this movie is intentionally made to emulate the terrible edgy comic books of the 90's, with the bad CG representating the shallow thoughtless artwork prevalent in many comics of that era while the dialogue is meant to sound like it's trying too hard to be provocative (while still staying at a suitable rating for teens), but just comes off as cringey. If you look at it that way, Venom is shaping up to be a perfect adaptation.
Or maybe that "turd in the wind" line is a perfect metaphor for this movie.
As someone who's read and enjoyed several 90's comics, I'm pleasantly surprised how much I liked the trailer. Even the "turd in the wind" has that cringey, humorous charm to it and captures that edgy cheese so emblematic of Venom's 90's mini's.
I found a really good video summing up just how bat-shit insane (and terrible) of an idea Sony's proposed Spider-Man Universe (without any actual Spider-Man!) is: https://youtu.be/0wEvXwYhCaQ
I'm still not sure what Sony's endgame is. I guess a Sinister Six movie like what they had planned for their ASM universe, but what would it even be about? Would they just use Silk as their ersatz Tom Holland, because I don't see that working out.
Honestly, I don't get why they are trying to set-up a Universe based on most of Spider-Man's Rogues Gallery. They have the rights to all Spider-Man characters, right? So then why didn't they just do solo movies for other Spider-Men and Women (something for Miles, Silk, Gwen, Noir, etc.), and then have them team up in a Spider-Verse movie rather than coming right out the gate with it? That would give them much more material to work with for their adaptations and would also give them an advantage over the MCU since this would be a multi-verse, and thus each solo series wouldn't have to worry about maintaining the continuity of a shared Universe, while still retaining the benefits of crossing over their characters every few years. It just seems like a way better option than what they are supposedly going for.
And speaking of bizarre superhero movie decisions that sound like bad ideas to everyone except the studio heads, Cavill's leaving the DCEU. (https://twitter.com/i/moments/1039877634136649729) It's a shame, because he sounded hopeful that he would get another go at Superman without all the Snyder baggage.
Actually, they may have a VERY good reason. To avoid the fallout of him getting James Gunned. Crazy Days and Nights has hinted at this happening for months, this is just one post.
http://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2018/09/blind-items-revealed-3_11.html
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnYVItcW0Ac5oe-.jpg)
Captain Marvel trailer is out: https://youtu.be/Z1BCujX3pw8
Personally, I found the trailer itself to be kind of underwhelming. I'm not really sold on Larson as Danvers, and the special effects look kind of bad in places for a Marvel movie.
That said, it's not much to go on so I'm not exactly pre-judging the movie, here (Doctor Strange had similarly lackluster marketing but I still enjoyed that movie just fine), and I will say that seeing a younger Fury and Coulson here was neat.
In the latest on "Why did Disney think firing James Gunn was a good idea?" news. (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/james-gunn-suicide-squad-2_us_5bbcf9f7e4b0876edaa2c4eb?ir=Entertainment&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000027)
So, on that note, what are people's thoughts on James Gunn doing the next Suicide Squad movie?
On the one hand, I'm glad that he's getting to work on another major IP and that his falling out with Disney hasn't wrecked his career. On the other hand, I kind of wish he'd take the helm of a franchise that he could shape from scratch like he did with GotG, since with Suicide Squad he has to follow-up a shitty first movie and he can't just ignore the problems of that film if this is indeed intended to be a sequel to it. This could very well be another case of what happened when Joss Whedon tried to take over Justice League. The core problems with what came before it and what it was already shaping up to be were already too vast for him to really be able to fix it in any meaningful way. Likewise, I'm not sure what Gunn could do to really fix the inherent issues already there with the franchise, unless the sequel just flat-out ignores the first movie and writes out every original character from that movie and replaces them with a completely new team, which I don't think that DC will allow.
I'd be fine if he turned it into a Secret Six movie with Batista as Bane.
Just to spite Disney, they should release this movie on the same day that GotG Vol. 3 comes out (if they ever decide on a release date after the delay).
Bane won't be able to leave unless he wants to get taken to the cleaners by Disney.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dpsa9vAVsAAD8Tp.jpg)
Anybody else think this looks like Magneto moments after smacking Charles' ass really hard?
So, I found this video response to the one that MWM made about a month ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjsrDcdwYQM
For those who haven't seen the MWM video, you can just search it on YouTube.
Now, like a lot of people, I'm a big fan of the content put out by MWM, and I generally agree with most of his opinions and analysis of films. However, also like most people, I feel that his Infinity War criticisms were way off-base and while they felt genuine rather than him just trying to be contrarian for the sake of it, I do get the sense that he wildly misinterpreted a lot of the film's messages along with the intent of the creators. This video that I found does a pretty excellent job of explaining why those points are not correct when you take the aspects that he criticizes in context.
And yet another manga property will be turned into the latest misguided effort to try and live-action everything up....hooray? (https://deadline.com/2018/10/my-hero-academia-movie-live-action-legendary-detective-pikachu-1202488986/#respond)
But we already have Sky High.
I feel with comic books being mined pretty well, Hollywood's really trying to find the next Iron Man in manga, looking for the right series and film to kickstart a whole new trend of successful live-action film adaptations based on popular manga series. And My Hero Academia is one of the best selling comics, if not THE best selling comic in North America right now. The wild success of the film's limited release proves there is a huge audience hungry for it. So if any live-action film adaptation could succeed in being a breakout mainstream hit, MHA is the ideal candidate. And of course, superhero stories are a pretty easy sell to audiences and there's plenty of successful examples of bringing them to life in live-action already, so there's less uncanny valleyness than trying to translate the fantastical world of Dragon Ball into live-action, for instance. So I'm really curious how it'll turn out, if it actually gets made.
If you need a bit of a break from DC and Marvel, the Dark Horse series
Black Hammer is being adapted by Legendary Pictures. (https://geektyrant.com/news/legendary-is-developing-a-film-and-tv-series-adaptation-of-the-black-hammer-comic-franchise) Here's the synopsis:
QuoteTen years ago, Black Hammer and six other superheroes had saved Spiral City from the Anti-God, but in the process became trapped in Rockwood, a timeless Twilight Zone-ish town. Shortly after the heroes arrive, Black Hammer dies. In the present, the six heroes live on Black Hammer Farm with very little hope of ever escaping Rockwood.
I read the first volume of Black Hammer a couple months ago. Liked it well enough.
The trailer has been released for the Christmas cut of Deadpool 2.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCf03KXyzIg
It might not be the end for Chris Evans. (https://io9.gizmodo.com/oh-my-stars-and-stripes-avengers-4-director-joe-russo-1830751520)
I've been reading some classic Doctor Strange runs as of late; from the late 60's to the mid 70's by writers like Roy Thomas and Gardner Fox, which have a very surreal and otherworldly take on the character and his adventures compared to the more expected superhero stuff. It feels like something that closer resembles a 50's horror comic in quite a few instances with the good doctor taking on cults and demonic or otherworldly entities as opposed to more basic physical threats. This reminded me of how Doctor Strange's director Scott Derrickson, who's more known for his horror filmography, once stated that if given a chance to do a sequel, he'd want to craft it more like a horror film.
At first I wasn't quite sure if that would work, but now I can see a pretty solid foundation from the source material to serve as a basis for that. The stuff with Nightmare can make for a very trippy and surreal Nightmare on Elm Street style affair. Or, when he takes on cults that try to summon sinister beings like Shuma-Gorath or that unleash beasts like Dagoth or The Undying Ones, it could work as a mix between something like Rosemary's Baby or The Wicker Man or Race with the Devil combined with a 50's Monster B-flick. It wouldn't even need an R-rating since gore was never a factor here so much as occult horror elements.
That said, of course this would never fit with Disney's current family-friendly image for these movies. While I have gone out of my way to defend the MCU in the past (and I still do), one general criticism that I do agree with is their tendency to play things safe in regard to limited mixing in of other genres. It's unfortunate because movies like a horror-themed Doctor Strange could really help break the mold of the MCU's general tone into something more varied and interesting.
That said, just some food for thought on my end. Maybe nobody else but me actually wants to see something like that.
So, they recently announced a Shang-Chi movie, which is cool and all, but also has me somewhat perplexed. I'm familiar with the character by affiliation with other Marvel groups like The Avengers and Secret Avengers, but I've always seen him as a supporting character and was never aware of any solo runs for him from what I can tell. So, that kind of strikes me as an odd choice for a character to base a solo film off of.
Seems more to me like they just wanted to do an Iron Fist movie but didn't want to wait for Netflix's rights to the character to expire in order to use him.
Quotebut didn't want to wait for Netflix's rights to the character to expire in order to use him.
I wonder how Marvel would make a movie for a Netflix character if they ever considered it. If they made a Daredevil movie, would it reference the show's events but keep it broad enough that audiences wouldn't be out of the loop?
So, the most noteworthy thing about the Captain Marvel trailer is how many people are commenting online that Carol's blonde glowing hair, flight, and energy blasts make her look like a live-action Super-Saiyan.
This then got me wondering if FOX still owns the rights to adapting Dragonball to film. If so, then do they automatically go to Disney when the buyout is complete? In that case, I want my DB Cinematic Universe, Disney. :sly:
So after months of telling us that Endgame wasn't the title to the fourth Avengers film, it turns out that Marvel lied to us: https://youtu.be/wuOvmyuYFMo
Doctor Strange 2 confirmed: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/amp/heat-vision/doctor-strange-2-scott-derrickson-returning-direct-1168156
Just saw Into the Spider-Verse. It deserves the hype. I recommend it.
Into the Spider-Verse was fucking great. Every shot was so stylized, like a 2-hour long music video. I hope this movie's reception will convince Sony to make spinoff films for Noir and Peni.
And for some reason or another, the Japanese producers thought the best way to advertise the movie was to make it look and sound like Tokyo Ghoul. (https://twitter.com/BlueEyed1412/status/1073272106102779905)
It's almost like....Sony allowed the creators to actually make a movie....without interfering....and it was great. Go figure. :??:
Though, with how obsessed Avi Arad and the other executives are with trying to set up a dozen spin-offs with each new movie over there, Lord and Miller pitching them a movie introducing six new highly marketable characters was probably music to their ears, so they may have been on the same page for once.
Trailer: https://youtu.be/PuV92mmp1cU
To quote someone on YouTube: "The new Hellboy parody looks great."
I mean, it looks like cheesy fun, but for all of the hype about how much darker and more comics-accurate this adaptation was supposed to be, I think I prefer the tone of Del Toro's movies to this. Literally the only thing it seems to have over it is the upped violence. I'm still going to see it, obviously, so I hope it's at least fun.
Though, on that note, who's bright idea was it to adapt The Storm and the Fury arc as the first outing of a new Hellboy series? You know, the literal climax to the entire series. Kind of an odd choice if you ask me. Also, before anyone else says it, Hellboy in Hell is an extended epilogue.
I don't really care about the Aquaman movie, but whoever allowed this has some explaining to do. (https://youtu.be/xhfnTs0RZLs)
This is Sony's marketing campaign for Venom in China. (https://twitter.com/the_moviebob/status/1080280135507554304)
I wish I was joking.
This is extremely good and accurate though.
Todd MacFarlane: NO FUN ALLOWED. (https://news.avclub.com/todd-macfarlane-genius-marketer-promises-there-will-b-1831438362)
Deleted scene from Into the Spider-Verse. (https://twitter.com/gloomboyloki/status/1081768045113151489)
I finally saw Aquaman tonight, and I'll be honest, I much preferred the first act to the rest. It started off almost like an Arnold movie or something, but slowly started becoming more of a boilerplate super hero film, and was really starting to lose me with the road trip and samey final action sequence. It also doesn't help that it's a very similar plot to Black Panther, but with weaker acting and story structure.
Still though, it's got to be better than any of the DCEU movies with more of Snyder's touch, even if it's a step below Wonder Woman. I do hope that Shazam is a stronger alternative, however.
This is a case where I feel bad for the director (though, not too bad considering that this movie just joined the billion dollar club) since he clearly tried his damndest to make this movie great. I do still firmly believe that James Wan was the right choice for this job, and his handling of the visuals and scene composition was as good as you could get for a movie like this. The problem is that he was limited in what kind of quality he could put out by a (let's be honest here) pretty bad script. The writing was the main thing dragging this movie down.
It was interesting how the movie quietly pretended Justice League never happened, like how it contradicted the previous movie saying Aquaman hated his mom for leaving him on a doorstep by showing her raising him in a mutually loving relationship here. I also noticed a weird racial allegory, where almost all the prominent Atlanteans were played by white people, and Orm seemed really pissed off at Aquaman for his half-human heritage. And it never gets delved into enough to be a strong theme, so it's just there.
The Fox Marvel movies will indeed be cancelled after Disney purchases the company. (https://www.mirror.co.uk/film/x-men-fantastic-four-films-13852013) Dark Phoenix and New Mutants will be the last of them.
Quote from: Daikun on January 15, 2019, 11:41:20 AM
The Fox Marvel movies will indeed be cancelled after Disney purchases the company. (https://www.mirror.co.uk/film/x-men-fantastic-four-films-13852013) Dark Phoenix and New Mutants will be the last of them.
That sucks. I know they were never going to get FF right, and the X-Men Cinematic Universe had its series finale of sorts, but there were some films there I was interested in like Hawley's Doctor Doom.
I really enjoyed Fox's approach to the Marvel movies in that they definitely had their own cinematic universe but they also didn't give too much of a shit about it, like they were about the movies first and the timeline second. Very 90's/early 00's way of doing things. I'm glad Deadpool is (supposedly) safe, but it sounds like they're speaking exclusively about his character/actor, meaning they might try to reboot characters like Domino and Cable or even his entire story...
I hope this will let some of the directors/writers reveal what their scrapped plans were for the future of the franchise. Mangold said something about writing a post-Logan pitch for Laura, and I want to hear what that would have been about.
I'm a little mixed. On the one hand, I do really like a lot of the X-Men movies, and was liking how some of the more recent ones have gone in different directions than your average superhero movie, like Logan's western roots and the supposed horror spin New Mutants will have. But Fox has never really got a handle out of the non-Xverse characters, and if Apocalypse and what we're seeing of Dark Phoenix are any indication, they're not really doing great with the core X-Men as of late either.
I do want to see what the MCU will do with these characters, but I also don't want them to come off as samey as the movies sometimes get.
So, Captain Marvel comes out tomorrow.
I'm a fan of superhero movies. I don't think that they are killing cinema and as a non-pretentious admirer of film who's head is not rammed firmly up my ass, I see no problems with having a "fun" time at the movies.
I also like the MCU. It has it's flaws, but what it has managed to accomplish and get right over the past decade far outweighs it's shortcomings, IMO. And Endgame (which I am incredibly excited for) is just around the corner, with Captain Marvel serving as the penultimate episode to this decade-long saga....
....And I just can't seem to bring myself to give a shit. This movie looks so mediocre and boring that it almost feels like a chore for me to take the time to watch it. I'd love to be wrong, but I'm not really expecting much of anything from it, to be honest.
I'm in the same boat for the most part. However, for me, this feels like Guardians of the Galaxy. What I mean is I have no interest in that movie(s) at all, nor the characters (extra brownie points for Capcom/Marvel forcing them into MvCI). The only reason I'm even remotely interested in Captain Marvel is to see how she ties in with the Avengers. Also, if this is Carol Danvers that'd make me a little more interested as well.
I, too, am a fan of superhero movies (only Marvel though) and while I have no idea where that stuff about superhero movies are killing cinema is coming from (I try to ignore critics at all cost these days), but for me it's the only form of action left in movies (I am absolutely thrilled about Triple Threat). If there weren't any superhero movies I wouldn't be watching movies at all these days.
The reception is making this sound like another Doctor Strange-esq boilerplate origin story, but with some 90's nostalgia polish. I'll still give it a shot, but I'm not expecting Winter Solider-level quality here.
Same. Still don't get why Marvel in general wants to push Carol in place of their other female characters. Like a Black Widow movie, or a Scarlet Witch one. Or they could have done a Kamala one to plant the seeds for the next generation of MCU superheroes. Or if you wanted to plug it as an intermission between IW and Endgame, make it about Valkyrie and what happened to her.
Quote from: Mustang on March 07, 2019, 04:12:45 PMI have no idea where that stuff about superhero movies are killing cinema is coming from
Mostly from elitist filmmakers and actors along with your typical wasteland of modern academic film snobs.
Quote from: Avaitor on March 07, 2019, 05:23:54 PMThe reception is making this sound like another Doctor Strange-esq boilerplate origin story, but with some 90's nostalgia polish. I'll still give it a shot, but I'm not expecting Winter Solider-level quality here.
And even then, I'd argue that Doctor strange at least had the talents of incredibly charismatic actors like Benedict Cumberbatch, Tilda Swinton, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Mads Mikkelsen (albeit with the standard MCU villain role not giving him much to work with) to help elevate a decidedly mediocre script. If Captain Marvel at least had that going for it I'd still be interested. As it stands, Brie Larson seems to have about as much charisma as a brick wall.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 07, 2019, 05:42:10 PMSame. Still don't get why Marvel in general wants to push Carol in place of their other female characters. Like a Black Widow movie, or a Scarlet Witch one. Or they could have done a Kamala one to plant the seeds for the next generation of MCU superheroes. Or if you wanted to plug it as an intermission between IW and Endgame, make it about Valkyrie and what happened to her.
I'd personally be up for using Captain Marvel to help set up Rogue by having her take Carol's powers whenever Marvel gets around to their MCU X-Men movie.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 07, 2019, 05:56:15 PM
whenever Marvel gets around to their MCU X-Men movie.
That's another thing. What
should their interpretation of X-Men be? Because they'll want to avoid stuff the Fox movies touched (for a while at least) for fear of unfavorable comparisons, but those films touched upon a lot. And even before the buyout, they were digging for scraps to use for the main X-Men movies. How can Marvel deliver a fresh approach to X-Men as a film series? Everybody's been talking about how they can be introduced, but what about which story arcs they would adapt? What the initial roster would be? How do they handle Wolverine?
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 07, 2019, 09:49:28 PMThat's another thing. What should their interpretation of X-Men be? Because they'll want to avoid stuff the Fox movies touched (for a while at least) for fear of unfavorable comparisons, but those films touched upon a lot. And even before the buyout, they were digging for scraps to use for the main X-Men movies. How can Marvel deliver a fresh approach to X-Men as a film series? Everybody's been talking about how they can be introduced, but what about which story arcs they would adapt? What the initial roster would be? How do they handle Wolverine?
A lot of the Fox X-Men movies are really just the same recycled story: Wolverine learns to become an X-Man.
Marvel's approach should be simple: Don't do that. Literally do
anything else and you have a fresh take.
Also, bring some bright colors to the movies. Fox's drab color scheme doesn't really fit with the MCU.
Quote from: Daikun on March 07, 2019, 11:50:22 PM
A lot of the Fox X-Men movies are really just the same recycled story: Wolverine learns to become an X-Man.
Marvel's approach should be simple: Don't do that. Literally do anything else and you have a fresh take.
Also, bring some bright colors to the movies. Fox's drab color scheme doesn't really fit with the MCU.
But the McAvoy/Fassbender movies did do that (even if they couldn't help but use Wolverine as a major player in DOFP). So not only do you have to avoid Wolverine for a while, you also have to avoid Charles and Erik's friendship as those movies thoroughly detailed, hammered, and repeated that aspect.
Captain Marvel looks like a Phase 1 MCU movie they forgot to release until now. It doesn't help that they thoroughly destroyed Carol's character in the last half-decade of the comics by turning her into a cruel fascist with few redeeming qualities. How is anyone who read Civil War 2 supposed to root for this character? Seriously, they should have done a movie about Kamala instead.
I have no idea how Disney will handle the X-Men but I think it would be wise for them to do TV shows or cartoons about them instead of films. The theatrical MCU is sprawling enough as it is and a lot of the best X-Men stories are more suited for serialized television IMO. Plus, I think it'll be hard for the general public to accept anyone but Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, and even further confusion will be created since they aren't going to reboot Deadpool.
I do also wonder if they're going to make the X-Men movies another period piece like the Fassbender and McAvoy movies, since a big part of Magneto's character comes from his history as a Holocaust survivor, but we're getting increasingly further away from that period to have an active Erik in today's timeline.
I wonder if they'll include Captain America in such a film, since they both hail from WWII.
Quote from: Daikun on March 08, 2019, 03:31:09 PM
I wonder if they'll include Captain America in such a film, since they both hail from WWII.
Now I kind of want to see a Cap and Wolverine film as well, since apparently they used to fight together back in WWII.
Carol!: The Movie was mediocre. Main problem is that while they certainly had to take away the alcoholic sociopath aspects of Carol's comic personality, they don't replace it with anything else. She's stuck as this stoic amnesiac who only shows shades of humanity when she finds out the real story about the Kree-Skrull conflict.
Pretty much this.
If it wasn't being wholeheartedly innofensively generic, it was doing a poor job of trying to ape Guardians of the Galaxy's style of tone and humor. I also cringed at that reveal of how Fury came up with the name of The Avengers. That was a real "Solo" moment right there. Nobody asked for it, and what we got was just stupid.
Also, this movie blatantly contradicts some later MCU films (timeline-wise), in particular making one of Fury's memorable lines from The Winter Soldier a complete lie that feels so out of character for him.
I liked Ben Mendelsohn's character, though. Wouldn't mind seeing him come back in another MCU movie. He and the Skrulls could play a big part in the MCU's eventual Fantastic Four movie. Perhaps they could set up a character like Kl'rt.
The problem with Carol is that there's so little from the comics to mine from if you want a good movie. The most memorable Carol moments are her failures. When her son from the future raped and impregnated her with himself. When she committed violent acts on innocent people in both Civil Wars. When Rogue absorbed her powers so severely that she was left in a coma. And her triumphant moments are pretty generic and things you could apply to any other superhero. I guess the movie could have played up her depressing aspects, a Sandor Clegane-like character who's suffered through and committed evil but slowly chooses to fight for good, but that would have been a weird choice for someone meant to be the cavalry for the Avengers next movie. Especially when Nebula is already in that role.
Though I did find a more forgiving video that analyzes who this Carol is. (https://youtu.be/RFU8mzoCYHY)
Thinking about it some more, a lot of this movie's retcons make no sense. Like, how did a Kree scientist just happen to have the Tesseract when it was established to be in SHIELD's possession the whole time after Howard Stark found it? Also, Carol gives Nick Fury that modified beeper to use to reach her in case of emergencies. How exactly did the Battle for New York, a literal alien invasion, not count as one, or even a major terrestrial threat like Ultron? And also, in the first Avengers film Nick Fury claims that SHIELD had just started using the Tesseract to develop advanced weapons because of Thor's appearance on Earth showing them that there were superpowered beings from advanced alien races, yet wouldn't SHIELD have already known that after the Skrull were witnessed on Earth (not to mention that they had an actual body to dissect and study)? Why didn't they just start developing that kind of technology back then, ESPECIALLY when it's made clear that they did regain possession of the Tesseract by the end of the events of this movie?
Honestly, this movie just creates more plot-holes while answering questions that nobody needed to know about.
I liked the movie a little bit more than you guys, but I agree that it's pretty middle of the road MCU. I thought that Larson did well with her material as Carol, especially when she was with Fury, but I agree that a lot of the timeline elements don't really make sense.
Also, this breaks the streak of better-than-usual villains that the MCU was having since Ego.
Quote from: Avaitor on March 10, 2019, 10:43:46 PMAlso, this breaks the streak of better-than-usual villains that the MCU was having since Ego.
It's weird how Marvel's been pushing Carol from a C-lister to an A-lister these past years, but they haven't given her an interesting rogues gallery for her movie to mine villains from. I'm looking at this list of her enemies, (https://comicvine.gamespot.com/carol-danvers/4005-21561/enemies/) and all of them are either nobodies, villains from other rogues galleries, and other superheroes.
James Gunn reinstated as director for Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3! (https://deadline.com/2019/03/james-gunn-reinstated-guardians-of-the-galaxy-3-disney-suicide-squad-2-indefensible-social-media-messages-1202576444/amp/)
Good.
Funny thing, a couple weeks ago, some news site made up the rumor that Bryan Singer would direct GOTG 3. And after Disney firing Gunn for so little as a rumor about child molestation, it was ridiculous to suggest they would replace him with someone who's actually being convicted of it. Not to mention his X-Men movies are the exact opposite of the GOTG movies in style and tone.
Not only is he back for Guardians, but he's still directing Suicide Squad 2.
Does that mean that'll actually be good? I don't want to have to deal with Margot Robbie's terrible Harley impression.
Just got back from seeing an early access screening of Shazam! today. It was a lot of fun, and the tone felt just right. It's easily the most entertaining DCEU movie to date, and the better of the two "Captain Marvel" movies from this year.
I'll grant you that it's nothing outright amazing, but it's on the same level as a pretty good MCU flick, which as it stands is a good thing for DC compared to what's come before.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2qdGjqWoAAMfOl.jpg)
Oh yeah, Darkseid would have killed Lois in the Snyder Cut.
So, I don't know about you guys, but Thursday night tickets in all theaters around my area (Louisville, KY) for Avengers: Endgame have already mostly sold out crazy fast. I was put into a 20-minute waiting screen before it would allow me to purchase tickets. When I finally did get in there was literally only one seat left in any of the middle rows (which I quickly snagged, thankfully) and a few open in the very front row (where I never sit because it gives me a headache). And this is just in an area that's moderately populated at best. I couldn't imagine what it would have been like trying to get tickets back up in New Jersey where it's more densely populated and where I'd actually be trying to get a few seats together to see the movie with my brother and some friends (I don't have too many friends down here in KY, and the few that I do don't really care about Marvel movies).
At any rate, I got a pretty good seat and a decent showtime that I can actually make without having to leave work early, so I'm pretty happy. I'm honestly just really pumped to see Endgame as I'm unabashedly a fan of the MCU and this is my most anticipated movie of the year, easily.
It's alarming how quickly tickets are selling. I haven't even bought one in advance, and just hoping to watch it on the Friday it comes out.
I think it partly depends on where you live, as well. If you are in the city or any other densely populated area, most tickets for Thursday and Friday screenings would be sold out weeks in advance, except for maybe really late shows (I've seen ones going all the way to 3:00 AM). However, you might not have to deal with that if you live in smaller area. When I went to see Infinity War last year, back when I was staying in Paducah, I didn't seem to have any trouble whatsoever getting tickets to see the movie on opening night.
Now on the other side of the shore, comes the Joker trailer. (https://youtu.be/e2E1aBQ5yA0)
Jesus. Hellboy has a 10% on RT. (https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hellboy_2019)
While I don't put much stock in RT scores anymore, this doesn't really surprise me. Not only did the promotional material look like shit, but the fact that they wouldn't release the review embargo until this close to the movie's actual release was a pretty big warning sign as it is.
It's saddening that we had to drop Del Toro's inspired vision for this. I feel as though they would have done a better job trying to reason with him to decrease the budget somewhat than to just up and reboot everything. I've seen people defend the decision by saying that this would be a more comic-accurate adaptation of Mignola's source material, which was just PR bull-shit that anyone who was actually paying attention to the promotional material of this movie could see for what it was. If by more comic-accurate you mean more references to original work, then I'd probably give it at least that much, but even Del Toro's many creative liberties still had a strange and unique vibe to it that helped it stand apart from other comic book movie adaptations, in the same way that Mignola's work felt very removed from a lot of other genre comics that came out at the time. Perhaps it's premature of me to say this as I haven't seen the movie yet, but everything that I have seen just leads me to expect this to be a soulless product. Even for those who didn't particularly care for them, at least Del Toro's two entries had genuine care and passion put behind them to see out a director's vision rather than satisfy a committee checklist.
The new Hellboy doesn't seem to be pleasing anyone. Maybe I should give the del Toro movies another shot, since it's been a while, but I really want to read some of the original comics again first.
Oh, I got around to seeing Shazam! the other night, and I enjoyed it, but I'd be lying if I called it a super favorite. My main problem, besides Big being creepy and crappy, and a poor choice of core inspiration, is that a lot of the dramatic moments don't really land. That, and the action kind of sucks. But I agree that it's the better of the two Captain Marvel movies, and probably better than Aquaman when its best moments land.
So, while I didn't marathon the MCU movies leading up to Endgame due to time constraints, I did basically re-watch all of the MCU films (except for The Incredible Hulk, as well as Captain Marvel which just came out) out of order over the past year since Infinity War. I concluded this loosely connected series of re-watches by re-watching the original Iron Man last night.
As I write this, I will be seeing Endgame in just a few hours. I am so incredibly excited for this that I can't remember a time that I was this hyped for a movie since Return of the King. I'm honestly even feeling somewhat emotional and I haven't even watched the movie yet. That said, as someone who has unabashedly been a fan of the MCU and superhero movies in general for as many years as I have, I'm insanely eager with anticipation to finally complete this movie-series journey that I (and millions of others) have been on for the past 11 years.
Just got back from the movie.
I don't think that I'm going to stop thinking about this one for a while. How much you get out of it personally as a movie experience will depend on your level of attachment (or lack thereof) to the MCU. If you are a fan like I have been, though, this one hits you hard in the feels. I have a few issues and nitpicks, but the overall experience was overwhelmingly satisfying.
It's also one of the most unique films in the genre that I have ever seen for the first two-thirds, with the final hour being comprised of perhaps some of the greatest moments in any superhero film ever made to date.
Google is letting you snap the Infinity Gauntlet. Do a Google search for Thanos (https://www.google.com/search?q=thanos) and click the gauntlet.
(https://i.imgur.com/pMkKFYV.jpg)
It's randomized, so you can click it multiple times and get different results.
Endgame was a blast.
Spoiler
Even though I hid from spoilers, I was pretty sure that Tony would die based off of that announcement over a year ago, saying the kid from Iron Man 3 would show up. I knew the only reason they'd bring him back was for a funeral, and he probably wasn't going to show up to anybody but Tony's. Also, it was a cool stealth bookend to dress up Thor like a Jeff Bridges character.
Guess in lieu of Stan Lee, we'll be seeing timejumping Chris Evans cameos from now on?
And I know the Netflix characters will never show up in a movie thanks to creative and contractual decisions, we had to settle for the butler Jarvis from Agent Carter making an appearance, but a tiny part of me was hoping for something. Even just a cameo of Matt Murdock executing Tony's will.
Spoiler
Tony's death and funeral were handled perfectly. The original arc reactor with Pepper's message to Tony from the first Iron Man was a great touch and really hit me emotionally. And that final line delivery of "I am Iron Man," sent chills down my spine with how good of a moment it was.
Also, Captain America lifting Thor's hammer and proceeding to beat the shit out of Thanos for like a straight minute is now one of my all-time favorite MCU scenes. It manages to also confirm my long-time theory from Age of Ultron as well.
I have mixed feelings about Thor's arc in this movie, but Hemsworth is just so charismatic in that role that he's undeniably entertaining to watch. I'm also still unsure of how I feel about Professor Hulk, but Mark Ruffalo helped to sell the character even if it's not necessarily where I wanted to see the character go. This was also the best character-work for Scott Lang and Nebula to date. Even Carol was more tolerable here than in her own movie.[/quote]
I'll be seeing the movie again this weekend, so a second viewing should help me to sort out my thoughts and decide where I'd rank this movie in the MCU. It's likely a top 5 contender, though.
Spoiler
It's been a pretty elegiac time for Marvel heroes. Wolverine died in Logan. Peter died in Spider-Verse. Now Tony's death. I gotta wonder how an 8-year-old would react to all these consecutive superhero deaths, especially the 8-year-olds who were allowed to watch Logan.
I loved seeing Thanos duel everybody with his double-sided sword from Ninja Scroll. How did he lose it in the original timeline?
Speaking of, I'm surprised that main timeline Gamora and Vision stayed dead. I was fully expecting some bullshit reset button to resurrect them alongside Natasha. But no. Guess Wandavision and the Black Widow movie will be prequels.
Regarding your last point:
Spoiler
I was also surprised by this and am happy that Disney and Feige had the balls to leave those deaths permanent. However, while we know that the Black Widow movie will be a prequel, there may be another option for the other two shows. Keep in mind that this movie revealed that the timeline doesn't work like in other movies. Going to the past doesn't change the future of your given timeline, but instead branches it out into another timeline (hence why they were able to kill Thanos and his army from the past without undoing the events of Infinity War). Basically, time-traveling in the MCU works very similarly to time travel in Dragon Ball.
As we saw, the past version of Loki escaped with the Tesseract. And having killed the Thanos from 2014 inevitably created an alternate reality where the events of Infinity War never happened. So, perhaps it's possible for some of these Disney shows to branch out into the multi-verse?
It's just a thought, anyways.
Just got back from my second viewing and it's even better on a re-watch.
Spoiler
I also think I might have a better understanding of old man Steve Roger's which at first didn't make sense to me given how time travel was explained in this movie, but it may still be a plot-hole.
Spoiler
I just assume he lived out his life in another timeline, lived with Peggy until she died, then asked Strange in that Earth to help him hop to his home dimension and tell his friends what happened.
My issue is what Strange really meant by "it was the only way". Because even if refusing to give him the Time Stone would have led to Thanos horribly murdering all of the team on Titan one by one until Strange either gave it up or died, the stone was necessary to reverse Wanda destroying the Mind Stone. Without it, Thanos would have lost. Maybe a loss where Thanos was still alive would have been more trouble than it was worth, probably would have raged and went on a neverending quest to kill the half of the universe with his own hands, and Strange needed the timeline where he died to occur.
For sure, the plot of this movie (and really everything since Infinity War) is super contrived to be more in service of what they want to do with the characters and how they want to end their arcs. Like....
Spoiler
People have already pointed out how The Avengers could gave just gone back in time to get more Pym Particles in the first place for more attempts. Also Tony Stark almost immediately figuring out time-travel is complete bull-shit. And really, since Captain Marvel has been stated to be the strongest MCU character to date, there's no reason that she couldn't have used the gauntlet to snap away Thanos's army as soon as Peter gave her the gauntlet.
However, by the very nature of the MCU since it's inception, and really superhero comic books in general, the story is worked around to serve the characters and themes that the writers want to explore, as opposed to the other way around. So it personally doesn't bother me too much that they went this route even though there is clearly more than one way that they could have won.
Yeah, I don't really mind that much. And it's not like a bad event comic where I keep questioning why these characters are acting the way they are instead of sitting back and watching the action. Also, someone else cameoed in the film.
Spoiler
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D5HJcsIWAAAxOUv.jpg:large)
That was a really good way to end this phase of the MCU. Or almost I guess, since apparently Far From Home is the real end of Phase 3. I wonder if that'll be more like an epilogue, though.
Spoiler
Something else I wonder is how the reincarnated characters will handle coming back into the present, five years removed and unchanged. Also, did everyone at Peter's school not survive the snap? Granted, we only really saw Ned at the end, but I can't help but wonder who if his crew in Homecoming would have graduated and grown by now.
Spoiler
All of Peter's classmates were on that field trip in the Far From Home trailer. So unless Flash got held back, they didn't live out the five years.
Another thing I'm wondering is who the next overarching villain will be now that Thanos is gone. Galactus? Annihilus? Doom? The Cancerverse? The power vacuum from his death has to be large for someone to fill his shoes.
Yeah, this ending is so perfect (they didn't even include any post-credit stingers to emphasize the finality of it) that it seems like a bit of a slap in the face to all of a sudden make the new Spider-Man movie the final film of the Infinity Saga. That said, I feel like it's more of a case of this being a stand-alone movie that, while being a sequel to Homecoming, will really only make small references to the events of previous MCU movies. It seems like Sony wanted a sequel to Homecoming released as soon as possible, hence why this is coming out so soon after Endgame. It probably doesn't fit in line with what Feige has planned for Phase 4, but it was a movie that still had to be made and released per their deal with Sony. So, in that regard, it'll be to Phase 3 what Ant-Man was to Phase 2, in being a fun, light-hearted romp, but ultimately more it's own thing.
So, in other words, it's a movie that probably doesn't have a specific place in any phase, but is just being called a phase 3 film for the sake of convenience. As far as I'm concerned, though, the Infinity Saga ends with Endgame.
Spoiler
It probably won't happen, but it'd be nice if Peter mentioned in Far From Home that between getting dusted and waking up, he thought he saw Uncle Ben guiding him back. Something to honor the two father figures he's lost in his life.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 27, 2019, 10:02:23 PM
Spoiler
All of Peter's classmates were on that field trip in the Far From Home trailer. So unless Flash got held back, they didn't live out the five years.
Another thing I'm wondering is who the next overarching villain will be now that Thanos is gone. Galactus? Annihilus? Doom? The Cancerverse? The power vacuum from his death has to be large for someone to fill his shoes.
I'm personally hoping for Doom. Galactus or Annihilus are more likely though since Feige said that he wanted Phase 4 to focus more on the cosmic side of the MCU. Feige even originally wanted Galactus to be the big bad of the MCU but couldn't use him because Marvel Studios didn't have the rights to the character back then, so I wouldn't be surprised to see him capitalize on the opportunity here. Also, I find Annihilus to be a pretty bland villain (I do love the concept of the negative zone, though), and going with him would inevitably lead to yet another big battle with a generic CG army. I'd personally prefer they go with a more powerful foe that they have to take out strategically rather than one that relies more heavily on yet another army.
On another note, since time travel is now a thing in the MCU and it has been heavily implied that Hemsworth is not done playing Thor after all, I'd like to see either the God Butcher tackled in the next Thor film. Or at least finally give us characters like Baldur and Beta Ray Bill.
Spoiler
After GOTG Vol. 3, of course.
If time travel's a recurring thing from now on, they could always do Kang the Conqueror. Or Dormammu since he's already been introduced.
And something else on my mind: I've noticed at the theaters since Civil War that people get really hyped whenever Ant-Man shows up, but always whenever he shows up in other superheroes' movies instead of his own two. He does something awesome in his own movies, people go "Okay, I guess that was cool". But whenever he so much as sneezes in Civil War or Endgame, I heard people cheer or clap. I don't get it. I guess people like him a lot more when he's a side character?
I think the same is true of Doctor Strange as well. I noticed a lot more people cheering for him in Infinity War and Endgame than in his own movie. That actually brings up one of my main concerns for the MCU going forward. Both RDJ's Tony Stark and Evans' Steve Rogers were by far the most charismatic performers in the MCU. Both were key pillars of the franchise that could easily play the leading role in any crossover films. With both of those actors' contracts up and them confirming that they aren't returning for any more MCU films, one has to wonder who could be a new pillar for the MCU.
I feel like Feige and Disney were really banking on Captain Marvel to be the new Captain America, but aside from Brie Larson's extraordinary ability to piss off the majority of the fanbase, the general reaction to her movie was pretty "meh" at best, and she was barely even in Endgame. Making her the lead would be the equivalent of how the WWE tried to push Roman Reigns as the next big star. Trying to do it forcibly without the character earning it just gets the fans to turn on them and the franchise. This is essentially what happened with Carol in the last few years of the comic books.
T'Challa would most likely be their next choice, but while most people liked Black Panther, a common criticism is that he felt like a supporting character in his own movie at times.
There's also Tom Holland's Peter Parker, and while fans really seem to like him, Disney's initial contract agreement with Sony will expire with the release of Far From Home, so a lot of that is up in the air with whether they want to renew it or screw Marvel Studios over and take the character back.
Yeah, I don't really see a particularly worthy replacement for Tony or Steve with the newer heroes, especially since Marvel has to share the rights to Spidey. It seems entirely possible that we'll get one more Thor, and I think along with the Black Widow movie and Guardians 3 (which even if it isn't the last, the franchise is very likely closer to the end than the beginning), we'll have enough presence to tide things over for a while, but we need an anchor.
Trying to give T'Challa, Carol, or Strange more of a personality and purpose in their next installments will help, but it might finally be time to give the Fantastic Four and/or the Surfer an MCU shot.
It took a while to get Thor to work and become an audience favorite, so it's not hard to assume they'll retool T'Challa and Carol to be more well-rounded characters too.
I can see that for T'Challa for sure. And for what it's worth, I really like Benedict Cumberbatch as Stephen Strange. It's just that the character himself has always been rather aloof from the physical threats of the Avengers in his history in the comics, and the MCU version looks to be going the same route. so it's hard to see him a central character in the Universe. Yes, I know he has been a part of said team and many others in his career, but to my knowledge none of those runs have lasted for very long except for maybe The Defenders. Speaking of which, it's looking like the Marvel Netflix shows may not be canon to the MCU after all, so the door's potentially open for a film version with Doctor Strange, Professor Hulk, and maybe Namor and/or Silver Surfer if they decide to introduce either of those characters.
Carol is a bit more uncertain for me, though. I don't necessarily think it would be impossible for the writers to make her a much more endearing character than in her first outing, but my real problem is that Brie Larson seems to be pretty miscast in this role. She's a very capable actress, but this is one of the few times in which Sarah Finn, who's normally an incredibly spot-on casting director, has made a misstep in trying to go for someone with past prestige over going for a lesser known talent who betters fits the role. I just don't buy Larson as a tough super hero, and I'm not sure more movies will convince me otherwise.
They could always soft reboot the Netflix team and let them graduate into movies. Adapt Daredevil's happy go lucky Waid run, turn Luke and Jessica into a couple.
All that said, I fully expect Chris Pratt's paycheck to increase exponentially if Marvel's really desperate for a series-wide lead.
If they wanted a cosmic take on Captain America, I would have preferred Nova over Captain Marvel, myself.
In case you wanted to hear YMS whine about Endgame. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-zo68N_oBI)
So, like always, I don't necessarily have a problem with him mostly not caring for Marvel movies (or anyone for that matter), but the problem with this video, as others have pointed out in the comments section, is that more than half of his complaints absolutely were addressed in the movie if you payed attention.
Spoiler
He's correct in observing that the time travel mechanics have logic holes, but is off the mark on just about everything else. Like, Nebula absolutely does tell everyone that Thanos killed Gamora on Vormir. She doesn't tell them about the sacrifice rule because she has no actual knowledge of that as she wasn't actually there. Nebula, both past and present versions, does not have the ability to open up Dr. Strange portals through time, which just baffles me that he even came up with that. Past Nebula clearly uses the Pym Particles that current Nebula had to transport Thanos' ship back to the present timeline. And his complaint about the Tony Stark funeral scene is just baffling. I don't know if he's ever been to an actual funeral before, but people tend to be much more emotionally reserved there as a form of respect, so it makes sense that we se subtler emotions being expressed from them at that point in time. If he wanted a bigger emotional reaction, why not mention Tony's actual death scene and the reactions from Peter and Pepper?
I could go on, but the gist of things are that he has a tendency to try and over-criticize a movie, to the point of making several mistakes and inaccurate assessments of his own, rather than just admit that he's not fond of the genre and move on. He did the same thing with War for the Planet of the Apes and A Quiet Place. Funnily enough, I didn't really care for A Quiet Place myself, but even I could see the inaccuracies in many of his complaints about it.
I just find it funny that YMS paints himself as a connoisseur of independent film and movies that make you think, but he refuses to understand blockbuster movies that mass audiences can easily get. He has that same issue I have with Digibro, where it seems as if they peaked years ago and threw away their creative filter that kept them from making statements on things they obviously don't understand. And instead of getting the funny Adum who made those Cool Cat and Neil Breen reviews, you get the annoying Adum who only makes quickie reviews with Cinemasins-tier writing.
And that doesn't get into his belief that animals can consent to human sex, and his inability to understand why people wouldn't want the deaths of their loved ones broadcast on major websites like Reddit.
I don't necessarily think that he hasn't produced any entertaining content in recent years, though. It's just that his snobbery and clear biases have only gotten more obnoxious and pronounced over time.
That said, he had a great YMS review on Spike Lee's Oldboy remake a few months ago, and he also did another entertaining Neil Breen review last year as well. I also agree with some of his Quickie's like Blade Runner 2049, Halloween, Searching, Hellboy, and at least a few others.
He also gave overall positive reviews to Shazam!, Spider-Verse, and Infinity War, but my problem there is that despite admitting that he actually had fun with those movies and liked them, he still had to find a way to bring uis bias into them. He made it seem like Spider-Verse only stood put because of it's style rather than how good it actually integrated it's style into it's storytelling. Likewise, he had to make some dumb spin on his positive thoughts about Shazam! and Infinity War being because they "knew what they were" and didn't try to be something else, showing his clear BS biases toward superhero movies. He seems to think that they have to adhere to dumb, pre-conceived notions of what other people stereotype the genre as being, and thus can only be good and not great, which he uses to justify why he's not a big fan of superheroes. Aside from being an incredibly close-minded and ignorant way of thinking, he basically limits his perspective on the genre in a way that it can't help but not be to his liking. If it's just dumb fun then it can be OK but not great, but if it tries to be more he'll do his damndest to claim that it's boring and stupid. It just comes off as really pretty standards, IMO.
Alright, after a lot of thought and several re-watches, here's my ranking for the entire Infinity Saga of the MCU:
22. The Incredible Hulk
21. Thor: The Dark World
20. Captain Marvel
19. Iron Man 2
18. Ant-Man & The Wasp
17. Thor
16. Ant-Man
15. Avengers: Age of Ultron
14. Doctor Strange
13. Iron Man 3
12. Black Panther
11. Captain America: Civil War
10. Spider-Man: Homecoming
9. Iron Man
8. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
7. The Avengers
6. Avengers: Endgame
5. Thor: Ragnarok
4. Guardians of the Galaxy
3. Avengers: Infinity War
2. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
1. Captain America: The First Avenger
For #'s 22-19, those are the only MCU films that I just outright don't like. Some of them have good moments or performances that stand out to me, but as overall movies they don't work.
The next set, #'s 18-14, are what I consider to be average (though, average by MCU standards, which isn't bad). These are movies that at least hold together well enough to have been enjoyable on my first time seeing them, but none of them hold up as well to re-watches. After having read some Doctor Strange comics, one of my biggest disappointments with that movie is how it fails to live up to it's namesake. It plays it far too safe and doesn't embrace the otherworldly nature of Stephen Strange's unique style of stories. For an origin movie, it's decent set-up, but it does t really feel like what I expect from the character.
For #'s 13-9, while each of those movies is far from perfect (yes, I do even have problems with Black Panther and Civil War in retrospect), they are what I consider to be good MCU movies as someone who's a fan of the MCU. They each have things holding them back, like how the first Iron Man never really quite lives up to it's amazing first act, but is still enjoyable on the whole, or how Bkack Panther's main character feels less interesting than most of his supporting cast, but the rest of that cast really carries the movie. Iron Man 3 has a bunch of problems but it's really a lot more entertaining than I gave it credit for on a re-watch.
For my top 8 picks, I really just unabashedly find them to be great movies, MCU or otherwise, albeit to varying degrees. In retrospect, Guardians of the Gakaxy Vol. 2 is one of those rare cases where I have completely 180'd on a movie given time and multiple re-watches. I flat out didn't like it when I initially saw it in theaters. I had one set of expectations and James Gunn was clearly going for something very different. However, once I really understood what he was going for, I really got on board with it. I still think the first Guarduins is a much tighter film, hence it being in my top five, but the sequel really expanded on the hear of it's core characters and themes, to the point where my few issues with the film seem all the more minor to me now.
Looking back on it, the original Avengers film by Whedon is pretty great. I got into a phase where I tried to downplay how good it was based on how simplistic it's story was, but overtime I have come to appreciate how that's clearly the intention of the film. Perhaps more so than any other MCU film, this is about it's characters first and everything else second. Without this coming together as well as it is, we probably would not still have an MCU, or at least not the way in which it exists now.
I have seen Endgame twice now, and it may still be too fresh for me to rank, but this is one that gets by on it's emotional impact on me more than any other MCU movie. I'll admit that it's story structure is arguably messier than even Ultron's and it's got several flaws if you are looking for them. But as an emotional payoff to 11-years of movies, it's kind of an amazing feat that it could pull it off in such a satisfying way. I had a hard time deciding on whether or not to rank this over the original Avengers, but for now I put it just a smidge higher.
My top five I have discussed at length before, so I won't say much more other than defend Ragnarok for being a smarter movie thematically than people give it credit for (simply because it has a lot of jokes doesn't demerit it's rich character study and underlying themes), and to point out that, yes, The First Avenger has indeed switched places with the Winter Soldier yet again to be my favorite MCU movie. I still love The Winter Soldier just as much, and initially I moved The First Avenger down a spot because I thought I must have been a bit too easy on it based on most other people's reaction to the movie as being lower-tier Marvel. But upon my last re-watch, and if I'm being completely honest with myself, The First Avenger encapsulates everything that I love and value most about superheroes more than any other MCU film to date, and it comes together incredibly well as a stand-alone movie that doesn't even need the strengths of being attached to a larger Universe to be as great and well put-together it is.
It's interesting to see you flop a few things around, like Iron Man 2 not being dead last anymore, or Ultron ranking below the original Avengers. It's a pretty cool list overall. I'm hoping to do a full rewatch after Far From Home, ideally in a big Phase 3 set covering those films. And hopefully I can get the Phase 2 one for a decent price before then, but I don't think that I'm going to be able to luck out and find it for under $100 at a pawn shop like I did Phase 1's suitcase.
For what it's worth, I still enjoy Ultron (I mean, I enjoy most MCU movies to at least some extent). I think it's a movie with a lot of good moments that unfortunately don't cohere to much of an interesting overall story. I even think Ultron is one of the more underrated MCU villains, as there are a few more layers to his character beyond the surface if you're paying attention. I do feel like Whedon got screwed over a bit in how he was forced to shove so much into the movie to the point of it feeling more overstuffed than Infinity War despite having less than half of the characters to work with, but I do also feel like actual story-telling was never one of his strengths to begin with. Movies like Serenity and The Avengers work so well because he just focuses purely on characters with the story being an overly simplistic backdrop to provide them with situations to bounce off one another and develop. Ultron was more plot-driven, though, and ended up suffering for it.
With Iron Man 2, it's interesting to go back to it so many years later. I still don't care for it on the whole (in many ways, it feels like it suffers from many of the same problems as Ultron), but it's also refreshingly experimental and at least has some fun scenes to show for it, even though there's more in the movie that doesn't work than what does. Being an early MCU film, it doesn't feel as formulaic as some of the later ones do, and while Whiplash felt like a wasted villain, it does provide a really fun comedic foil in Justin Hammer (I actually wouldn't mind Sam Rockwell returning to the MCU in some form or fashion). Also, this is a really minor thing, but it's kind of baffling to see an MCU movie without the usual opening credits. This still had some of the DNA of an early 2000's supehero movie in it, and in some ways it can make the film a bit more interesting. Still, I think that after Endgame, pretty much anything Iron Man related has been bumped up a notch for me just due to the benefit of hindsight and finding how much the character's former experiences has been retroactively enhanced for me due to where his overall character arc ends up.
I thought it was interesting how the MCU buffed up Tony's lackluster rogues gallery by making Thanos and Ultron personal villains of his, only to find out Thanos was associated with him from the very beginning. (https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Iron_Man_Vol_1_55)
Guess Marvel negotiated with Sony about their Spidey contract after all. (https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/spiderman-home-trailer-introduces-concept-marvel-multiverse/)
Better Spider Man than Captain Marvel.
I liked Captain Marvel, and am still looking forward to Endgame when my friends are available to see it with me, but I'm sick of Brie Larson. Cast are likely happy about this too.
I'm not one of those people who jumps on the "Disney is trying to brainwash us with SJW propaganda" bandwagon, but yes, it's well documented at this point that Brie Larson has made a complete ass of herself.
Or we could get Robb Stark. (https://variety.com/2019/film/news/richard-madden-eternals-1203207844/)
Saw that earlier. To be fair, Richard Madden wasn't a bad actor by any stretch. I'd argue that of all of the Stark children, he was the only one portrayed with any sense of charisma that didn't feel painfully forced (the same could be said for a lot of the big actors killed off within the first four seasons of GOT).
I'm not sure if they are going to do an Eternals movie right out of the Kirby era, or if they are going to take any inspiration from Neil Gaiman's reimagining (which I personally love), but if it's the latter then I think that he'd be a pretty good fit to play Mark Curry (Makkarri/Mercury).
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 07, 2019, 01:43:42 PM
I'm not one of those people who jumps on the "Disney is trying to brainwash us with SJW propaganda" bandwagon, but yes, it's well documented at this point that Brie Larson has made a complete ass of herself.
I still like Disney, even though they have had some nuts under their employ like that Windig fellow they had to let go of. My point wasn't even about the feminism or SJW stuff but how she's so terrible it's glaringly obvious in interviews that about none of her castmembers want anything to do with her. Not much of a conspiracist, but I do think any time Cheadle has had to defend her online was done through clenched teeth.
Quote from: Peanutbutter on May 08, 2019, 01:14:21 AM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 07, 2019, 01:43:42 PM
I'm not one of those people who jumps on the "Disney is trying to brainwash us with SJW propaganda" bandwagon, but yes, it's well documented at this point that Brie Larson has made a complete ass of herself.
I still like Disney, even though they have had some nuts under their employ like that Windig fellow they had to let go of. My point wasn't even about the feminism or SJW stuff but how she's so terrible it's glaringly obvious in interviews that about none of her castmembers want anything to do with her. Not much of a conspiracist, but I do think any time Cheadle has had to defend her online was done through clenched teeth.
I think trying to psychoanalyze her because of promo interviews is in poor taste. There are plenty of decent people who give shit interviews, and an equal amount of awful human beings who can automatically command charisma when asked questions. It's like thinking Mark Hamill hates Disney by judging his facial tics in interviews and ignoring the times he's defended their decisions on Star Wars.
There's a good YouTube video (I'll try to find a link after work) that breaks down why her interviews are so cringe-worthy without using any click-baity SJW shenanigans. It presents it more as her inability to properly convey sarcasm or indicate when she's joking, and how some of her comments come off as more defensive or venomous than she probably means due to her delivery being off.
Her now infamous interview sitting between Chris Hemsworth and Don Cheadle is a perfect example of this.
(https://i.imgur.com/PvfVQNu.png)
In case you somehow wanted Segata Sanshiro's thoughts on Endgame.
You know, the other day I stumbled on a Japanese YouTuber's video on Endgame, and was kind of surprised to see how many people in the comments section highlighted Captain America lifting Thor's Hammer to be one of their biggest highlight scenes next to "I Am Iron Man."
Also, Segata Sanshiro would one-shot Thanos.
Watching this interview with the IW/Endgame writers, and they were apparently preparing for the scenario where audiences would groan at the Battle of Wakanda in case Black Panther had a poor reception. (https://youtu.be/GsnkAMUIODA?t=1425)
Have the closest we'll get to a Spider-Man/Daredevil/Deadpool crossover. (https://youtu.be/JE6nrwxvcEM?t=133)
In case you wanted to read the script to a Beast movie Fox was considering before the buyout. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/custom2/X-MEN%20Fear%20The%20Beast%20.pdf)
Marvel and Sony should make an Into the Jameson-Verse movie next.
I'm also now processing the fact that this is the third Spider-Man 2 that we've had just 15 years.
Movie was fun, though I think I prefer Homecoming overall. I'd say that this is maybe tied with Raimi's Spider-Man 1 for me (though if I had to pick between the two, nostalgia would allow for the the original to win out), but compared to Spider-Verse and Spider-Man 2, this is still a far cry from the best the franchise has to offer. Still, I'd say that this is a genuinely entertaining MCU movie and a much better light-hearted follow-up to a heavy event movie like Endgame than Antman & The Wasp was to Infinity War.
Spider-Man 1 is so good, I love Willem Dafoe in it. :swoon:
The Raimi trilogy is interesting to me since my opinion on it completely flip-flopped....twice. I was 12 when I saw the first Spider-Man and it was pretty much one of my favorite movies ever at the time. In general I loved the whole trilogy since I was at the prime age for it. Then, in my early forum days I turned on the movies somewhat because that was a popular thing to do and I had a habit of blindly following stupid trends. These days, though, I appreciate them more than ever. I don't think they were flawless by any stretch, but I have really learned to admire Raimi's craft and his film-making sensibilities. There are a lot more dynamic shots, interesting use of lighting, and generally more well-organized production design than what you get in most modern blockbusters, or hell, even most blockbusters back then. I also have come to really appreciate the tone of those movies as well as the clear love that Raimi has for the source material, putting a ton of heart and soul into the characters and overall feel of the film, which makes up a lot for some of the worse actors (looking at Kirsten Dunst and James Franco specifically), including in the third film. Also, Alfred Molina as Otto Octavius is still the best movie Spider-Man villain to date, IMO.
That said, I'm sick of the side of the Raimi fan-base that shuns literally any other on-screen interpretation of the character.
My thoughts are almost exactly the same as yours, right down to turning on them temporarily because of blindly following trends! (Or maybe I just had bad taste for a while.) Now that I'm older and can look at them objectively, I really like all three of them. They're some of the only big budget blockbusters to really have the filmmaker's DNA in them - Raimi's penchant for exuberance and camp shines through brilliantly, and they provide a unique interpretation on the character that stays true to his roots while also taking many liberties with the source material. Spider-Man 1 is endlessly entertaining and quotable for me; it's still the gold standard for how to do an origin story in my book, and even its gaffes (like when the "Spider-Man" carrying Mary Jane is obviously a mannequin attached to a wire) add to the experience in a lovable way. Spider-Man 2 drags a little at points but is a genuinely wonderful movie, easily the most earnest superhero film of its era and still one of the purest to this day (only matched or exceeded by The First Avenger and Into The Spider-Verse from what I've seen). Spider-Man 3 is definitely an oddity, but I've grown to love how unabashedly corny and downright bizarre it is; the Evil Peter dancing scenes are incredible and I will go to my death for them.
Alfred Molina
is excellent as Doc Ock. Whoever cast him and J.K. Simmons as Jameson was an absolute genius.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 03, 2019, 03:48:54 PM
That said, I'm sick of the side of the Raimi fan-base that shuns literally any other on-screen interpretation of the character.
Definitely agree here too. The best on-screen Spider-Man is definitely the one from Spectacular Spider-Man for me (if that counts), but honestly I liked Andrew Garfield a lot too. The Amazing Spider-Man movies aren't "amazing" (har har) but the chemistry between him and Emma Stone was ridiculous, I loved seeing them together in all their terrible awkwardness. I have yet to see Homecoming or its sequel yet, though, so I can't comment on that.
I really like Tom Holland as Spider-Man, personally, but as for the movies your enjoyment of them may vary depending on whether or not you mind your Spider-Man stories having strong ties to a larger fictional Universe. Not that the movies don't tell stand-alone stories, but Peter's character arc is tied to other MCU movies and characters.
Namely, Tony Stark is sort of a mentor figure to him and kind of his Uncle Ben equivalent for this Universe. That's very polarizing for a lot of people, but I'm personally fine with it since to me Uncle Ben was always more of a role model in Peter's life that is a staple of the character as opposed to a fully realized character himself. So it doesn't ruin anything to give another character a similar role. Couple that with the fact that we already had two on-screen interpretations of Ben through two different iterations of the franchise, so I can understand why Marvel would want to try something different. Also, the people complaining about Spider-Man being in Iron Man's shadow in his own movie are full of it and the same people who can't except different interpretations of the character. Tony Stark has a cumulative 8-minutes of screen time in Homecoming and only appearances in brief flashbacks in Far From Home. Not really sure how that qualifies as overshadowing.
One thing I will say is that while you don't need to have seen Civil War to enjoy Spider-Man: Homecoming, the events of Infinity War and Endgame are pretty imperative to Far From Home, so I'm not sure how skipping those would affect one's viewing experience of it, though it'd still be easy enough to follow in regard to the story.
Chris Claremont offers his ideas on how he would have handled the X-Men movies after DOFP. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0YY2wfVCaI&feature=youtu.be&t=32m20s) Short answer: It would have been more interesting, but much more confusing.
So, after carefully considering it, here are my rankings of all eight Spider-Man movies so far:
8. The Amazing Spider-Man 2- I should make it clear that I don't actually hate any Spider-Man movie that has been produced so far. That includes this movie, which is bad, but far from unwatchable. I don't see a point in dwelling on it though since it's clearly obvious why it's bad, and while it suffers from similar problems to Spider-Man 3, it also lacks a lot of the heart of that movie which elevated it a bit. As it stands, it has a few really well-acted and emotional moments in it, keeping it from feeling like a complete waste, but it doesn't really have anything else to offer besides.
7. The Amazing Spider-Man- This doesn't have as many issues as it's sequel, but it does still suffer from being overly safe and conventional to the point of being kind of boring. I do like the casting of this movie and feel as though Andrew Garfield makes for a decent Spider-Man, and it's a shame that he didn't get better material to work with, but overall this movie feels inoffensive but also kind of hollow and lacking in personality.
6. Spider-Man 3- I do still defend this movie to an extent. It has a lot of clear issues, but even so, it still works for me on an emotional level for the big character moments as well as on a comedic level when you just learn to accept Raimi's trademark campiness for what it is.
5. Spider-Man: Far From Home- This is the most recent one yet and, overall, I really enjoyed it. That said the plot does feel like a mess, and I do feel like it wastes a lot of good opportunities to capitalize on some big character moments. The film-making here also feels a tad plain like with the ASM movies. It's a fun movie for sure, but aside from a few scenes, not the most memorable.
4. Spider-Man- This one was pretty much tied with Far From Home for a while, but I gave it the clear edge after a re-watch. While it does have some issues and dated elements to it, the overall package is undeniably entertaining, and the actual film-making here is well-crafted and makes Raimi's personality shine through. Also, Danny Elfman's score is second to none.
3. Spider-Man: Homecoming - This is just a really good high-school film, first and foremost. Far From Home was trying to do the same but kind of lost track of that somewhere in the mix, but Homecoming successfully takes the Peter Parker character and interprets him through the lens of something like a John Hughes film. The end result is something really different for the character but no less appealing, and while the film-making is still a little safe and unspectacular, the performances and tone really make up for it, IMO.
2. Spider-Man 2: Still the best live-action Spider-Man movie, and I feel like a complete moron for ever turning on it. This movie single-handedly captures both the greatness and tragedy of a character like Spider-Man better than any of the other movies to date, while also capitalizing on everything Raimi did well in the first movie except even better here.
1. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse- Yeah, I know we have at least one person here who hates Lord and Miller :humhumhum: ; but having their influence as producers (and one of them being a co-writer) on this film aside, this movie more than any other really encapsulated the Spider-Man mythos of how anyone, no matter how common or from any walk of life, has the potential to be a hero. And the creative use of animation in combination with the unique but inspired story-telling style of this movie that can only come about from this medium really elevates the whole experience for me. I just watched it for the fourth time last night, and it gets better with every viewing. And on top of all of that, it not only successfully introduces the character of Miles Morales to the mainstream, but also gives me perhaps my favorite on-screen interpretation of Peter Parker to date in a movie (The Spectacular Spider-Man animated series still takes the top spot for me, though).
Spider-Verse is the best superhero movie of all time IMO, and discounting the MCU films (which I haven't seen), I'd say my list would be exactly the same as yours, though I might actually swap SM 1 and 2 depending on my mood.
Announced for Phase 4:
(https://cdn1us.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeekus/files/styles/main_wide/public/2019/07/marvel-blade-release-date-cast.jpg)
Wonder what Wesley Snipes thinks of this.
Anyways, most excited for Thor: Love and Thunder, and was genuinely surprised to hear that Natalie Portman is back and that they will be doing a version of Jane Foster Thor.
I'm really hoping that the Loki mini-series will be drawing heavily from the Journey into Mystery and Agent of Asgard runs.
Happy to hear that the Black Widow movie is very similar in style and tone to The Winter Soldier. Speaking of which, while I like both characters, I'm a bit cautious about The Falcon and Winter Soldier mini-series because I'm not really convinced of either of them as leads, yet.
Doctor Strange 2 and WandaVision were both things that I was kind of "eh" about but admittedly my interest was piqued at finding out that they would be heavily connected projects and that while WandaVision will go for a weird and surreal feel to it, Doctor Strange: The Multiverse of Madness will aim to be a straight up horror movie. Granted, the insistence on sticking to PG-13 kind of botches that intention for me, but I am at least curious.
They should have called it Thour. :kabapu:
Quote from: Foggle on July 21, 2019, 01:58:42 PMThey should have called it Thour. :kabapu:
:il_rope:
These were a pretty good set of announcements. I'm surprised at how excited I am for the new Doctor Strange, but like EK, the title is too cool to ignore, as is the idea of a horror take on the character. The first movie didn't do much for me aside from the odd bits of surrealism, especially at the end, which I'm really hoping this one has much more of.
I wonder if we'll hear more about the future of Black Panther, Guardians, and Spider-Man at D23, as well as more about their Fantastic Four and X-Men plans. I'd personally like to see the former as a Disney+ series, and could wait until Phase 5 for the latter.
Oh, and I finally got around to seeing Far From Home last week. I enjoyed it, about as much as Homecoming, although I don't think that all of the humor worked as well as it did in the former film. But I really did like Mysterio, especially his own surrealistic moments. And while I'm generally not a big fan of Tony stealing Peter's thunder in these movies, I do like the ties to previous Iron Man films. It was also nice to spend more time with Fury and Hill, since besides their brief parts in the last Avengers movies, we haven't really seen either of them in years.
Also, that cameo at the end. :awesome:
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2019, 09:18:43 AMWonder what Wesley Snipes thinks of this.
He made a statement. (https://twitter.com/wesleysnipes/status/1153754102934884352)
Jack Saint tries to tackle the universal themes of the MCU and the often self-defeating ideologies within Tony's character. (https://youtu.be/bPlag_PvqAk)
Andy Serkis has been confirmed to direct the Venom sequel. Interesting choice, I suppose.
Spider-Man could be leaving the MCU (https://variety.com/2019/film/news/spider-man-mcu-sony-disney-agreement-1203308069)
Some people are pissed off about this. Others are ecstatic. I'm just here for the drama. I want to see Disney and Sony have a metaphorical slap fight with each other protracted over several years that ends in both parties burning shittons of money and good will. :kabapu:
Quote from: Foggle on August 20, 2019, 06:53:15 PM
Some people are pissed off about this. Others are ecstatic. I'm just here for the drama. I want to see Disney and Sony have a metaphorical slap fight with each other protracted over several years that ends in both parties burning shittons of money and good will. :kabapu:
A slap fight would only either cost or complicate the jobs of people in both companies, and lead to an arms race that could further amplify a monopoly. I don't see that benefiting anyone involved.
To be honest I feel like the MCU had a pretty fantastic finale in Endgame. It was a strong run and we can always say we had the Infinity Saga. So I'm frankly not that interested in continuity anymore but would rather see them do more experimental, trippy films based on more outlandish properties in Marvel's backlog. Like, to para-phrase Star Lord from GotG 2: Make some weird shit, Marvel. Like, I'd prefer a Moon Knight movie that stylistically adapts the run started by Warren Ellis in 2013 than the next X-Men movie, if I'm being honest (granted I'd still watch the latter, of course).
While it honestly doesn't bother me that much if we don't get another Spider-Man MCU movie, I will admit that it's going to be super awkward to see how they manage to skirt around THAT wallop of a cliffhanger that they left off on in Far From Home. It's going to be kind of hard to pretend like it just never happened.
I'm honestly kind of indifferent towards the news. Holland and Watts are still contracted to keep their roles, so that'll be good (although I can take or leave Watts as the director), but they just won't be tying into Marvel's films. If this means that we'll get an actual Spider-Man film from them, and not another appendix towards the MCU, I'm curious. But Sony also hasn't shown that they really know what to do with the character, Spiderverse aside, so I don't have a lot of faith.
Quote from: Avaitor on August 20, 2019, 08:04:13 PMI'm honestly kind of indifferent towards the news. Holland and Watts are still contracted to keep their roles, so that'll be good (although I can take or leave Watts as the director), but they just won't be tying into Marvel's films. If this means that we'll get an actual Spider-Man film from them, and not another appendix towards the MCU, I'm curious. But Sony also hasn't shown that they really know what to do with the character, Spiderverse aside, so I don't have a lot of faith.
I mean, regardless of what people thought of MCU Spider-Man, having the rights revert back to Sony is hardly cause for excitement. Spider-Verse is great because Lord and Miller got to do their thing since the higher-up Sony execs don't take their own animation department seriously, so it's kind of whatever as long as it makes them money. Avi Arad still has his greasy fingers all over the live-action flicks, though. Regardless of any missteps he might make, I'd still take Feige over Arad any day.
Throwback to this clip. (https://youtu.be/KkdS2ZuzzcY)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 20, 2019, 07:46:24 PM
Quote from: Foggle on August 20, 2019, 06:53:15 PM
Some people are pissed off about this. Others are ecstatic. I'm just here for the drama. I want to see Disney and Sony have a metaphorical slap fight with each other protracted over several years that ends in both parties burning shittons of money and good will. :kabapu:
A slap fight would only either cost or complicate the jobs of people in both companies, and lead to an arms race that could further amplify a monopoly. I don't see that benefiting anyone involved.
I mean, it's not up to me what two of the richest corporations in the world do when they get petty over IP rights. I feel bad for anyone whose livelihood is affected by this but at the end of the day it's down to net billionaires getting cranky at each other for not coughing up enough millions over a comic book character. Certainly it won't hurt people in the industry more than Disney buying Fox and cancelling hundreds of film projects in development did.
Quote from: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/stan-lees-daughter-sides-with-sony-in-spider-man-spat-with-disney.html"When my father died, no one from Marvel or Disney reached out to me," Lee said. "From day one, they have commoditized my father's work and never shown him or his legacy any respect or decency. In the end, no one could have treated my father worse than Marvel and Disney's executives."
Yikes...
I'm finding it difficult to trust her words considering she was also accused of elder abuse of her father a couple years ago. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/stan-lee-needs-a-hero-elder-abuse-claims-a-battle-aging-marvel-creator-1101229)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EClO4fnVAAAZNN6.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EClO4fmUIAA6gSo.jpg)
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 23, 2019, 01:11:56 AM
I'm finding it difficult to trust her words considering she was also accused of elder abuse of her father a couple years ago. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/stan-lee-needs-a-hero-elder-abuse-claims-a-battle-aging-marvel-creator-1101229)
Should've included this since it's apparently not common knowledge:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/video/stan-lee-sets-record-straight-relationship-daughter-jc-friend-keya-morgan-1101155
According to Stan himself, the accusations were bullshit concocted by the accuser in question, who was the one
really abusing him.
And the person who filmed that video was arrested on elder abuse. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/marvel-comics-mogul-stan-lee-s-former-manager-keya-morgan-n1010326)
Incredible.
It looks like his daughter never sided with the guy who filmed the video, at least, though who knows if he was lying in it. Unless proven that he was forced to say those things, it doesn't exonerate Disney in my eyes, though I do believe that Kevin Feige never had ill intentions at the very least.
Unfortunately, it's not hard to believe that one of the most famous elderly men in the world would be abused by his friends and family, as well as the company that owns his intellectual property, all at once.
Watched Dark Phoenix. You know what's funny? Jean never actually turns into the Dark Phoenix. The one or two innocent people she kills are completely by accident. Even though the X-Men have costumes this time, there's no visual indication the Phoenix Force makes her a different person either. And despite promises the movie would be more "Cosmic X-Men" than the Singer movies, it gets really gray and earthly dull after the space opening. X3 was more bombastic, the movie this was meant to be an apology for. How does that happen?
And what was the deal with the villain? Years ago, I used to think one of the pluses the X-Men films had over the MCU was better villains, a view that largely became outdated when Apocalypse came out. So it's almost poetic that on the same time we see Thanos get his due, X-Men gives us a complete waste of Jessica Chastain. She makes Sigourney Weaver's character in Defenders look cool. And according to behind the scenes reports I read, they kept changing her character's name because even they had no clue who she was supposed to be. Resulting in a vague fusion of Emma Frost and Lilandra who commands an army of Skrulls.
I liked the subway fight though. Really wish that could have been in a better X-Men movie.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on September 22, 2019, 09:52:18 AMWatched Dark Phoenix. You know what's funny? Jean never actually turns into the Dark Phoenix. The one or two innocent people she kills are completely by accident. Even though the X-Men have costumes this time, there's no visual indication the Phoenix Force makes her a different person either. And despite promises the movie would be more "Cosmic X-Men" than the Singer movies, it gets really gray and earthly dull after the space opening. X3 was more bombastic, the movie this was meant to be an apology for. How does that happen?
Apparently the entire third act as well as other stuff in the movie, which was supposed to contain more cosmic stuff, was entirely scrapped and re-written/shot to take place on a train because the original ending bore too much of a similarity to Captain Marvel. One has to imagine that, while the Disney/FOX deal was still in negotiations during the production of this movie, that decision still must have been influenced by Disney as I can't imagine FOX executives wanting to waste the time and money to re-shoot part of a film that was clearly doomed to disappoint at the box office either way.
I honestly have to say that, while the FOX-Men movies have been wildly inconsistent and all-over-the place in terms of quality, I'm kind of going to miss seeing an alternate interpretation of traditional superheroes in comic book movies. That is to say that, while I enjoy the more unabashedly over-the-top comic book aesthetic of the MCU and the post-Snyder DCEU, it was nice to have a mix of more realistic takes on these characters and Universes that didn't have to be restrained so much in style to fit in continuity with a cinematic Universe. While this could age poorly in some cases like with the original X-Men or Daredevil, it could also lead to great films like with The Dark Knight, First Class, or Logan. Both styles of superhero movies complemented one another and made the genre feel more varied, IMO. While I've personally never had an issue with the uniformity of MCU movies since to me it's a serialized story at heart, I do find myself agreeing with the sentiment that it'd be a lot more of an issue if that's the only style we got from the genre.
That is to say that I'm fine with most of my MCU movies being lighthearted and fun. I do want other stuff as well, though, and I'm wondering if Feige will really go in that direction with his take on X-Men or not. That's one reason I'm actually looking forward to Joker. If it's as good as early buzz suggests, and does well, it'll be an encouragement for producers to allow for some more riskier takes from time to time. After all, isn't that how superhero comics evolved in the first place?
Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, and other writers and artists introduced characters with (relatively) more realistic problems and consequences to their actions than typical superheroes of the time. Writers like Roy Thomas and Dennis O'Neil took classic superheroes into surprisingly dark territory for the time proving that these stories could challenge the conventions of the CCA and expose young readers to somewhat more mature subject matter. And people like Alan Moore and Grant Morrison really explored what the medium of comic books were capable of by not being afraid to get weird and really tackle high-concept stories that couldn't be replicated by anyone but themselves. All of these writers and their works were highly influential on what came after them. While not everything they wrote or influenced was great, it kept the genre alive in that medium by always surprising readers about what these supposedly silly cape comics were capable of when applying new ideas to them.
After a hugely successful run of very entertaining but formulaic MCU movies, I'd really like the genre to take some more risks now. New superhero flicks should try to surpass what came before them rather than just recycle them and play it safe.
I think one of the issues and charms of the X-Men movies is that because they started since 2000 and are only going to end whenever New Mutants gets leaked/released, they've had to go up against three distinct eras of superhero movies. The first two X-Men films were meant to wash away the bad image superhero movies had gotten from critical failures like Batman & Robin, Judge Dredd, and Steel. And it's very easy to forget now, but that iteration of the X-Men became what plenty of people imagined the X-Men to be like in pop culture. But then they had to compete with the Raimi Spider-Man films and the Nolan trilogy, and combined with Singer leaving, the X-Men became far easier to make fun of for their overuse of Wolverine, refusal to dress any characters is anything but black or grey, and lines like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M6ZFEkkM2Q). Then once the MCU got big, Fox was divided on either chasing their coattails or going against the grain like the earlier films did but with better directors like Vaughn and Mangold. And I'm not sure how that would have worked out in the long run even if Disney never bought Fox. That Gambit film was probably always going to rot in development hell no matter what.
Maybe Dark Phoenix's critical and box office failure would have convinced Fox to shift the X-Men franchise yet again. Another thing I noticed about DP was there were plenty of scenes featuring group shots of the cast with a huge empty space between characters seemingly meant for Logan. Like there's a scene at the Cerebro set where Mystique and Beast are standing really far apart from each other, with dead air between their dialogue too as if someone was meant to be talking but got muted, and it's almost like the original script had Wolverine but instead of rewriting the scene they just erased all of his lines and scene directions without changing anyone else's. I'm probably blindly speculating there because it's not like I have Dark Phoenix's rough draft in my hands, but for all the moldbreaking we got from Logan and the Deadpool films, the mainline X-Men movies got trapped into their own formula. Charles and Erik fight each other then make amends and play chess. Mystique does something stupid. Characters like Cyclops, Storm, Nightcrawler, and Quicksilver do absolutely nothing beyond a couple scenes. For all the claims from Fox this film would push the boundaries, it felt way too familiar.
Spidey's back! (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spider-man-shocker-disney-sony-striking-deal-new-movie-1243777)
That took like, what, a month and a quarter? Shorter than the James Gunn fiasco.
Got around to watching Joker. Joaquin Phoenix was great as usual. I'll admit a lot of the memes surrounding the film made it hard to take some moments seriously, but I thought it was fine. It just never goes beyond "Let's paint Taxi Driver in clown makeup".
And all the dance sequences were dumb.
Yeah, it's an adequate version of The King of Comedy for people unfamiliar with actual Scorcese films, with Phoenix's performance being the one thing that helps elevate it. To be clear, I think it's a decent flick, if a bit overhyped (in much the same way that Black Panther was).
Speaking of Scorcese, I'm not quite sure why people are getting so worked up about his comments on superhero movies. At this point he's like, what, the 500th celebrity to say they aren't real movies? I just figured most people would be used to it by now and move on. Or, maybe I've just learned to roll with any general negativity toward the genre and just hold to my own opinions regardless. I mean, Scorcese is one of my favorite filmmakers of all time, but it doesn't mean that I have to agree with everything he says. I also don't have to get worked up about it, either.
I don't get it either. Scorsese's never been a blockbuster guy anyway, so anybody getting mad at his views or getting mad at people getting mad at his views should calm down.
The more I've been thinking about the movie, I've been seeing some more issues. The film heavily subscribes to the "one bad day" theory The Killing Joke gave as to why the Joker turned evil, even though the comic itself refutes that idea and treats it with disdain that a bad day can turn anyone into a crazed serial killer. It's also interesting to note that the idea of the Joker being the product of an abusive mother was previously a plot point from Gotham, as well as the director's suggestion that the Joker in this film is actually a proto-Joker who inspires the real Joker later in the line. I still thought the film was all right, but it gives very simplistic reasons why someone can turn into a psycho. Saying Arthur could have lived a happier life with less bloodshed if people were more kind to him is too much of a captain obvious message, instead of the intricate character study it was propped up as.
Besides Scorsese movies and a couple of Batman media, Joker obviously takes some cues from real life serial killers like Edmund Kemper, Ed Gein, and John Wayne Gacy. But the thing is, if you read up their biographies, there were a web of clues since their childhood they'd turn to senseless murder. It's not as simple as "Their mom didn't support them and society treated them like shit". Most criminals don't have an on switch flicked on as soon as something horrible happens to them.
That's why I say it feels like "Baby's First Scorcese-esque Film." It understands the outline of what a Scorcese psychological drama looks like but contains almost none of the nuance. Any layers that are there are due almost entirely to Phoenix's performance than anything in the actual script. The score and cinematography help sell that aspect of the movie as well even though the writing doesn't earn it. The problem is that unlike characters like Travis from Taxi Driver or Rupert from The King of Comedy, the world surrounding Arthur is pretty clear cut black and white. While one could argue that's only because the film is told from his perspective, the issue with that defense is that the same exact thing is true of those other two films and their main characters. The difference is that they still manage to convey far more ambiguity than anything in Joker while still largely keeping their stories set firmly from their star character's point of view.
Yeah, there are too many "Oh, look how much Arthur's life sucks" moments in the movie, almost like the movie's holding a neon sign pointing at you to feel bad about Arthur. The director can say these scenes could potentially be hallucinations in Arthur's head like Zazie Beetz's character was, but I think that's a copout. You can't just say "Oh, maybe Thomas Wayne actually used his billionaire connections to falsify the adoption records and make Penny Fleck look insane. You never thought that? Hmm?", because how far does that go until you can suggest every scene in the movie's a hallucination from Arthur's viewpoint? Instead of creating ambiguity, it only implies the creator had no conviction in their scenes and throws out ideas or interpretations that really should have been in the film instead of blurted out in press interviews.
It goes back to how dumb it is to give the Joker a backstory. Despite popularizing the idea, The Killing Joke scorned the concept and preferred a multiple choice past for the Joker. Episodes of the animated series like Mad Love make fun of the theory of Joker being the product of an abusive childhood, especially telling when a show made for all ages mocks the same idea that an R-rated film sincerely embraces. Giving Joker a sympathetic backstory is like giving Hannibal Lecter or Michael Myers sympathetic backstories. And if the movie wasn't lucky enough to have Joaquin Phoenix, we likely would have gotten something like Rob Zombie's Halloween instead.
So, while I'm pretty much desensitized to other filmmakers taking shots at Marvel or the genre in general at this point, I was rather amused by Crispin Glover's take that this was all current Hollywood propaganda. It's especially funny how many desperate haters want to jump on that bandwagon without realizing that Crispin Glover has a notorious history of finding propaganda in all kinds of media going back well over a decade. He literally thinks that the alien invasion from The Avengers is subliminal messaging to get people on board with America taking on foreign powers. It's actually kind of hilarious how committed he is to his "conspiracy" theories.
(https://preview.redd.it/6dhidlmdwks31.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=bfddff5721f1e11f1bc1291c3e70ec6edcdb5ca9)
It's a matter of when now.
Well, since I've seen a bunch of people online do it, here's my top 10 superhero flicks of the decade:
10. Deadpool 2
9. Shazam!
8. Avengers: Infinity War
7. Guardians of the Galaxy
6. Thor: Ragnarok
5. X-Men: First Class
4. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
3. Captain America: The First Avenger
2. Logan
1. Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse
With X-Men I flip-flopped between First Class and DOFP until re-watching both last year and deciding that First Class edges it out slightly due to Reeves being an overall better director than Singer (IMO). Still love both, though.
Likewise, Infinity War could have easily gone to Joss Whedon's The Avengers, but I found the sequel to have just a bit more re-watch value for me, personally. The first to Cap movies are the ones where I had to absolutely have both on the list.
Spider-Verse and Logan were no brainers. Shazam! really grew on me a lot since I first saw the early screening, and I've watched it three times now. It's the perfect Superhero take on a classic style family movie.
Great list, though I haven't seen Shazam, Infinity War, or Ragnarok yet (I know, I know). My top 5 would be almost exactly the same but with Deadpool 2 instead of First Class. The "Super Duper Cut" on the home video release is a huge improvement over the theatrical version (which I already really liked) IMO.
I'd recommend giving Ragnarok a shot if Taika Waititi's style of humor is up your alley. Obviously humor is subjective, but it really works for me. I wouldn't even worry too much about having seen any of the previous Thor movies. Ragnarok literally makes a joke out of how disposable and inconsequential the first two movies were right from the beginning (in fact there are a number of people who hate it for that very reason).
Also, JoJo Rabbit was pretty great in that regard as well, which I also strongly recommend.
Also, Shazam! was really fun. I'd say it was the closest thing in tone that I've seen to the Raimi Spider-Man movies since that trilogy ended.
I love Taika Waititi and I'm definitely gonna watch Ragnarok someday! I hope to catch JoJo Rabbit before it leaves theaters as well, and I'll get around to Shazam and the last two Avengers movies eventually too. I'm just in a weird place with movies lately and haven't been watching very many. :(
That's a pretty damn good list. I'm not sure what mine would look like, but my top 5 would probably have Logan (as #1, nat), the first Avengers, Black Panther, the first Guardians, and either Winter Soldier or Deadpool 2.
Based off all the casting, with Jesus from The Big Lebowski as Carmine Faldone, either the RPattz Batman movie is a Long Halloween adaptation or they're throwing random villains on the screen and hoping one will work. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-casts-john-turturro-as-crime-boss-carmine-falcone-1257437?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral) Guess we'll have to wait until Reeves casts somebody as Two-Face to see if that's the case.
You know, for as good as Marvel has been about designing their movie costumes to look aesthetically practical, I've got to say that Red Guarduan looks kind of absurd in a movie with characters wearing relatively much tamer attire. I also kind of love that, though, and going by the trailer it's intentional since he seems to be played as over-the-top compared to everyone else.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK3WohRUYAAIW5Q.jpg)
He's like the bizarro counterpart of Peter from Deadpool 2.
I'm just hoping that he has an equivalent to "I can do this all day." You don't put Red Guardian in there without making a joke about how he's Captain America's Russian counterpart.
Ryan Reynolds has confirmed Deadpool 3. (https://variety.com/2019/film/news/deadpool-3-confimed-ryan-reynolds-1203452448)
And it might be part of the MCU.
I totally forgot that this movie was even happening: https://youtu.be/9eQBl3_6FKA
Also, Vulture is in it....MCU Vulture. I'd love to know Kevin Feige's honest feelings about this. :sly:
(https://i.gifer.com/5aIM.gif)
If this actually happens, it'd do a lot to reignite my excitement for the next Doctor Strange movie: https://variety.com/2020/film/news/doctor-strange-2-sam-raimi-1203475309/amp/
New Mutants is The Day The Clown Cried of superhero movies. (https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1238221215677984773)
A bunch of crybabies on Twitter got their wish.
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19989788/unnamed.jpg)
Yep.
Well, let's hope they shut up and that we'll never have to hear about Snyder again.
You know they won't. We'll hear them demanding Justice League 2 and Justice League 3 to complete Snyder's 5-film plan.
R.I.P. Joel Schumacher (https://variety.com/2020/film/news/joel-schumacher-dead-dies-batman-director-1234644961)
Guess Keaton might be Batman again. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/michael-keaton-talks-return-as-batman-flash-movie-1299668)
Count me in the camp that wanted him to return for a live-action Batman Beyond movie. I mean, I'll enjoy seeing Keaton in the role regardless so long as he doesn't pull a Bruce Willis in reprising an old role, but still, it's a huge missed opportunity in my book.
Still, I think it's cool to see something like this happen. Now if only we could get another Tobey Maguire Spider-Man appearance. I mean, with Sam Raimi doing the next Doctor Strange film which leans heavily into the Multiverse, and if Disney and Sony decided to play nice beyond their current deal....just saying, y'know. :sly:
I've asked this before, but I've got no idea why Bruce Willis hasn't retired. He exudes either complete apathy or loathing in almost everything he's been in since the last decade or so. And he's made enough money that his great-grandchildren can live like kings without working a day in their lives. Must be out of habit.
Also curious that DC's just given up on embargoes. We had four live-action Bruce Waynes show up last year. Now it's Keaton Batman and Pattinson Batman and whoever's the Arrowverse Batman appearing in the same time frame. A far cry from the days when they wouldn't let Batman characters appear in JLU because The Batman called dibs.
My local theater just recently re-opened, albeit to limited capacity, and only playing older movies for now. That said they were playing the original Avengers as one of their features this week, which I just went to go see. I mainly just wanted to go back to the cinema again since I miss the experience, but man this movie is always a treat for me. I can safely say after 8 full years that this movie still holds up and deserves to he remembered as fondly as it does.
Nice!
My nearest theater has reopened, and they're mostly showing older features right now (by older I mean from the 80's to very recently), but there's nothing enticing me to go out. I'm slightly curious about the Sonic movie, which they have, but that's not really worth the risk rn.
It was the 20th anniversary of the first X-Men movie last week. One that started a roller-coaster of quality featuring some of the best and worst superhero movies of all time, with a director who shall not be named thanks to his actions including instances on the set of some of his films, and thanks to numerous issues, technically hasn't ended its legacy yet until New Mutants finally sees the light of day. Found an article discussing what went into making the film that interview Hayter, Donner, Janssen, and Winter. (https://observer.com/2020/07/x-men-anniversary-fox-marvel-superhero-movies-kevin-feige/) And some YouTubers made video essays talking about their favorite scenes throughout the whole series. (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLd7v7nQLQGwLFOPGk1QPEBJr6D9F2yUnq)
The X-Men movies are consistently inconsistent, but I'll always have a soft spot for them. It's just kind of cool how they've always done their own thing and only occasionally taken some trends from other comic book franchises. While it's hard to defend movies like Origins and Apocalypse, you won't see the MCU or even DCEU pull off a Logan or Days of Future Past.
I won't lie, I also have a soft spot for FOX's X-MEN movies, at least the better ones. In the past I'd say that X2 was my favorite, but over time my favorite shifted over to First Class, which I think is genuinely a great superhero movie, not just a good X-MEN movie. And yeah, in that regard, FOX never truly captured the spirit of the comics, but I hate it when people use that to dismiss any of these movies as being lesser films simply because they aren't perfect as adaptations. While they don't necessarily get all the details right, I'd argue that the higher quality ones get the main themes down, and on top of that are just good pieces of cinema in and of themselves. Viewed as a stand-alone story, First Class is an interesting take on an alternate version of history in which mutants were involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis behind the scenes. It's just such a fucking awesome concept that you wouldn't see any other big franchise flicks ever trying to attempt. It doesn't hurt that it has top-notch writing, directing, and acting, and a truly underrated score by Henry Jackman (who also had a good score for The Winter Soldier).
Meanwhile, the first two movies may be somewhat dated, but they work as really well-made science fiction stories, while DOFP and the Deadpool movies are solid blockbusters in their own right. And then there's Logan which is such a unique entity in the genre that just couldn't exist in any other franchise due to the unique circumstances of this franchise's history and missteps with FOX. For all of the duds and negatives, there's also some genuine brilliance that shouldn't be overlooked or forgotten about.
Yeah, while they were never faithful to the comics, it clearly wasn't their intent to begin with. It was to take stories from the comics and re-imagine them in an early 2000s climate, which lasted even after the films stopped taking place in the present day and went from period piece to future tale and back again. And while that didn't lend favors to many X-Men characters I like, there are a dozen I can name that got the short straw, it's cool in a way that for an entire generation of people, their mental image of Wolverine is Hugh Jackman in a wifebeater.
The funny thing is that even comic book fans who don't like the movies still tend to admit to liking Hugh Jackman's take on the character. It's become so iconic to the point where it may be in the MCU's best interest to wait until at least a few more years before introducing their version of Wolverine into the MCU to avoid too many direct comparisons.
There are plenty of X-Men elements the MCU will have to avoid or subvert for a while without avoiding comparisons to the old movies. It'll be exceedingly difficult to find anybody who can fit Charles and Erik the same way Stewart and McKellen or McAvoy and Fassbender did. And obviously, they've salted the earth on stories like the Dark Phoenix saga. Honestly don't know how they should approach it. Can't do a straightforward "Cyclops and the team fight the Brotherhood" plot without looking stale, but you can't go for any wild E for Extinction or House of X/Powers of X adaptations without a lot of setup first.
I know one of the writers of some of the previous MCU movies suggested updating the character of Magneto to be a survivor of the Rwanda Genocide instead of the Holocaust. Some people of course don't like the idea of changing his Jewish heritage, while others are just man-babies who think putting any person of color in a prominent role is automatically making it woke. Personally, though, I think that idea makes a lot of sense. For one thing it would kind of be impossible at this point to make a threatening version of Magneto as a Holocaust survivor for how old he'd have to be by now. Meanwhile, the essential aspects of what makes the character who he is at his core would still be there in the other proposed version. Plus, the MCU would have the added benefit of being different enough from both FOX iterations of the character to be seen more as it's own thing. This is a completely different Universe, after all.
Yeah, the thing about X-Men is that it's meant to be an allegory for social division and bigotry, and with a series meant to last indefinitely, that means finding more recent sources of division and hatred to mine from. Sometimes the message is too vague to mean anything, (https://i.imgur.com/7pvLIBh.jpg) sometimes too self-defeating, (https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/1/15659/1711243-kaga_astonishingx_men_motivation.jpg) but it's still there in the best X-Men stories. Logan did end with him helping a group of Mexican-born mutants cross a border. And fortunately for X-Men but unfortunately in real life, there are no small number of recent genocides to base Magneto from.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgDElZiXoAAqj0j?format=jpg&name=medium)
Matt Reeves' The Crow looks pretty good.
Trailer's Out: https://youtu.be/WbUEueLx-eU
Hey, I'm not gonna lie, I dug The Batman trailer. I've mostly been a fan of Mat Reeve's output over the past decade, what with directing arguably the best X-Men movie so far and taking two Mark Millar properties (a writer who's body of work I genuinely dislike) and turning them into actual fun, engaging stories with likeable characters. I'm good with him going back to basics here and making more of a detective style Batman movie. This seems to have vibes from The Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Year One, Hush, and even a bit of The Black Mirror.
I'm not on the "DC is back" bandwagon (especially with all of the layoffs to staff members in the comic book department) when it comes to the movies, since Shazam! is the only one that I have genuinely liked since the last Nolan Batman movie. Even their DTV animated output has ranged from shit to passable, and for the record, I still think I'm going to dislike the Snyder Cut of Justice League since I'm not a fan of Snyder as a filmmaker (though it is cool that fans who want it are getting it). So when I say that I'm genuinely optimistic for this movie and like what I'm seeing so far, I do really mean it. This and WW84 are genuine bright spots in DC's line-up for me.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 22, 2020, 08:52:41 PM
I've mostly been a fan of Mat Reeve's output over the past decade, what with directing arguably the best X-Men movie so far and taking two Mark Millar properties (a writer who's body of work I genuinely dislike) and turning them into actual fun, engaging stories with likeable characters.
That's Matthew Vaughn. Matt Reeves is the guy who directed the recent Planet of the Apes movies.
Yeah, I kind of realized my goof up a few minutes after posting it (still stand by what I said about Reeve's body of work, though). I would delete that post but I figured we're all entitled to our embarrassing goof-ups from time to time. :sweat:
It also doesn't hurt my case that I personally really liked this past decade's Apes trilogy, so my point still stands in that regard.
Paul Dano as the Riddler reminds me of those fanmade posters from over 10 years ago of what people wanted from the 3rd Nolan Bat-movie. Google "The Dark Knight Riddler", and you'll see a whole slew of them. But in a good way. Can't wait to see his take.
Speaking of, I rewatched some Riddler eps of BTAS, and noticed how little he actually appears compared to other Bat-villains. He only has a major role in 3 episodes, and while they're all good, none of them are character-defining the way Heart of Ice, The Demon's Quest or Mad Love are.
Saw the trailer of Batman. I don't know anything about this guy that got as Batman. My coworker has been going in on the movie itself because of casting choice before the trailer. Like I said, don't know him and after seeing the trailer I'm not sold, but I am interested. I need to see a little more. I like the vibe from Batman himself, but the trailer itself, I need to see more.
Quote from: Mustang on August 24, 2020, 06:53:26 PM
I don't know anything about this guy that got as Batman. My coworker has been going in on the movie itself because of casting choice before the trailer.
He's the guy from those Twilight movies a decade ago. He played the sparkly vampire. Since then, he's done better roles.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 23, 2020, 04:12:50 PM
Speaking of, I rewatched some Riddler eps of BTAS, and noticed how little he actually appears compared to other Bat-villains. He only has a major role in 3 episodes, and while they're all good, none of them are character-defining the way Heart of Ice, The Demon's Quest or Mad Love are.
I've heard before that as much as Timm and co liked using the Riddler, they struggled to write for him, especially to come up with riddles. It's especially kind of lame that they could never come up with more material for him in TNBA, since I like his design there.
Besides the upcoming stuff that was announced, I did just see Birds of Prey. I like it alright. I'm still not a big fan of Robbie's Harley voice, and the script needed work. Primarily the character writing, which besides Harley was weak, especially with whatever the fuck they tried to do with Cassandra Cain. But it's still fun enough, and had one of the better climaxes that I've seen from a super hero movie in a while.
I've still yet to find that one DCEU movie that really lands for me. Wonder Woman probably comes the closest, but I can't find it more than just fine. Aquaman loses me around the halfway point, I respect what Shazam was doing but didn't click with it, and I have little use for Snyder or Joker's half-assed nihilism. But at the same time, I do applaud DC for going in different directions with their films. On the other hand, while the MCU does tend to be less diverse, I still end up liking most of their films better. I'd probably take WW or even Birds of Prey over Captain Marvel, but at the sane time, the DCEU has yet to make something that landed for me the same way that a Black Panther or a Guardians has.
You know, I'm not sure why Whedon agreed to do reshoots for JL in the first place. It's not like he needed the money unless he signed a shit contract that paid him zero royalties from his two Avengers films, and even then, he could've just signed a contract to make another Sing-Along Blog or Firefly thing to make ends meet. And it can't be because it was a favor so he could do a Batgirl movie, since that ended up never happening, and as much issue as people have had with Whedon recently, a guy with 2 billion-dollar blockbusters in his resume wouldn't need to do favors just to make a Batgirl film.
I really liked Birds of Prey, mostly for the fights and more inventive scenes, but god they did Cassandra Cain so dirty. Really could not stop thinking about that the entire time I was watching it, which hampered my enjoyment a lot. I think Robbie does a good job as Harley in it, much better than Suicide Squad where she was awful imo. But then again, everything about SS was horrific.
When Keaton Batman shows up, what are they gonna say he's been doing for the past 3 decades in his universe? Will some version of the Schumacher movies happen in his past? Or allude to another world where the Burton movies never stopped and Bruce has been fighting Burton versions of all his foes since 1992, like photoshopped pictures of Christopher Lee as Ra's Al Ghul and Eva Green as Poison Ivy? Or go the dull route and say Bruce hung up the cowl after the end of Returns and took it up again because Barry "inspired" him?
It's funny how since it's cool to hate on the popular thing there's this sort of mentality with the online community (especially with YouTubers) that Marvel has just become a soulless machine whereas DC is now apparently the A24 of superhero movies allowing for true artistic expression. I'm all for sticking it to Disney's corporate BS and shitty business practices, and I'd be lying if I said I don't find some validity in some of the criticisms leveled at Marvel films. That said, it's still ultimately the work of creators who, despite not having complete creative control, do put genuinely clear effort into their work and especially in the case of Gunn, Waititi, and the Russos, have a clear sense of passion for what they're working on. I'm perfectly fine with people criticizing Marvel, which as I said is certainly valid in quite a few cases, but trying to completely dismiss anything MCU-related simply because it's the big thing right now seems more like a fad or community mentality in more cases than not.
I'll say straight up that I do like the fact that DC is now allowing for more variety and experimentation in their films. Aside from differentiating themselves from the competition, it really allows for some more out-of-the-box concepts to be brought to the genre which allows for potentially more bizarre stories and concepts to be adapted. However, the key word there is "potential." For all of their experimentation thus far, DC has comparatively far less hits than misses to show for it. If I'm being generous they have at least done better financially, but I haven't genuinely liked any film they've put out aside from Shazam (which ironically is also very tonally similar to a Marvel movie). I was so-so on Joker when I first saw it, and even then my opinion quickly soured on it. To me it's a painfully shallow attempted emulation of old Scorcese films that is, at best, competently made. That said, yeah, I'd argue movies like Guardians of the Galaxy or Raimi's Spider-Man have far more creative merit and nuance to them as overall films.
I don't really give two shits what corporate entity a movie belongs to as long as I enjoy the work itself. I'd be happy to be singing DC's praises, but so far WB's efforts have yet to really earn anything praise-worthy, IMO.
When it comes to Joker, the top review on Letterboxd said it best, "if you've never swam in the ocean then of course a pool seems deep".
Quote from: Foggle on August 25, 2020, 03:51:22 PM
I really liked Birds of Prey, mostly for the fights and more inventive scenes, but god they did Cassandra Cain so dirty. Really could not stop thinking about that the entire time I was watching it, which hampered my enjoyment a lot. I think Robbie does a good job as Harley in it, much better than Suicide Squad where she was awful imo. But then again, everything about SS was horrific.
I just don't get why it had to be Cassandra Cain at all, if they were going to do nothing related to her character. Even if they named the character Stephanie Brown instead, that would've been much less tedious and disappointing. Or Jason Todd, if they weren't afraid to slightly deviate from the female bonding that drives the movie. His origin is closer to Cassandra in the film, anyway.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 25, 2020, 05:20:35 PM
It's funny how since it's cool to hate on the popular thing there's this sort of mentality with the online community (especially with YouTubers) that Marvel has just become a soulless machine whereas DC is now apparently the A24 of superhero movies allowing for true artistic expression. I'm all for sticking it to Disney's corporate BS and shitty business practices, and I'd be lying if I said I don't find some validity in some of the criticisms leveled at Marvel films. That said, it's still ultimately the work of creators who, despite not having complete creative control, do put genuinely clear effort into their work and especially in the case of Gunn, Waititi, and the Russos, have a clear sense of passion for what they're working on. I'm perfectly fine with people criticizing Marvel, which as I said is certainly valid in quite a few cases, but trying to completely dismiss anything MCU-related simply because it's the big thing right now seems more like a fad or community mentality in more cases than not.
I'll say straight up that I do like the fact that DC is now allowing for more variety and experimentation in their films. Aside from differentiating themselves from the competition, it really allows for some more out-of-the-box concepts to be brought to the genre which allows for potentially more bizarre stories and concepts to be adapted. However, the key word there is "potential." For all of their experimentation thus far, DC has comparatively far less hits than misses to show for it. If I'm being generous they have at least done better financially, but I haven't genuinely liked any film they've put out aside from Shazam (which ironically is also very tonally similar to a Marvel movie). I was so-so on Joker when I first saw it, and even then my opinion quickly soured on it. To me it's a painfully shallow attempted emulation of old Scorcese films that is, at best, competently made. That said, yeah, I'd argue movies like Guardians of the Galaxy or Raimi's Spider-Man have far more creative merit and nuance to them as overall films.
I don't really give two shits what corporate entity a movie belongs to as long as I enjoy the work itself. I'd be happy to be singing DC's praises, but so far WB's efforts have yet to really earn anything praise-worthy, IMO.
Yeah, I understand the criticism towards the MCU. They're samey, visually flat and dry, and their action scenes can't hold a candle to what the John Wick or Mission Impossible franchises are doing. But I always have a good time with their movies, even the weakest ones like Iron Man 2, Dark World, and Far From Home. Their character writing is usually solid, the world building can be worthwhile, and they more often than not have a strong tone and pacing. There's a reason these movies are as successful as they are.
Meanwhile, I do like how DC is differentiating their films, but they've yet to make that one truly great film. I'd also argue that they've yet to pick up a great director with their current output, while the MCU has Cooglar, Waititi, the Russos, even Whedon (never mind Whedon's take on Justice League). Some would be willing to say Patty Jenkins qualifies, and I did like Monster, but meh. I'm willing to give Matt Reeves and James Gunn a shot with their films, but their track record still isn't that strong.
DC's still stuck in the shadow of The Dark Knight. They were just as surprised as anyone else by TDK's critical and financial success, and they've been spending the last 12 years trying to recapture that high. And they're just starting to get out of it, even if The Batman's trailer has obvious Nolan echoes.
Ditto on Cassandra Cain. I'm pretty fine for the most part with re-interpreting characters for adaptations, but in this case it just didn't make sense for how little that character equated to in Birds of Prey, at which point they may have just made her an original character. Cassandra in the comics has a genuinely interesting backstory and is an interesting dark reflection of the child superhero sidekick as well as anti-hero (depending on the story-line she's featured in). There is so much you could do with that character that it's a waste to just use her as a name-drop for some mostly irrelevant character that serves as a glorified MacGuffin.
As for the Batman, I think what gives me added faith in the project, aside from personally liking Reeve's take on the Apes franchise, is his Q&A from DC Fandome. I mean, there's a lot of basic standard PR diatribe in there as you would expect, but his personal emphasis on exploring the detective side of Batman in this film as well as his psychology (even going so far as to cite Darwyn Cooke's Ego as an influence) as well as treating Gotham City itself like a character (something that Zack Snyder clearly does not understand) really gives me the impression that he's taking his project seriously and not just treating it as a paycheck.
For all of my negative impressions of DC to date, a few exceptions withstanding, I do really genuinely hope they pull their shit together. At the end of the day all I really want to see is movies that I can enjoy, and in the best of cases that leave an impression on me with some sense of emotional impact. By this point I have read several DC comics that have done that very thing for me: Morrison's Animal Man and All-Star Superman, Cooke's Ego and The New Frontier (still my all-time favorite comic book), Robinson's Starman, Giffen and Dematteis's JLI, and various others (not to mention the tons of classic content from the DCAU TV shows and movies from the Paul Dini era).
Marvel movies don't often capture me quite on that level despite me enjoying most of their movies, however they have managed that in at least a few cases like with the Captain America movies, Thor: Ragnarok, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Infinity War/Endgame. Plus, there's also Spider-Verse if we're including Sony as well.
Ever since Man of Steel, DC has had yet to make a movie that I find more than just entertaining at best.
I'm just glad Reeves cited Ego as a major influence instead of Year One/TDKR/Killing Joke/Long Halloween like all the other Batman directors, even ones who don't end up directing Batman like Aronofsky, have.
Not to take away from those stories, as they are classics and highly regarded to this day for a reason; but yes, it's rather frustrating that these tend to be the only stories that are brought up in mainstream discussion of the comics. They only represent a small fraction of the nearly eight decades that the character has existed for.
There's other classic material that's just as defining, like O'Neil's run with Neal Adams and Dick Giordano, Steve Englehart's material, as well as Chuck Dixon, Marv Wolfman (who introduced Tim Drake), Darwyn Cooke (as already mentioned), Ed Brubaker, Grant Morrison, and while I'm not a big fan of his main run, Scott Snyder's The Black Mirror deserves recognition as well (even if it's not a Bruce Wayne story).
At least the Batman stories every filmmaker adapts or takes influence from are good. It's frustrating how many times we need to see Death of Superman, or how hard DC is pushing Flashpoint as the Flash comic all Flash adaptations should strive for. Or whenever they insist Identity Crisis should be included in the canon of genre-defining DC graphic novels.
So, The New Mutants was pretty "meh" all things considered, but hey, at least I can finally say that I've seen all of the FOX-MEN movies.
(https://preview.redd.it/wfuivkv5wrj51.jpg?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=b6d8f677e44663e21c8e5dec7a6bd727d21d9a6c)
In other news, Chadwick Boseman died of cancer. (https://apnews.com/5f4352111fdead278da3651b44d311b8?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=APEntertainment) Shit, that came out of nowhere. RIP.
I think this news is a shock to everyone. I truly do hope his family, friends, and loved ones are able to properly grieve and cope with his passing. RIP.
My sister just told me about it. R.I.P Chadwick. Wakanda forever. 2020 sucks man.
This is a real travesty. He was a highly talented and charismatic actor, and it seemed like he had the world ahead of him. The world is a better place for the life he brought into T'Challa, and the hope his turn brought to millions of aspiring fans.
And it's also disappointing to hear that the New Mutants couldn't even get Bob McLeod's name right. I was kind of interested in the movie at first, but it sounds like one last failed experiment from Fox's X-universe. Which is an unfortunate, but honestly pretty excepted, way to end a franchise. Deadpool notwithstanding.
Prayers out to Chadwick's family. Cancer blows.
The news about Chadwick Boseman is absolutely devastating. I couldn't believe it was true when I read it. RIP to a true king.
New Mutants was pretty forgettable, all things considered. The only character who really stood out was Magik, and that's just because she was a bitch to all the other characters. In trying to move past the typical superhero film, it instead goes straight into 90s teen horror. Wouldn't have batted an eye if a young Skeet Ulrich or Sarah Michelle Gellar appeared. But all that does is remind me why the 90s teen horror genre died out.
So if not for the buyout, was Mr. Sinister meant to be the X-Men movies' answer to Thanos? Because at least 3 different movies referenced something called the "Essex Corporation" being in charge of the hospital in New Mutants and the orphanage in Deadpool 2, and they were also the guys who collected Logan's blood in the post-credits scene for Apocalypse. Pretty sure New Mutants implied they were in charge of the villains in Logan too. But that also sounds weird to use 4 whole movies to foreshadow Mr. Sinister of all villains. It's not like Kinberg had long-term plans for Apocalypse or the Phoenix, so why Sinister?
I imagine they didn't really have any longterm plan but seeded in that Easter Egg to guage if it drummed up any hype among the more hardcore fans. If it went over well and they weren't bought out by Disney then it may have indeed resulted in Mr. Sinister being the next big bad of the franchise.
Looking at all the projects that were either in development or at least thrown around before Fox was sold, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men_(film_series)#Cancelled_projects) they had to have some overarching plan for what they wanted to do. If only because I know Fox execs and their accountants looking at the box office would've loved to have their own version of the "everybody fights Thanos" scene in Endgame but with X-characters instead. They would've loved to have a scene in their climactic X-Men movie where the X-Men, X-Force, the New Mutants, a time-traveling Deadpool who brought Cable and Laura, Alpha Flight, a resurrected Logan because they dumped a ton of money at Hugh Jackman's house, and every other X-team they adapted all team up to fight Mr. Sinister or some other overarching villain who's been foreshadowed for the last dozen movies. All while a CGI Stan Lee appears.
In that case they would've been better off saving Apocalypse as their Thanos rather than wasting him (and Oscar Isaac) in a one-off role.
No one's ever really gone. (https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1311742838699372550)
(https://movie-fanatic-res.cloudinary.com/iu/s--y2maEhBQ--/t_full/cs_srgb,f_auto,fl_strip_profile.lossy,q_auto:420/v1408377399/electro-the-amazing-spider-man-2-dvd-set.jpg)
Wonder Woman 1984 will arrive on HBO Max the same day as its theatrical release with no additional cost. (https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/18/21504152/wonder-woman-1984-release-delay-new-date-warner-bros-disney-black-widow-dune-tenet)
Diana raping a guy in the new Wonder Woman movie was... a choice. Not a good choice at all, but it's a choice.
Having Steve Trevor come back in the body of some random guy who actually existed and presumably had his own life going on is such a strange choice in general. This is especially the case considering that the wishes were being granted by a magic stone that could magically conjure just about anything else into existence from thin air and re-write reality. One has to wonder why it couldn't just do the same for Steve Trevor.
I don't even really hate this movie on the whole. It could mostly pass for a cheesy standard hero flick from the early 2000's which I have an admitted soft spot for. But some of the writing decisions are just baffling. I'm also a bit underwhelmed with how they handled Maxwell Lord considering how much more more nuanced of a character he is in comics like JLI.
You see, this is exactly why this hype for DC movies taking the reigns from the MCU needs to calm the fucj down. I get that everyone hates Disney for understandable reasons, but MCU movies have mostly been successful on consistent quality from actual filmmakers who, contrary to popular belief, aren't soulless robots and actually do give a shit about making a good product most of the time. Marvel deserves it's fair share of criticism, but at this point it feels like more people do it as part of a current fad than as legitimate criticism with thought put behind it.
With DC branching out more it leads to more variety for sure, but that doesn't automatically make everything they turn out good, and to this day they still have far more duds than gems. And on that note, the notion that all Marvel movies are the same kind of needs to die, IMO.
Yeah, I don't know what they were doing with Max. He was obviously based off of a certain politician, which would have made this movie very odd if the election swung a different way, but then they suddenly give up on that in the final act just to make him sympathetic. Obviously, Diana can't do to Maxwell what she does to him in the comics without clashing with whatever tone the movie was going for, but I don't know. It's like when the first film revealed that Ares wasn't around and all the horrors of war were thanks to humanity making horrible decisions, but then Ares shows up anyway so they can have a big action scene. And this movie has tons of moments like that where they do one thing, but then backtrack on that and do another. Like when Diana out of nowhere reveals she can cast spells to turn things invisible just so her Invisible Jet can show up in the movie, but then she can fly on her own anyway, so that whole scene was pointless. Or all the buildup on her Kingdom Come suit that she only uses for a couple scenes. It's such a messy movie.
Anyway, I assume they'll bring back Pedro Pascal to do a JLI or a Checkmate show on HBO Max, because all these DC movies apparently need companion shows.
WW84 did better than expected at the box office, even with the pandemic.
WW3 has been greenlit. (https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ny-lawmakers-set-special-session-to-extend-eviction-ban/2801131)
Quote from: Daikun on December 28, 2020, 01:47:38 PM
WW84 did better than expected at the box office, even with the pandemic.
WW3 has been greenlit. (https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ny-lawmakers-set-special-session-to-extend-eviction-ban/2801131)
Ah, yes. Wonder Woman 3's plot is about banning evictions.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on December 28, 2020, 02:44:40 PM
Quote from: Daikun on December 28, 2020, 01:47:38 PM
WW84 did better than expected at the box office, even with the pandemic.
WW3 has been greenlit. (https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ny-lawmakers-set-special-session-to-extend-eviction-ban/2801131)
Ah, yes. Wonder Woman 3's plot is about banning evictions.
Honestly? That'd be a better plot than WW84's. :>
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuOi6OxXIAEz_E3?format=jpg&name=small)
Spending all that money to have Jared Leto say that at the end of the trailer was a choice.
It feels extremely weird to say this, but I did like the Snyder Cut. Probably the best of his DC movies. There were still parts I didn't like, such as most of Barry's scenes, the yodeling in all of Diana's fight scenes, and Vic finding out about his powers came off as a US Army commercial. But I actually liked Steppenwulf, and thought the tone more operatic than the theatrical cut.
Spoiler
So why was J'onn Martha?
It's wild to see Snyder become increasingly vindicated now that his version is out, but it does sound like this is an improvement on the theatrical version in every way. I probably won't get to it while it's on the service this month, but I'm slowly gaining more interest in getting to it.
Having seen it myself, I can say that it is in fact a Zack Snyder movie, with all of the good and bad implications that has. It's not really my cup of tea, but it is at least a much better realized story in terms of tone than the theatrical version. Still, while I did enjoy certain parts of the movie, it by no means felt like it needed to be 4-hours long, and this is definitely an opposite issue to the theatrical cut where it had to be less than two hours. I feel as though a good hour and fifteen minutes could have easily been cut and the pacing would have been much better for it.
It's also ironic that Snyder called out one of his critics for saying that he enjoyed superhero flicks like Saturday morning cartoons, when at least a third of the dialogue from this movie felt like something out of a Saturday morning cartoon. But I guess because he threw in a few F-words that makes it for adults by Snyder-logic.
I don't really mean to pick on Snyder too much here, though. In a way I'm still glad that this film got made as a case for a creator getting the chance to express their vision. I wouldn't mind that sort of thing happening for other films in the future where the original director notoriously had to leave the production for one reason or another (I'd still love to see an Edgar Wright Ant-Man movie, for that matter), so it's neat that it got to happen here, even if it's not for something that really appeals to me.
At least we didn't get his rough draft idea where Bruce cuckolds Clark and fathers a child with Lois. Granted, I spotted a pregnancy kit in one of Lois' scenes.
Found out the guy who played Jimmy Olsen in the Donner films was the cop she befriends here. Which was a cute way to make up for popping Jimmy in BvS.
I neglected to comment on it earlier but I liked The Suicide Squad trailer. I'll be seeing it regardless as I have faith that James Gunn can turn in at least a pretty good if not outright great combination of action and comedy, but the trailer seems to have the right tone and gets me just that bit more excited for the movie.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E0evS9hVkAAZg8U.jpg)
While it's been out for a while, I finally got around to watching Patrick Willems' video on the modern trend of R-rated superhero films, and it's a really great watch: https://youtu.be/6dfI_2dscGE
He pretty perfectly breaks down this current pop-culture obsession with trying to make things that were never intended to be for adults more gritty for the sake of trying to justify them as mature. The thing is, there is nothing wrong with adults enjoying something with children as their target audience. Plenty of great stories are fun for all ages because they are child-appropriate while containing themes and messages which we can appreciate more when we're older. Superman Smashes the Klan is one of my favorite comic books that I've read from the past year or so and it's clearly aimed at a grade-school audience. It works because it is written and paced so expertly and with such great use of theming that I couldn't help but enjoy the hell out if it as I read each of it's three-issue installments every couple of months.
Yes, there is a place for R-rated superhero fare. However, it has always struck me as aggressively counterintuitive to try and forcefully rebrand characters that were always meant to appeal to a young audience as now being some hyper-violent action dramas that go out of their way to make sure that a young audience should NOT be able to watch them.
It reminds me of when Mark Millar, who's no stranger to taking superhero stories and making them edgy often without reason or purpose and you can arguably point out that his work and adaptations of his work gave life to the rise of R-rated superhero shows/movies, said Man of Steel disturbed him. (https://screenrant.com/mark-millar-problem-man-of-steel/)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3Da6HXWQAAJ-4L?format=jpg&name=small)
I know it's supposed to be a Watchmen reference, but my second thought was "Why did Bruce drip strawberry jam on his suit?"
And whenever I see people talk about Keaton coming back as Batman, I've also found them wanting Burton and Keaton teaming up to do a Batman Beyond movie because it will "complete their trilogy" or fulfill their long-standing desires to see a true sequel to Batman Returns. Which I understand, Burton's Batman 3 is one of the biggest what-ifs in Batman film history next to "What if Heath Ledger never died?", "What if Affleck got to direct his own Batman film?", or "What if Aronofsky's Batman pitch went into production?" I sorta wish we could live in a timeline where WB never booted Burton off the director's seat too and let him make as many Batman movies with Keaton as he wanted while he was at the height of his creative talents, but modern-day Burton won't satisfy those decades-long hopes.
So, aside from the post credits scene, Black Widow basically felt like a lost Phase 3 movie. The entire thing fits so distinctly between Civil War and Infinity War that had this movie released in 2017, it wouldn't feel out of place in the slightest.
As for the movie itself, it was very middle of the road. I enjoyed the family dynamics and general core characters, which tends to be what even average MCU movies are pretty good at for the most part, but the actual plot and villain felt completely forgettable. I like it more than Captain Marvel and Ant-Man and the Wasp, but that's pretty faint praise. It's certainly no Winter Soldier.
I know what you mean. Until the very ending of the film, there was nothing in it that felt prequel-y or even acknowledges we're watching a character who died a couple years back.
So I hated the first scene with the flashback. I don't know why, but the whole tone and shots felt off to me. Taskmaster was one of the weakest MCU villains by far. Not much of a Taskmaster fan, but they could've replaced the character here with literally any D-list Marvel villain and the plot wouldn't have changed. They were about as poorly served as Deadpool was in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, albeit not nearly as offensive. I guess Ray Winstone's character doing a Harvey Weinstein impression as he talks about kidnapping defenseless young girls and turning them into his slaves made for a more sinister antagonist, but he doesn't drive the plot enough for it to work.
But I did really like Yelena. For a film made to make up for the other movies pushing Scarlett Johansson to a supporting role for a decade, Florence Pugh stole the show here. I haven't made the time to see Midsommar or Little Women yet, so her performance was a real surprise. All her jokes worked, and she's where most of the movie's characterization was in. The strongest parts of the film are when Yelena and Natasha bond and make up for lost time, and while I did like David Harbour and Rachel Weisz, I think the film could've benefited from spending more time on that relationship for a while longer.
Also curious what could have been if they used David Hayter's script.
I liked it a little better than you guys, but I agree that Taskmaster was a waste. Maybe it just felt refreshing to see a movie in theaters again and not worry about a fast-spreading disease, but I had fun, especially when it focused on the family. And even the more MCU-ish material worked fairly well IMO.
Looking forward to seeing where Yelena goes from here. I agree that she was the MVP of the film.
Yeah, for a blatant Natasha replacement in the MCU, I actually came away really liking Yelena as a character more than I expected to. Captain Marvel aside, I usually find at least one or two characters that I really gravitate towards in MCU movies.
Not really too thrilled about them pitting her against Hawkeye due to false information. I'm hoping that isn't a big plot point of the upcoming Disney+ series and instead it's more low-stakes and somewhat laid back in tone like the Matt Fraction run.
Yeah, that part's confusing. I assume they're trying to do Dark Avengers, and Julia Louis Dreyfus will inevitably recruit Abomination, Bullseye, and evil counterparts to Thor and Tony in later installments. Problem is, Yelena wasn't evil in this film, or even hinted as such like they did with Walker, so I don't know what the plans are there.
Deadpool finally makes his grand entrance in the MCU. (https://youtu.be/g7q60i_Lh_E)
So, next week The Suicide Squad releases and I'm actually genuinely excited for this movie. I love James Gunn's vision for this movie and how he insists it will be a lot higher stakes than most Marvel or DC comic book movies. This movie essentially seems like it will be a modern grittier version of The Dirty Dozen starring A to D list DC characters with Gunn's trademark sense of humor, and that just seems like it will be an awesome combination.
I love all of James Gunn's work but The Suicide Squad was mostly off my radar until you reminded me it existed with your post this morning - after looking it up, gotta say I'm sold. I've been watching The Thick of It recently, which is hilarious, and now finding out that Peter Capaldi's going to be a main character, I hope to god he's gonna have some Malcolm Tucker-esque lines. Then I saw a picture of the Weasel, which looks like something straight out of Gunn's Troma days, which is fucking awesome. Finally, I read that he compared Harley's relationship with Bloodsport to Abbott & Costello, and a Margot Robbie/Idris Elba buddy comedy is something I never knew I needed. I never really saw the appeal of Robbie's Harley in the original Suicide Squad film, probably due to the awful script and directing, but I thought she was great in Birds of Prey. I haven't watched any superhero movies since BOP in all honesty, which I mostly checked out for the fight scenes since I heard they got some input from the John Wick guys, and I ended up quite liking it despite its utterly contemptuous treatment of my favorite DC character (Cassandra Cain). Really hope this will live up to Guardians of the Galaxy and Slither for me.
EDIT: Good god yes.
Quote from: https://www.unilad.co.uk/film-and-tv/peter-capaldi-on-playing-supervillain-malcolm-tucker-in-the-suicide-squad/UNILAD sat down with Capaldi ahead of the release of The Suicide Squad, where he plays Gaius Grieves, also known as The Thinker, a super-intelligent inventor with telepathic abilities.
Doctor Who may seem like the most obvious stepping stone to a comic movie, but James Gunn was looking elsewhere. 'He cast me because he'd seen me in In the Loop, the spin-off from The Thick of It,' Capaldi said.
One line sticks out as particularly Tucker-esque: 'Yankie f*cking doodle dandie.' It wasn't written by Gunn – he just told Capaldi to let rip.
'He doesn't really know about Doctor Who or anything, that's why he put me in it. James writes scripts brilliantly, and what you do with James is you shoot all the lines, and he'd say to me... just make some stuff up. It was quite nice to be allowed to make some of that stuff up again. It's always a bit scary though, but that's what he wanted, so I just let Malcolm out again. That's where Malcolm went, he became a supervillain,' he laughed.
James Gunn doesn't know what Doctor Who is? Weird, coming from him.
Just got back from the theater. I can safely say that The Suicide Squad is tied with Shazam! as my favorite thing to come out of the entire DCAU, and it's probably one of my favorite comic book movies of the past few years. The tone, humor, and absurdity of the violence just vibe really well with me.
Also, I caught that John Ostrander cameo. You can tell how much James Gunn loves that run from how he pays homage to it in several ways: Bloodsport basically feels like a stand-in for Bronze Tiger in several ways, with a bit of Deadshot's personality mixed in there (while still being his own character), infiltrating Jotunheim is the main objective of the Suicide Squad in the movie (which was the centerpiece of a major moment in Ostrander's run), more characterization is given to some of the supporting members of Belle Reve rather than just on Amanda Waller (including some of them objecting to her methods when they feel that she goes too far), and the conflict at hand was heavily critical of the shadiness of the American government and their hypocrisy in how they treat foreign countries and organizations as enemies for doing the same things that they themselves do (just more discretely). That's just to name a few things, but while I did say that Ostrander/Yale's run was good but not a personal favorite of mine, I think having aspects of it filtered through James Gunn's particular style of story-telling and presentation really made for something that I found to be highly enjoyable.
And yeah, it's actually kind of refreshing to see a movie like this that lives up to it's namesake. Expect plenty of characters to die, including some that you will actually come to like. Not that I need superhero movie to have a body count, but it does really fit this one, and I actually felt the stakes, which lead to some fairly tense moments despite how generally bonkers the tone was most of the time.
I'll definitely want to re-watch it again this weekend.
That flashback scene with Taika, that scene hit me.
Shocked how much of a 180 this is compared to the first film. This movie succeeds at everything that one failed at.
To be fair, the first movie was clearly very butchered in the editing process. I still don't think that it would have been my type of film, but it's also very clear that David Ayer and his team were trying to make a different movie than what WB at the time forced them to change it into when they decided that they wanted something different.
It seems like they learned their lesson and allowed James Gunn to do his job and go for his vision. I think the result speaks for itself.
And yeah, the secret ingredient to this movie for me was that despite how mean-spirited and over-the-top it could be to many of it's featured characters, there is still an underlying heart and humanity to almost all of them and the movie in general, something which Gunn excels at.
Instead of Starro, the Squad were meant to fight Superman back in the brainstorming phase. And it's something Gunn wants to do for a sequel. (https://comicbook.com/movies/news/the-suicide-squad-superman-cameo-spoilers-james-gunn-original-story/)
I'm actually glad that he went with literally anything else than that concept. While I trust in James Gunn as a filmmaker, I've kind of gotten sick of the evil Superman trope by this point.
Watched the movie a second time and I really have to appreciate Gunn's attention to detail. Beyond just being stylized, there are so many meaningful shots and a distinct use of editing to visually convey information and add layers of nuance to the core characters. It's worth paying attention to background details on repeat viewings. Peacemaker in particular is a bit more layered than I would have initially given him credit for. I like how when Bloodsport tells Ratchatcher about his traumatic upbringing with his abusive father, we get a brief shot of a little smirk and chuckle from Peacemaker, which is done in a way that I interpret as him actually being able to relate to what Bloodsport is saying. Likewise, when we see a POV shot from the bus to a couple on the street sharing affection, and then it immediately cuts to a close-up of King Shark's face, we visually get a better understanding of his character and how he wants to be able to relate to others.
There are a ton of instances I could bring up, but TSS makes a great example for why this sort of cinema is not just big dumb fun, as it so often gets labeled as being. Yes, it's primarily bonkers and over-the-top, but underneath the surface there is a lot of heart to the film, and what may come off as big dumb action in appearance is very smartly made and put together.
Oh yeah, I noticed Starro's portrayal as a prisoner who just wanted freedom but went mad and lashed out against humanity mirrors his portrayal back in Batman Beyond.
Spoilers for the whole movie:
Spoiler
"I was happy, floating in space, staring at the stars."
Gunn didn't have to give him that line. He could have just up and let him die a la Ronan from GotG, but that one little sentence before falling dead really highlighted that Starro wasn't the villain of the movie. He was a product of the true villains, which in this case was the US government, but with Waller essentially representing the concept of that as the face of who we are essentially rooting against.
I can't believe WB was willing to fund a $185 million Troma film with DC characters but I'm so glad they did. Everything about it was seriously on point, probably the most I've enjoyed a film since John Wick 3. I need more immediately (and Guardians 3). No one does it like Gunn.
Good news, everyone. The Weasel is probably innocent of his crimes against children. (https://www.indiewire.com/2021/08/the-suicide-squad-post-credits-scenes-what-they-are-1234652683/)
Quote"There's a lot of people in prison for crimes they didn't commit," Gunn said with a laugh. "Don't you think that if there were 27 [dead] kids and Weasel was living on the block, that you're going to blame Weasel. Is he guilty? I think it's a Project Innocence situation for Weasel and he deserves to really have the legal team that he probably did not have the first time through. I mean, he is one step above a Greyhound, if that, when it comes to his brain capacity."
Quote from: Foggle on August 09, 2021, 06:05:35 PMI can't believe WB was willing to fund a $185 million Troma film with DC characters but I'm so glad they did. Everything about it was seriously on point, probably the most I've enjoyed a film since John Wick 3. I need more immediately (and Guardians 3). No one does it like Gunn.
We do still have a Peacemaker series coming out with several episodes confirmed to be written and directed by Gunn. I'll admit, I was skeptical of this (as much as I trust Gunn as a creator) but I was genuinely, unironically impressed by how well John Cena pulled off that role. This is the second time that Gunn has taken a former WWE superstar (or I guess technically current, but as a part-timer), known for wooden acting and actually managed to bring a lot of personality out of them. I am still unsure if he can be a lead character, but I'm definitely interested after this movie.
Anyways, I've seen the movie three times now. I still think I prefer the first GotG just a smidge, but this is definitely a top 10 superhero film for me. In general, though, Gunn has been remarkably consistent as a director. I love all of his movies (I warmed up to GotG V2 a LOT over several re-watches), though after his next efforts for Marvel and DC (which I'm genuinely excited for), I would personally love to see him make a return to horror.
Also, I absolutely loved how he cited Where Eagles Dare as a major influence for this movie. The Dirty Dozen was obvious (and those who remember my top films list from about a decade back might remember that I had that movie listed fairly high), but I remember my dad showing me Where Eagles Dare (we used to watch a ton of films together when we both had way more free time) and lamenting how few people ever brought it up in modern discussion. It was one of his favorites growing up, and of course I loved it too, so it was super cathartic to see Gunn bring it up in an interview and also acknowledge that everyone forgets about that movie when discussing the classics.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 09, 2021, 07:54:26 PM
I would personally love to see him make a return to horror.
As long as he's actually the director this time and not just in a producer role. It was so disappointing when they were hyping his big horror project Brightburn, and then it turned out he wasn't directing or writing it, and the end result was just another "What if Superman... but evil?!" plot.
Too early to say but this might actually be my favorite Gunn movie, though I love all of his work a lot, especially Slither. I actually like Guardians 2 more than the first one, which I know is an unpopular opinion, but I was really into the humor and messier storytelling style. The plot did a lot for me as well.
John Cena was genuinely fantastic. All of the acting was great. Can't even pick a favorite or least favorite out of the cast/characters, everyone was a stand out in some way, even the ones who died almost immediately.
I was expecting Capaldi to be my favorite, but even though he did a good job too, he wasn't anywhere near that list. Idris Elba did a wonderful job. Kinnaman was so much better here than in the first film. Ratcatcher's actress, Daniela Melchior, was also fucking cool in her role. Even Stallone gargling out two or three words per scene was great.
Capaldi felt kind of wasted to me, though he did a great job in the scenes he got. Just a naturally funny guy. He also has one of my favorite lines in the movie ("the answer to that question may not be the one you're expecting" or something similar).
Ratcatcher was definitely one of my favorites, I would absolutely watch a spin-off about her, especially if it meant we got to see more Sebastian. Idris Elba was amazing as always and Margot Robbie has really grown into the Harley role since the awful first movie (where the bad acting probably wasn't her fault), though I'm sad the two characters almost never interacted considering how James Gunn described their relationship. Maybe a bunch of scenes were cut?
I rewatched the original Suicide Squad last week and it was somehow far worse than I remembered. It might honestly be my least favorite superhero/comic book movie of all time. The writing and performances are painful, the editing style and pop song usage are wretched, the story is pointless and completely nonsensical, the constant sexualization of Robbie is embarrassing, the Joker never makes a single joke... god it's fucking bad. All this to say that I can't believe TSS actually made me care about Flag, wow.
Even if Gunn only knew Capaldi from In the Loop, I was amused (https://youtu.be/tK9xwLvj_ac?t=10) by this unintentional callback. (https://youtu.be/kO2Dl8C2YKU)
Spoiler
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8agWe9WYBc9kqa?format=jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8agWf-WYBkRxOS?format=jpg)
Before they decided on Bloodsport, some concept art shows they were going to use Slade as one of the leads.
So, I've been pondering about this since watching and loving The Suicide Squad, and I came up with a list of my 10 favorite superhero movies at this point. To be clear I am specifically talking about this sub-genre of comic books rather than comic book movies themselves, otherwise I'd also have to consider stuff like Oldboy, Snowpiercer, and American Splendor among many other movies in the mix.
I don't even really like doing ranking lists and have largely grown out of that as a lot of times I can't find much value in trying to organize a subjective opinion in such a way. That said, with something as specific as this sub-genre, I think it's a bit easier to try and come up with something of this nature, but honestly don't take it as a matter-of-fact take on my valuing of these movies. It's just the way I'm currently feeling at the moment (though I do genuinely love the movies on here).
10. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker- I know I'm alone on this, but that's what personal opinion is all about. I actually slightly prefer this to Mask of the Phantasm (which just as easily could have made it on here), and even a recent re-watch shows that, at least for me, it still holds up really well. I still don't think that any of DC's DTV animated movies even come close to this or MOTP (though there were a few of the earlier ones that I did at least kind of like).
9. Super- This is the only film on here that isn't actually based off an existing comic book, but I think that also gives it a really fresh perspective on the genre. At one point I might have hade Kick-Ass on here instead, and while the movie version of that story is quite good, Super has just edged it out a bit for me in recent years. Maybe that's partly because I'm on a James Gunn high right now, but I also think that this movie hits me as feeling a little bit more personal in it's execution, which I'm all for.
8. The Dark Knight- While there are a few aspects of Batman Begins that I prefer, this movie still holds up insanely well. I've noticed a bit of a backlash against it in recent years. Maybe part of that is because some people are sick of Nolan, or because it's less overtly comic-booky than it's peers, or maybe because some angry Zack Snyder fanboys hate literally any interpretation of DC characters that isn't by him. Whatever the reason, this movie works because it presents an interpretation of the character that still gets the core of what makes Batman and his mythos so compelling at it's core. I also just really kind of miss how this movie put so much emphasis on practical effects in a way that almost feels like a lost art in the genre today (and with modern blockbusters in general).
7. The Suicide Squad- Maybe it's too early to put it on here, but this is about how I'm feeling right now, and after watching it three times in a row I can't help but just fall in love with it and these characters each time I see it. I notice more details and nuances on each viewing, and James Gunn's sensibilities just gel so well with what I love about these kinds of movies, both aesthetically and on an emotional level. I don't know what else to say.
6. Guardians of the Galaxy- For pretty much the same reasons as above. I will say that I initially didn't like Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, and then warmed up to it bit by bit, and now I love it almost as much as the first movie. I actually considered putting it on here over this one. I'd argue that it has higher highs, but I still ultimately give Vol. 1 a slight edge because it also still works incredibly well on an emotional level while feeling like an overall more consistent film. With Guardians Vol. 2, I love a lot of it, but there are still weaker parts of the movie for me that hold it back just a little bit.
5. X-Men: First Class- This is a movie that I really liked when I first watched it and has only improved with each viewing. I actually think it's a tad underrated, even though many people were calling it overhyped (ironically enough) when it came out. Aside from having pretty excellent performances, at it's core this is a story about a friendship and bond forming between two people with distinctly opposing ideologies, and the ultimate tragedy of that eventually driving them apart. I love the strong use of theming in this film, as well as the period-piece set-up. While the side characters are admittedly the weakest aspect of it, I honestly can't say it really bothers me as the movie knows to put most of it's focus on the few that really matter to the story and messages that it is going for, and I think on that level it exceeds far better than I initially realized. Everything from the directing and dialogue choices to the tight pacing and well-realized structure of the story-telling is incredibly top-notch. Again, it works for me because ultimately it feels like there is a stronger emotional core to this movie than any other movie in the franchise, which is always that I gravitate towards.
4. Captain America: The First Avenger- I've said for a long time that this is my favorite MCU movie, and I know I'm maybe one of the few people who has that opinion. That said, I've continued to feel that way for the entire decade since I've seen it, and I ultimately just have to stick to my gut feelings. I get that it doesn't leave much of an impression on most people, and that's fine. For me, though, it encapsulates a lot of the unironic charm and youthful innocence of golden age style superhero stories, and that's just so refreshing to me. I'm kind of sick of the extremely cynical take on superheroes that we see so often these days (most prevalently in Zack Snyder films) that is so rarely ever done (even The Boys I would argue got pretty overbearing in it's cynicism with it's second season). It also helps that I consider this a to bit of a spiritual sequel to The Rocketeer (which spoiler if you look below, I think pretty highly of), but even putting personal opinion aside, I'd actually defend this as being a much put together movie than many people give it credit for. There is actually a stylized nature to the presentation and use of cinematography that feels rather distinct from most MCU movies both then and now, and the score by Alan Silvestri is actually genuinely great and highly underrated. The MCU, among many other issues (many of which are valid, I will fully admit to), does get fairly criticized for it's relatively weak use original scores by it's various composers and how much of it comes off as forgettable background noise. I think that this is a clear exception to the status quo, and much of the music helps elevate the movie in key scenes and it gels perfectly with the tone that the movie is going for. Also, while there is some admittedly wonky CG in the mix, I would again like to point out that there is a substantial amount of excellently handled practical costumes, sets, and effects in this movie. Something that really adds to the aesthetic, and that very aesthetic has so much character to it, in and of itself. I love this movie, and make no apologies for it. Also, it's another case of the rare period-piece superhero movie, which I wish we could get more of.
3. Spider-Man 2- This is another movie that I initially didn't love as much as I do now. I know it's actually quite a popular choice, but these days I can completely see why. As my appreciation for film as an artform has grown, as well as my love of Sam Raimi's uniquely bizarre directing style, I have really come to love just how well-realized his vision is. I'll admit that this is not necessarily my favorite version of Peter Parker as a character (that would probably still go to The Spectacular Spider-Man), but I have really come to appreciate Maguire's portrayal as it's own unique interpretation (much like Bale's take on Bruce Wayne/Batman in the Nolan films) and within the context of Raimi's movies, this version of Peter Parker/Spider-Man completely works with the context of these films. This series in general is clearly going for an aesthetic meant to evoke much of the feeling of the Lee/Ditko 1960's era of the character and his stories, and it's insanely well realized here. Everything from the cheese to the sincerity of the characters and dialogue is 100% intentional in that regard. In specific regard to the second film, though, like with all other choices on my list, there is a strong emotional undercurrent at the core of this movie. Much like with Nolan's Batman, even if this is not the most comics-accurate portrayal of the character, I would argue that it honors the core values of the character far better than any live-action adaptation has so far. The first movie presented the idea of the iconic phrase: "With great power comes great responsibility." To me, Spider-Man 2's very theme is an exploration of the meaning of that phrase, and it pulls it off to perfection. This is another movie that improves for me more and more with each re-watch in that regard.
2. The Rocketeer- So, I'll level with you here, this is 100% pure personal taste and bias. There are tons of objectively better shot, written, edited, scored, and directed films within this genre. That is why I must stress that this is all just my subjective opinion. That said, I adore this movie. I saw another reviewer put it best when talking about this movie in a video analyzing the story-telling values of Joe Johnston, which is essentially that there is an earnestness and genuine belief in the old-time values that this movie presents. It is very much an homage to golden-age era comic books as well as World War II-era movies that presented those core values. Obviously most movies today, and even of the time The Rocketeer originally came out, tend to have a fair critique of the skewed perspective of those old stories (many of which were willfully ignorant to many of the real issues going on at the time), and there is a fair amount of cynicism to it. At best, a some movie will still honor that sort of tone while simultaneously poking fun at it. However, I do think there is still a value to a movie removing itself enough from reality and genuinely embracing the concept of good-natured people rising up to do the right thing, without that cynical edge it. This is where I think execution is everything, and I can't help but feel like Johnston actually manages to pull off this tone in a way that completely works for the story he is telling, and even gives it a charm that makes it feel so memorable to me. Again, this is all something that just hits me personally, but from beginning to end the movie puts a smile on my face and brings out everything that made me fall in love with superheroes as a kid. I think this is elevated by, again, much like with Captain America: The First Avenger, a great use of well-realized practical sets, costumes, and props, along with a very suitable score that fits the tone of the movie. The result is something that feels utterly unique and has never even come close to being replicated (with with the aforementioned CA movie being it's spiritual sequel in many ways). To me it's a rare, unironic expression of a character with a genuine sense of goodness about him using a rocket pack created by Howard Hughes to go up against Nazis and an evil movie star. That shit is right up my alley, and I don't know any better way to describe it than that.
1. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse- So, I've already talked about this film at length before, and I'm also tired so I'll actually keep this last one brief. Firstly, I love animation, and differing animation styles, and this movie manages to capture that feeling despite it being computer animated. On-top of that, it uses animation to accurately depict the feeling of watching a comic book in motion. That explains how it is aesthetically pleasing in a way that a live-action comic book interpretation simply can't be, no matter how well executed it is. On the core level of what the movie is actually about, it it excels in all the of the ways that any of the previous movies on this list do, but manages to somehow take things even further. It is unapologetically bonkers in it's ambition, and actually managed to introduce general audiences to the concept of a multiverse well before it became the popular hot topic that it has now with the MCU. You can also add in that I already love Spider-Man as a character, but the movie actually does the added task of making Miles Morales an iconic and fully realized character in his own right, in a way that the original comic book run just wasn't able to achieve, IMO. Every single character that makes up the rest of the ensemble is memorable to me, and as I've already stated a bunch of times by now, the movie ultimately encompasses what I love about superheroes beneath the surface. It has themes and scenes that feel personal and emotional, and in this case it's how it can combine that with the comic book style and aesthetic that only animation can provide which helps elevate this movie into something that is uniquely it's own and specifically appeals to all of my sensibilities. And yes, I do know that I had another animated movie on this list, but it was still ultimately a somewhat compromised animation style for obvious reasons. This movie really does prove to me that the style and execution can count just as much as the substance, as the very use of that presentation can significantly enhance every aspect of what the story being told is trying to explore and going for. I have re-watched this movie countless times by now, and it is still just as exciting for me every single time I watch it.
And that's pretty much my thoughts up to this point. Obviously like always there are things that will be subject to change based on how my feelings change over time, and there were a ton of other movies that I had a difficult time leaving out, but this best reflects how I feel and what I most value in the sub-genre these days.
Also, let's get this out of the way:
Honorable Mention: Logan- Basically consider this the number 11 pick. Believe me, it was really hard picking what to leave out but ultimately it had to reflect my honest current opinion. While I love this movie, I haven't had quite as much desire to revisit it as I have for the other ones on my list. I still think it's pretty excellent, and it shows you how far the genre has come that something as good as this could even rank below the number 10 spot. If I had more time and was willing to list more movies, I'd have a lot more picks in general, but essentially the movies I went with were the ones that have some personal weight and meaning to me. They aren't objectively the best by any means (again, The Rocketeer is 100% personal bias on my part), but they are movies that really make me feel something and that's what ultimately counts, I believe. Oh, and yes, the Deadpool movies, Shazam!, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and a bunch of other obvious choices would be on here as well if it were a longer list.
Great list! I haven't seen Super or Rocketeer yet, but I'll definitely have to check them out later. Everything else I agree are great flicks and among the best in the superhero genre. Spider-Verse is definitely my top favorite as well, for.a lot of the reasons you've mentioned!
I have no idea why I haven't seen Super yet, since it has a director and actors I like. I think years ago, someone told me it was a shitty Kick-Ass knockoff so I bailed on it. Don't remember why I believed them.
Quote from: LumRanmaYasha on August 13, 2021, 09:33:05 PMGreat list! I haven't seen Super or Rocketeer yet, but I'll definitely have to check them out later. Everything else I agree are great flicks and among the best in the superhero genre. Spider-Verse is definitely my top favorite as well, for.a lot of the reasons you've mentioned!
Thanks! Super isn't for everyone but it really works as a darkly comedic drama about a psychologically scarred man taking the guise of a superhero in place of dealing with his own mental and emotional issues of loneliness and an inability to connect with others. It's also James Gunn completely unfiltered, which depending on who you are will either work for you or turn you off (I unapologetically love it).
The Rocketeer is definitely a movie that I think only I would rank as high as I do. I have encountered at least a few other people who love it, though, and I do know that it has a cult following of it's own. That said, I don't know if it will work for you as well as it does for me, and I do have to stress that it's not nearly as well made in terms of directing or writing as any other film on my list. It really is the actual feeling that it conveys that ultimately wins me over and makes me rank it as high as I do in how it appeals to me personally. That said, I think this video does a pretty great job of explaining the movie's strengths, as well as touching on some of it's flaws: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZtF4V9jgD0
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 13, 2021, 09:40:47 PMI have no idea why I haven't seen Super yet, since it has a director and actors I like. I think years ago, someone told me it was a shitty Kick-Ass knockoff so I bailed on it. Don't remember why I believed them.
To be fair, I was told this and used to believe it as well. I didn't actually watch or even seek out Super until after I saw Guardians of the Galaxy and also realized that James Gunn was the same guy who directed Slither. It is admittedly very comparable to Kick-Ass (which, as a movie, I do really like), but this one just works for me a bit better.
I love Gunn's style and sensibilities so hearing he's unfiltered in Super definitely makes it sound right up my alley! And I've actually heard a lot of good things about The Rocketeer over the years, so it's always been a film I've been keen to watch sometime. And I actually really love the Royal Ocean Film Society's video essays so I'll definitely check out their piece on the film!
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 13, 2021, 09:46:51 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 13, 2021, 09:40:47 PMI have no idea why I haven't seen Super yet, since it has a director and actors I like. I think years ago, someone told me it was a shitty Kick-Ass knockoff so I bailed on it. Don't remember why I believed them.
To be fair, I was told this and used to believe it as well. I didn't actually watch or even seek out Super until after I saw Guardians of the Galaxy and also realized that James Gunn was the same guy who directed Slither. It is admittedly very comparable to Kick-Ass (which, as a movie, I do really like), but this one just works for me a bit better.
I think it was also because the trailer didn't enthuse me at the time, thinking "It's just Dwight from The Office and Elliot Page playing their usual bits? Meh." Granted, this was back when I only knew James Gunn for three things: writing a couple Scooby-Doo movies, being Jenna Fischer's ex-husband, and Gunn's namesake in Angel.
It just dawned on me Keaton, Affleck, and Pattinson are all playing Batman next year, while Bale's the odd man out doing a Marvel movie. Feels like if back when all the Bond actors were alive, Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, and Craig had a 007 teamup, while Brosnan was doing something completely different like another Mamma Mia sequel.
Anyway, I watched Super, and I loved it. Loved watching Elliot Page go psycho as Boltie. Loved the aesthetic in the fight scenes. Loved the Bibleman parody with Nathan Fillion.
Page was particularly excellent in this movie as Frank's psychotic sidekick. I love the subversion of the film first presenting her as a quirky side character that will be a friend that Frank desperately needs to battle his depression and psychological fantasies that lead him to dressing up like a superhero, and then find out that she is in an even worse extreme of that mental state than he is.
And I also love Michael Rooker's character in this movie. He's legitimately threatening while also having a couple of the funniest moments in the film as well.
I finally saw The Suicide Squad, and I have to say that this is probably my favorite DC film now, and I think I like it as much as the Guardian films. It's a lot of fun!
And I should get around to Super as well, I completely missed that.
A strange realization that Bloodsport is the first Superman villain to appear in movies who isn't another iteration or associate of Luthor or Zod.
James Gunn shouted out Suda51 and Lollipop Chainsaw as inspiration for Harley's big fight scene in The Suicide Squad (https://www.ign.com/articles/suicide-squad-tribute-forgotten-action-game-goichi-suda-lollipop-chainsaw) and it makes me smile like you wouldn't believe. :joy:
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fa/dc/a3/fadca36fbeea3db4b5cad19fec94154c.jpg)
I love them so much!
Spider-Man: No Way Home trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKVSRXqsCDw)
Got any thoughts on it?
Annoying these MCU Spidey movies feel more like Marvel Team-Up stories (Spider-Man and Iron Man vs The Vulture! Spider-Man and the Skrulls vs Mysterio! Spider-Man and Doctor Strange vs the Sinister Six!), and we've still yet to get one that's just Peter and MJ grounded in New York. Sure, it's the tone these movies are aiming for and getting mad about it is like criticizing Brave and the Bold for not being a solo Batman show, but I think Holland needs at least one street-level Spider-Man movie to even out all the ones where he hops all over the country/world/multiverse. Give me Spider-Man: Stuck at Home or Spider-Man: Homework.
And just show me Maguire and Garfield already.
I'd argue that Homecoming is still a solo Spider-Man movie at it's core. Tony Stark only has a collective 8-minutes of screen time in that movie and never actually teams up with Spider-Man in any scene. He works as a background character without stealing the show from Peter.
Far From Home definitely feels like a Spider-Man and Nick Fury/SHIELD crossover story, though, but that's not my biggest problem with it. That one has pretty weak writing on the whole, IMO. I still maintain that Homecoming is pretty good, though.
I thought Homecoming was good too, and Far From Home had glaring missteps (Tony gifts Peter with an army of kill-drones?). I just think there should've been a Spider-Man movie where Holland's Peter gets to ground himself some more before we do the wacky multiverse one.
Speaking of Spider-Man, now that we have photographic proof Andrew Garfield's back thanks to leaks, (https://twitter.com/Hardik_S_/status/1429836457502412810) his tenure feels like such a trainwreck but I'm still curious what its legacy is. Unlike Maguire or Holland, he never got a great Spider-Man movie. I thought ASM 1 was boring, and I hated its sequel. His era comes off as such a middle step-child in between the other two Spideys that it's kind of a blur to me.
You can also tell from interviews how genuinely disappointing it was for Garfield himself. He clearly wanted to do this role beyond just a paycheck (much like how Robert Pattinson is doing Batman because he genuinely likes the character). The whole experience and backstage politics really affected him and he has stated that the experience left him a bit weary of big blockbuster roles going forward. That's likely why he had established himself far more as a character actor since then.
Yeah, I read that one where he was angered that Sony pressured him to apologize for suggesting the ASM MJ could be a guy and his iteration of Peter could explore his sexuality. And that Sony was apparently going to recast him even before they considered a deal with Marvel Studios. Garfield had a vision for Spider-Man that was at odds with Sony's, similar to when Raimi quit Spider-Man 4 because he was exhausted by the company's demands.
I definitely got excited hearing Dafoe's laugh as the Green Goblin and seeing Molina as Doc Ock, and I'm not even that nostalgic for the Raimi trilogy. Doctor Strange's motivation for helping Peter seems kinda flimsy but maybe it'll come across better with more context. Personally, even though we know Maguire and Garfield are gonna be in the movie, I don't want to see them in any trailers. I would rather their appearances in the movie be a surprise going into it, so even though we know it's going to happen, we won't have any context to judge when it will, which I think would just make their appearances feel more exciting and special, but maybe that's just me.
I do hope that they are just extended cameos in this movie. It's neat to see them, of course, but they shouldn't overshadow the MCU Peter Parker in his own movie.
I kinda agree. I think it would be neat to see a team-up in the last act of the movie, but yeah, I do think it would be better for the film to not go full Spider-Verse and just keep the focus squarely on Holland.
I'm on the fence with that. While they shouldn't overshadow Holland at all, I want them to have something to contribute in the movie besides the team-up pose. Not saying they should go "Okay, let's wrap up whatever loose threads were in the Raimi and Webb films and conclude those Peters' character arcs", but these are Spider-Men with unfinished stories (ASM 2 ended on a cliffhanger, Spider-Man 3 ended more on a reconciliation than a big conclusion) and there should be some resolution for both of them now there's a chance. Show Maguire Peter married to Dunst Mary Jane. Show if Garfield Peter's still in grief over Gwen's death and the big mystery revolving around his parents.
Just saw Shang-Chi, which I admittedly wasn't expecting much from based on the trailers. It was a pleasant surprise and much better than I expected overall. It's nothing you haven't already seen before from other superhero origin films, but it's still executed pretty well for what it is. Like a lot of other people have said, the action is a lot better here than in most MCU movies, and the villain is among the more memorable and emotionally nuanced ones in the MCU. Still, it does fall into more than a few genre trappings which, even for me are getting to be a little too old-hat at this point.
That said, it's the kind of superhero flick that has an unironically fun and mystical tone, and isn't ashamed of that fact. It's kind of refreshing with all of the cynical takes that have become so prevalenf lately, even including some of the better done ones.
I'd say that this is upper-mid-tier MCU. I like it far more than Black Widow or Spider-Man: Far From Home, slightly more than Doctor Strange or the first Ant-Man, but not quite as good as the original Iron Man, the first two Cap movies, Guardians, or The Avengers/Infinity War/Endgame. Still, it's the most I've enjoyed an MCU movie in a while.
It needed less Awkwafina and more Tony Leung.
I actually didn't mind Awkwafina that much compared to most MCU comic relief characters. She didn't make me laugh much, but didn't really annoy me as much as she could have if handled worse (like Darcy from the first two Thor movies). That said, I do agree that Tony Leung could have used some more screentime, even though I really liked the scenes that he was in.
Shang-Chi is probably the most I've liked a Marvel movie since Black Panther, although I did really like parts of Infinity War and Endgame. I agree that it's not too unique in terms of the MCU formula or origin stories in general, but I thought that it was very well-told, and the action is among the franchise's best.
I don't really have much else to add, but I wouldn't be surprised if this ended up my favorite of this year's Marvel flicks.
New trailer was cool, but what interested me more was hearing Pattinson, Kravitz, and Reeves discuss their take on Batman and Catwoman. (https://youtu.be/WxGiwp6ddxI) They see their version of Bruce as a self-destructive rock star living in a decaying mansion, which explains using a Kurt Cobain song in the trailers.
Here's the title of the next Ant-Man and the Wasp movie.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCgyXA-VkAszHfD.jpg)
:happytime:
Peter, those are Cheerios.
I have to be honest, as tired as I am of Film Twitter, Eternals does look and sound kind of bad. Not much about the story has really interested me, and the visuals do look duller and flatter than advertised. And hearing that it's light on comic relief, even beyond Marvel standards does make it sound somewhat exhausting. And it does make sense, Chloe Zhao seems kind of humorless from what I've gathered about her.
But fuck, am I tired of it being spoiled all over.
Just saw Eternals. Yeah, it was pretty dumb. Granted, I think I'd still say that Captain Marvel and Thor: The Dark World are a bit lower on my MCU rankings, but Eternals I think falls flat in a bigger way since it aims higher. It's funny, I wasn't really a huge fan of Jack Kirby's original run with the characters, nor the Thor miniseries directly following it, however for all of this movie's hype of being lead by an Academy Award winning director known for deeper films, most of the characters felt rather one-note. The Deviants in particular were pretty lackluster, and it actually made me appreciate Kirby's material a bit more since despite being a mess of ideas with little coherency from a writing standpoint, he did make the key Deviants more nuanced, less one-dimensionally evil characters. In that regard, despite his writing faults, I do believe that Kirby was ahead of his time in terms of his ideas and subject matter in the medium.
Oddly enough, I thought Sprite was probably the best realized character in the movie, despite clearly being meant as more of a supporting role. Her motivations and character arc made sense, and she came off as a more interesting character due to her internal conflict and morally gray demeanor towards humanity.
Having Arishem talk was a weird decision. His voice sounded like something out of a Saturday morning cartoon, and again I appreciate how Kirby chose to make the Celestials silent characters and have the Eternals themselves act as interpreters of their will. It gave them an heir of mystique and grandiosty that was seriously lacking in this movie.
Also, the twist villain trope rears it's ugly head again and needlessly convolutes the plot even further. I saw it coming, but still cringed when it happened.
Keep in mind that I'm not on the "let's all start bashing the MCU because it's the cool thing to do now" bandwagon. I still like the better MCU content and genuinely look forward to a good number of projects. That said, I will call out when I think something kind of sucks. I don't strongly dislike the movie or anything. I'm mostly dispassionate about it, which in a way can be kind of worse. I still think Neil Gaiman's run would have been a better template for the movie to build off of, but even going the way that they did, it could have worked better if it was focused on only two or three core characters and had a story far less up it's own ass.
I finally got around to Eternals, and it was alright. Far from the best MCU, but I'm not sure if this would even crack my bottom five. I agree with EK about Sprite being a highlight, but I also liked Phastos
Spoiler
even if he's responsible for the A-Bomb
.
This wasn't as dour as I was expecting, but it's also not as strongly paced as most of the better films. And I do think that the backgrounds and camera work were generally strong, better looking than I was expecting.
But really, it would have been better if the supporting cast had more time to expand their roles, as most of them came off as two-dimensional at best. Maybe this should have been a miniseries on Disney+ instead.
Just wanted to say, after getting used to so many of the more auteur directors bashing Marvel and comic book movies in general seemingly every other week at this point (I'm pretty numb and indifferent to it now), it's genuinely kind of nice to see one kind of stick up for the genre. In this case namely Paul Thomas Anderson (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indiewire.com/2021/12/paul-thomas-anderson-superhero-movies-have-not-ruined-cinema-1234685162/amp/).
I'm a fan of a lot of works from most of the naysayers as well, and it's not like there aren't legitimate complaints to levy at a lot of modern Superhero movies that aren't legitimately fair criticism. That said, I've always hated the idea that there's this unwritten rule that you aren't a true film fan if you enjoy something of that sort and don't exclusively indulge in more artistically-inclined cinema. God forbid people have varying tastes to fulfill different kinds of things that they want to see.
That doesn't mean that I don't have massive issues with Hollywood being exclusively dictated by massive corporations and creativity in big-budget priductiond being largely stifled. That said, it doesn't mean that the actual individuals working on these projects should have their work indiscrimately shat on, especially when saud work is not only helping to keep theaters alive, but in many cases the profits from which are at least partly used to fund the smaller, more personal films that many of these same auteur directors work on themselves. It's cool to see at least one among this bunch that seems to understand that.
Yeah, Stellan Skarsgard said it best in a recent interview. It's not superhero movies that are a problem, but corporations prioritizing them so much they give little time to mid-budget or independent films unless they're part of a popular franchise or have an established big-name director like Tarantino on board. That doesn't mean those movies don't exist anymore, but they're not in the public eye as much. Which inevitably frustrates numerous directors, some reasonably so, some not, culminating in Ridley Scott going on incoherent rants about millennials.
I'm not even going to try and downplay it, I fucking loved No Way Home. Like, I had an emotional response to it on several occasions, from cheering to being genuinely in awe of certain moments in the movie. It's not as good as Spider-Man 2 or Into The Spider-Verse for me, but it easily ranks as my third favorite Spider-Man movie behind those two. It's easily the best of the MCU trilogy, and one of my new favorite MCU movies in general.
It's not perfect, and I do have some (mostly) minor issues, but I'm not going to hide how elated it made me feel. To be honest, it's been a while since I've loved a solo MCU movie this much. It actually managed to surpass The Suicide Squad as my favorite comic book movie this year (and I love The Suicide Squad).
Spoiler
Besides the obvious reveals of Tobey and Andrew, I can't tell you how loud the audience cheered when Matt Murdock had his cameo about 15-minutes into the movie.
I'm also really glad that they mailed the nuance of Norman Osborn and Dr. Octavius. I was really worried that they'd play them off as generic MCU villains, but they did them justice here, which was a huge relief for me.
Yeah, it was good shit. Willem Dafoe and Alfred Molina stole this movie. I didn't realize how much I'd miss seeing the Raimi version of Green Goblin again until watching him here. I'm almost disappointed he isn't staying on as a recurring villain in future Spider-Man movies.
Spoiler
It was weird seeing Maguire Peter being so talkative and chipper. Guess aside from still having a complicated MJ relationship, the last 14 years have been good to him. While Garfield Peter was so miserable and desperate for friendship here. Even in short background scenes or when he cracks a joke, it's obvious his life since Gwen died has been absolutely rough on him. Especially during the scenes where all the Peters banter together, you can tell Garfield Peter's the most depressed no matter how hard he's trying to hide it.
And they really took the "Why is MCU Spider-Man now a trust fund kid with Stark tech and a Jon Favreau butler now?" complaint to heart. Holland Peter is put through the ringer in the second half of the film.
I don't have much to add that you guys didn't already say, but I absolutely loved No Way Home. And it does feel like they've taken the criticism from both of Holland's films to heart, and made the best possible version of them. It's no coincidence that I'm seeing even some of the MCU's biggest critics give this more of a thumbs up than usual.
Although personally, I do hope that when we next get a new live-action Spider-Man, that the stakes are lowered. This is the most amount of time Holland's Spidey spent in New York, and it just showed how much the character is meant to tackle nearby threats and not handle things at a universal scale. That's cool every once in a while, but it really shouldn't be every time.
So was the Sinister Five planned, or was the sixth member left out for some behind the scenes reason? Like Dehaan and Giamatti either said no or weren't available, the shit with Franco made him persona non grata, and Keaton was too busy being Batman again? I thought the sixth was going to be an AU Ned who turned evil and became Hobgoblin, but that didn't happen either.
No Way Home convinced me to rewatch Spider-Man 3 for old times' sake. I remember rewatching it a few years ago and liking it a lot more than I used to, but on this viewing, all the old criticisms came back to my head like "Sandman's motivations don't correlate to his actions and retconning him into Uncle Ben's death is stupid, the romance arc is too sloppy, both Peter and MJ are horrible to each other even before the Symbiote, this version of Eddie Brock sucks". But there's a mindless fun quality to it I admire, especially all the Emo Peter scenes. Honestly, despite Raimi saying he hated Venom and only added him in because of executive edicts, the Symbiote scenes have more gravitas to them than the Sandman ones. I doubt it would've worked as well if Raimi used Vulture like in his original plan.
Speaking of contested Spider-Man sequels, I've been noticing a lot of positive re-evaluation from Amazing Spider-Man 2 come out of Twitter and YouTube. Even seen a few genuinely argue it's the best Spider-Man movie. And I don't know why.
Yeah, I've been seeing that too. I think at least some of that comes from people who were the right age for Garfield's Spider-Man movies, which is fair, time moves forward and all. But... really?
I actually didn't rewatch any of the movies before NWH, so maybe I should see if I can find the set with the pre-Holland films and give them all another go. It would be interesting to see what others are seeing in it.
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on December 21, 2021, 08:08:58 PM
So was the Sinister Five planned, or was the sixth member left out for some behind the scenes reason? Like Dehaan and Giamatti either said no or weren't available, the shit with Franco made him persona non grata, and Keaton was too busy being Batman again? I thought the sixth was going to be an AU Ned who turned evil and became Hobgoblin, but that didn't happen either.
Hmm, that's a good question. I wonder if Topher Grace was even asked, or if Sony wants us to forget that take on Venom.
Maybe it's the romance? Garfield and Stone had the best chemistry out of all the 3 Spider-couples, enough that I'm pretty sure all the Spider-Gwen/Gwenpool/Gwen clones who've popped up in Marvel lately came from people wanting more of that. But that's about the only thing I remember the TASM movies excelled at.
Since apparently everyone is doing it now, here are my rankings for all of the Spider-man movies (including Venom, since again apparently everyone else is).
11. The Amazing Spider-Man 2
10. Venom
9. The Amazing Spider-Man
8. Spider-Man: Far From Home
7. Venom: Let There Be Carnage
6. Spider-Man 3
5. Spider-Man: Homecoming
4. Spider-Man
3. Spider-Man: No Way Home
2. Spider-Man 2
1. Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse
It's worth noting that I don't actually hate any Spider-Man movie so far. Don't coonfuse that with me not thinking that that there are in fact some pretty bad Spider-Man movies, but even the worst of them have things that I like about them. For me, TASM2 is easily the weakst of the bunch since on top of being a mess, it actively makes a lot of writing decisions that I absolutely detest for the character and that particular iteration of the Spider-Man Universe. Even then, I do have to give props to Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone's performances in it. It's the one aspect of the movie that I can say is genuinely good. The first TASM is much more competent but it's also....kind of bland for me, for lack of a better description. Nothin in it actively offends me (or very little does), but by that same point not much stands out about it to me either. It feels like a lesser version of Sam Raimi's first take on the character in every way.
Venom is trash, but I'd be lying if I said that was the kind of trash that I sort of enjoy despite clearly having a lot of developmental trouble and being tonally inconsistent throughout. Venom 2 on the other hand I will say that I enjoy very intentionally since it clearly knows what kind of movie it is. I firmly believe that they set out to make a Superhero B-movie with this one and it's very self-aware throughout. It's done in a way that I found to be rather enjoyable in all honesty.
For the Home Trilogy (or really just the MCU Trilogy so far), I have to say that Far From Home really went down for me after my initial viewing. It has a lot of writing issues and really does a lot of injustice to the character for me on repeat viewings. It's not atrocious by any means, but it's one of those times that even for me (who isn't as negative on the standard MCU formula as most people understandably are) found the MCU-ness of it all to be way too overbearing in a pretty bad way. Homecoming I feel was a genuinely fun movie on the other hand, and to me it felt like the closest thing we got to a live-action version of TSSM. Far From Home is still really new, but it's one of those movies that just knocked me out of my seat in a way that only happens once every few years, and it's easily a top three for me.
The Raimi trilogy is special to me so I'm biased. Spider-Man 3 has a ton of writing issues and is plagued by behind-the-scenes drama....but damnit, the emotional moments still hit for me, and I find that it has a lot of beats to it's story and to the characters that work more than people give it credit for. The dumb stuff is dumb, but at least for me it's entertainingly dumb. It's actually a surprisingly rewatchable movie despite the abundance of issues that it has. The original 2002 film isn't perfect, but it's still the best enty-point movie out of any of the live-action ones, and still one of the best origin movies ever put to screen, IMO. And of course Spider-Man 2 only gets better with time and re-watches for me. I've already gone on at length about why Into The Spider-Verse is not only my favorite Spider-Man movie, but my favorite superhero movie that I've seen so far, but yeah, it just nails the entire mythos of the character and why people love just about any iteration of him.
That's a good list.
It's been too long since I've seen the vast majority of these for me to rank them. But I definitely still need to see the new Venom soon. I only just saw the first one a few months ago, and I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it.
I haven't seen Venom 2 yet, so:
10. Amazing Spider-Man 2
9. Amazing Spider-Man
8. Venom
7. Spider-Man Far From Home
6. Spider-Man 3
5. Spider-Man
4. Spider-Man No Way Home
3. Spider-Man Homecoming
2. Spider-Man 2
1. Into the Spider-Verse
Venom's okay for what it is, and Tom Hardy arguing with himself is fun, but it falls heavily into plenty of the superhero movie cliches. Particularly how the villain's just a bigger version of Venom with under-defined motives or barely even a personality.
I'll give the Amazing Spider-Man movies this- besides Garfield and Stone, Sally Field is a pretty fine Aunt May. My favorite scene in both of those movies even comes from the second, when she tells Peter to stop obsessing over his parents, as she and Ben were his. It was a well-acted scene, and it does call out a problem that these movies have- Uncle Ben doesn't seem to matter in them.
Even besides the weird fascination the movies have with his non-entity parents, Peter seems more affected by Captain Stacy's death than his own uncle, the man who supposedly raised him. Hell, the MCU has been playing coy about the existence of a Ben Parker, and even those seem to have him more of an impact in those movies.
What a waste of Martin Sheen. It's easy to go "lol, chocolate milk" and laugh at him for the reason he died, but then you remember how they shot his death scene where he's wrestling for the gun for no reason. But the TASM movies weren't interested in rooting Peter. They were the movies that decided his radioactive spider-blood was an important plot point. Of course, TASM 2 backtracks on that hard in its final scene going "No, Peter's not just Spider-Man because he has magic blood. Look at him helping this little kid and saving his life!", but it leads to a movie juggling "Peter is the chosen one" and "Peter is just your average kid trying to do his best" and struggling at both. And it's no coincidence the most popular new Spider-Man characters in the last decade started off as reactions against these films.
Apparently, TASM 3 would've went back on some of the character deaths (Norman would've come back after dying of "the Osborn curse", producers said they were looking to revive Gwen and maybe Captain Stacy too). Along with their attempt to turn the Sinister Six to their own Avengers or something, I wish someone at Sony published a book explaining what the hell happened in these movies. They really wanted their own MCU, but forgot Kevin Feige's job is harder than it looks.
I saw a bunch of people talk about a Batman: No Way Home or an Into the Bat-Verse, and while I'm not as multiverse fatigued as others, I wouldn't want either of those unless certain actors were still alive. You put two Spider-Men in one scene together, they're gonna banter, talk about each others' lives, have fun. Put two Batmen in one scene together, they're going to make stern judgments about each other, speculate on perceived differences, and only find camaraderie by the end of the film. You can't do a movie with Bale, Keaton, Pattinson, and Affleck together because aside from some differences (Bale plays him as a romantic, Keaton portrays him as a bit of a creep, Affleck an old soldier), they wouldn't make for that much contrast with each other. If Adam West was still around, I could see a farce between him and a couple of the other Bruces. But alas. While the other idea sounds neat on paper, it also feels redundant to throw half a dozen Batmen in a cartoon at the expense of the Bat-Family.
Form of...water! (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/wonder-twins-dc-movie-adam-sztykiel-director-1235093333)
Pattinson revealed his favorite Batman comics. (https://twitter.com/pattinsonphotos/status/1493367383196680197)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FLmBuImXMAI5EAp?format=jpg&name=small)
A Morrison, 3 O'Neils, and an Azzarello.
He also said he'd want Batman to fight the Court of Owls or Calendar Man in his sequel. (https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/the-batman-robert-pattinson-sequel-villains/) He also wants a 13-year-old Robin. (https://twitter.com/TheBatmanFilm_/status/1493657205027086344)
Oh wow, Shaman. That's one of the first non-Archie or cartoon-based comics I ever read, and I have good memories of it.
That's a pretty good list, especially as it's light on the more obvious choices.
AMC Theaters is going to charge higher ticket prices for The Batman. (https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/2/22957881/batman-tickets-amc-pricing-premium)
My quick first impressions of The Batman is that I really enjoyed it and find it to be a fairly strong entry in the franchise. It's not as good as The Dark Knight or Mask of the Phantasm, IMO, but that's hardly an insult.
Though, I do have to ask....
Spoiler
....Did Riddler have any backup plans in-case Batman or the cops didn't act exactly as he predicted they would? That's probably my one big issue with the movie. For how grounded and serious it's supposed to be, it relies way too heavily on the villain having things go way too "according to plan" to the point of coming off as kind of ridiculous once you stop to think of how many variables there could be in any given scenario. Like The, what if Batman brought Falcone out the back of the building, instead of the exact right place for him to be sniped? Or what if his followers chickened out and didn't go through with the job after he was locked up in Arkham? To be fair, it acknowledges that his plans are fallible when trying to kill Bruce Wayne, but it still feels like way too much was left up to luck lining up with all of his other plans. The Dark Knight's Joker also seemingly had a lot of things happen to his benefit, but it was also made clear that he was mainly trying to spread chaos and that many of his plans didn't rely on a definitive outcome.
The ending felt a tad underwhelming given all of the buildup, but on the other hand I loved what it thematically represented for the character. It's especially refreshing to see after Snyder's take on Batman.
Still processing the movie, but on the whole, I really liked it. Colin Farrell was my favorite out of the cast. Re-imagining Riddler as a TikToker was weird but I dug it, even if his plan at the end was too much like Bane's in TDKR (imagining we'll get a ton of annoying "Riddler was morally right, they just made him kill innocent people so you think he's the villain" takes on Twitter too).
On an adaptation level, the movie's picks were curious. It took a lot from the Earth One books, a bit from the Telltale game, and I even noticed a little influence from the unused Miller/Aronofsky script. I didn't care for any of those, but it's like how No Way Home took One More Day and made that work. But it did leave the film feeling very familiar. I mean, this isn't the first time Zoe Kravitz's played Catwoman. Which kinda disappoints me even though I enjoyed the film. I was expecting something a little more groundbreaking rather than the back-to-basics approach here, similar to how TDK blew everyone away and made them go "You can do that in a Batman movie?"
Spoiler
I also see that WB was so nostalgic for the Nolan era that they pruned not just the guy from Tenet but the kid from Dunkirk as Bruce and Joker.
The Batman was pretty good. I like that it really did feel like the detective movie that it was hyped up as, and the action also worked pretty well. I don't know if it's better than the Nolan movies, since yes, it is pretty familiar, but I think it works well enough to justify its existence.
Remember when we thought that DC was slumping compared to Marvel? While I'm still not convinced that Snyder is the visionary his fanbase claims him to be, they have been doing a good job of distinguishing their films from Marvel's, and letting them go in enjoyably weird directions. I feel like we couldn't have got this five years ago, or at least not nearly as well. We definitely couldn't have gotten Peacemaker.
Spoiler
So WB had to have been pushing hard to connect this with Joker (2019) before Reeves resisted and hired Keoghan? The film's tone, portrayal of a few characters, message about class struggles, and especially the climax where a public personality is shot on live TV to start a revolution make it such a spiritual sequel to that film that if you took out parts like the iPhones, this film could easily take place around a couple decades after Joaquin Phoenix shot DeNiro.
While there are similarities that you can draw between to the two movies, I think that Matt Reeves has made it pretty clear that this movie is in it's own independent Universe separate from any other DC projects.
Also, I watched the movie a second time and have had at least the weekend to process my feelings on it. I still stand by what I said that it doesn't top The Dark Knight or Mask of the Phantasm for me, but yeah, I can definitely say it's a really strong Batman movie. I wasn't sure how to feel about Pattinson's take on the Bruce Wayne side of the character as it was so different from what I was used to, but after accepting that this version of the character is a recluse billionaire that doesn't have much of a public presence (and something which I heavily suspect will be part of his character arc if Reeves gets to do his planned sequels), it worked for the kind of story that they were telling here. I do think that we could have had more scenes between him and Alfred, though, as it's clear that he is the only person who he has a meaningful relationship with as Bruce Wayne at this point.
Paul Dano's Riddler is, again, a complete reinterpretation that barely if at all resembles his comic book counterpart, but again it worked for this kind of movie. The opening scene in particular, aside from being beautifully shot, really cemented his menace just about as well as the opening to TDK did for the Joker. Speaking of which....
Spoiler
....I really could have done without that Joker cameo at the end. I get it, he's Batman's most iconic villain, but not every single Batman story has to reference back to him. We've seen so many interpretations of the character at this point that we would be just fine going through an entire Batman movie or two without any mention of him. You know how people rag on Marvel for sometimes going overboard with being a bit too fan-servicey and having to pop in unnecessary cameos in their movies? This felt like that to me. The movie really didn't need that scene between him and Riddler, IMO. It's interesting, because despite it's long run-time, most of the content in this movie felt pretty essential to the story being told. This is probably one of the few scenes which I think could have been cut.
This really did come off more like a serial killer with incredibly intricate planning and a wealth of resources as opposed to a supervillain. You can clearly see the Fincher influences, here. I do still stand by my criticism of his actual plots being a bit too intricate to the point of occasional absurdity, but Dano's performance itself was flawless. Same props go to pretty much the rest of the cast, including Collin Farrell as Penguin and Jeffrey Wright as Gordon (I still consider Gary Oldman to be my personal favorite live-action take on the character, but Wright was still excellent).
I also dig how sloppy Batman's fighting was in this movie. It feels like how a highly-trained single person being weighed down by a loaded suit with tons of padding and armor would fight, and he clearly messes up a lot without coming off as feeling incompetent. Again, I suspect if we get a trilogy out of this that he will improve drastically throughout the course of the series, but this does feel like a Batman who's only in his second year of crime-fighting.
I also like how much detail was packed into this movie. Not just comic book references, but also story details, such as little nuances to Batman using his technology to profile the cops at the beginning which is more apparent on a re-watch once you know how his contacts work, to how clues are laid out about what's going on behind-the-scenes once you catch the context of certain off-handed remarks or visual imagery with knowledge of what will happen or be revealed later.
I really do look forward to seeing more from this take on the Bat-Universe.
The Batman got me to rewatch the 1989 Batman movie, and that movie's personally interesting in not for how much it influenced Batman media since like the Gotham atmosphere or the Elfman theme, but how much it deviates from everything else. Not just in making Joker the guy who killed Bruce's parents, but basically revealing aside from a couple eccentricities, Jack Napier and Joker are the same person and no one questions that. It's Joker without either the mystery or the tragedy in his character, and he's essentially a campy mobster here. Not to say Nicholson doesn't deliver a great performance though.
Same with the movie's portrayal of Bruce. Burton goes hard in making him a reclusive loner, but at the cost of making him weird in all the wrong places. Like when he gets Vicki drunk, has sex with her while she's too inebriated to say no, and then sleeps upside-down like a bat afterwards. There are some good reasons why when people go back and remember these films, they fondly recall Bruce and Selina's relationship far more than the one here. Even if that scene was cut out, there's zero chemistry going on between Basinger and Keaton. And that dampers this film when its emotional anchor is, bizarrely, a love triangle between them and Joker. Beyond that, this version of Bruce doesn't get much to do either compared to later versions like Bale's or even Affleck's. Even the Knox character had more of a character arc.
I think back to one of the common criticisms of Burton's Batman movies, that it's obvious he only read 1 or 2 Batman comics before working on these movies (calling The Killing Joke one of the first comics he ever loved when that book came out only a year before the 1989 film hit theaters didn't help). And while I don't agree with that criticism, Returns is one of my favorite Batman movies and that one doesn't care about accuracy in the slightest, I can sorta see it apply here.
I'm noticing that Twitter is trying to rehabilitate Batman Forever now, and I'll admit that I'm curious about it. Batman & Robin is much less competent but much more fun, but from what I recall, Forever is too dour to enjoy as camp, but also too dumb to take very seriously.
I could be wrong, though, so it may be time for a rewatch.
Yeah, I've seen one camp argue for Tim Burton's third Batman movie and another demand WB release a Schumacher Cut of Forever. Maybe Keaton coming back re-opened some old wounds for fans of that era of Batman, because I don't completely understand it.
As for the film itself, I can't imagine what it was like for audiences back then to go from Returns to Forever. Returns presents itself as a tribute to German expressionism, while Forever comes off as a big-budget Nickelodeon movie. And I hated Jim Carrey in this. He's just so annoying.
But since I mentioned Keaton,
Quote from: Avaitor on March 05, 2022, 03:17:49 PM
Remember when we thought that DC was slumping compared to Marvel? While I'm still not convinced that Snyder is the visionary his fanbase claims him to be, they have been doing a good job of distinguishing their films from Marvel's, and letting them go in enjoyably weird directions. I feel like we couldn't have got this five years ago, or at least not nearly as well. We definitely couldn't have gotten Peacemaker.
I'm concerned the other Batman movie coming out
this next year will reverse course, since the big selling point is "We've brought Michael Keaton back! In a Batman movie confusingly called The Flash! Don't forget he's in Batgirl too! We're making his Batman the mentor of the other DC movie heroes!" It's all very one step forward, two steps back.
Well, here's the confrontation they deleted from the final cut of The Batman. (https://youtu.be/FBeccCU_pEE)
Interesting choice to make Doctor Strange 2 a Wizard of Oz pastiche, but I'll take it. I assume the America Chavez comic from years ago burned them out on making the film character like her regular version, but I wish they gave her at least some of that personality.
Spoiler
It must be a rough year for Agents of SHIELD fans, having not only all the other shows ignore their show's existence or contradict it, but now this film had one of the Inhumans show up before any of their favorite characters. And yeah, I know it's a different Black Bolt, but it's still the same actor as the one on the show.
Meanwhile, though it's a little annoying that Wanda's mental health took a turn for the worse since her show ended and now she's willing to kill trillions just to achieve her dream of a domestic life with children (wondering why Vision was absent in the film), she was fun as the main villain.
The movie has it's issues, but I really enjoyed it on the whole.
Spoiler
I have to admit, after so much recent superhero media has followed the trend of having other heroes face gruesome deaths for cheap shock value, I've become mostly annoyed by the trope if not indifferent. That said, there is something kind of novel about seeing it in an MCU movie given how family-friendly they tend to try and be, even in their somewhat darker flicks like Infinity War.
Anyways, I may be in the minority on this but I actually have a fondness for the first Doctor Strange despite how formulaic it is. I really liked this one, especially the stuff with Necro-Strange which was just pure Sam Raimi Evil Dead-esque goofiness in all of the right ways, but I do think that I slightly prefer the first movie as an overall story. This movie was fun but couldn't shake from feeling more like a middle chapter in a much bigger saga than a stand-alone story. That's really just a matter of personal preference, though.
Spoiler
Yeah, Wanda imploding Black Bolt's head was a little surprising. And at least it's not the most disposable Charles death on film.
Yeah, that wasn't as tight as I was hoping it'd be, but it was nice to see Raimi have some fun in between Marvel's traditional world building.
... Was this really his first movie since Oz? I hope he gets to direct something else soon, ideally not a blockbuster.
Spoiler
I know they were never beloved by any means, but it's kinda funny those 00s Fantastic Four movies have been so memory-holed that MoM had more of an eye for a fancasting of Reed than bringing back the Reed from those films for a cameo. Unless Jim from The Office is going to be Reed for the long haul.
So the eventual promo tour for The Flash movie's gonna be a nightmare for WB, right? I assume they'll have to release the film in theatres or else they'll have burned over $200 million for nothing, but the news going on with Ezra...
There's also the Amber Heard situation with Aquaman. She's been painted in a pretty bad light in the public eye after the trial with Johnny Depp, so I imagine WB will really scale back her appearances in the marketing and potentially try to write her out of any future movies.
Ezra is definitely a much worse case, of course. I imagine they'll just have to do their best to try and get the movie out as is and then immediately recast him after the film releases.
That or hire whoever runs Jared Leto's PR team. Those guys somehow confused the public enough to forget Leto runs a cult.
Another issue, much less serious but still interesting, is how many writers worked on the movie. (https://www.cbr.com/2023-superhero-movie-45-screenwriters-flash/) What was going on in production? It's a Flash movie. It shouldn't require a bigger rotating door of directors and writers than the post-B&R Batman films had before they found Nolan.
Meanwhile in DC, Lady Gaga as Harley. (https://twitter.com/THR/status/1536499479225958401)
So, it's been more than enough time by this point, but kind of curious what people's thoughts are on Phase Four of the MCU so far? For starters, while it is increasingly popular to trash the MCU these days, I want to make it clear that at least for me, I'm not one of those people who pretends like I was always against this franchise and that I champion only "true auteur filmmaking." You know, the people who want to seem smart and sophisticated so they go against anything made by a big corporation that's popular, ignoring that it's still made by many creative individuals and that even many classics from big-budget stuff like Lucas's Star Wars to Raimi's Spider-Man movies and even more mid-budget films going back to the 40's and 50's were made with creatives battling with big studio heads and their mandates.
That said, Phase Four has mostly been kind of "Eh" for me so far, upon reflection. I was pretty indifferent to Black Widow other than really enjoying Yelena as a character, I thought Shang-Chi was fun but ultimately too safe and nothing that I have ever felt compelled to go back to, and I personally didn't care for Eternals. I legitimately loved Spider-Man: No Way Home, and upon re-watch I still feel the same way about it, but that one kind of feels like an outlier to the normal MCU for obvious reasons since it's a shared Sony property. And then there's Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, which I have only seen the one time in theaters and still hold the same thoughts on: It's fun but also a mess of a plot and has several key issues to it's story. That in itself is just the movies thought. This phase has really felt like it's more about the Disney + shows, and that actually is where I think more issues start to arise. I have gone on record and stated how much I was initially enjoying some of these shows, and I still stand by that. WandaVision has a great first two acts to it's season, but faltered off by the end. Falcon and the Winter Soldier was mostly so-so for me the whole way through with just a few stand-out scenes and moments. Loki started out great in it's first couple of episodes but kind of became a mess with it's plot by the end (which, considering that this is from the same writer as DSITMOM, that makes sense). Hawkeye legitimately disappointed me and really wasted it's opportunity to adapt one of the best Marvel comic book series that I have ever read. And Moon Knight, much like WandaVision and Loki, really had me intrigued at the start and kind of devolved into something disappointingly basic and not well thought-out by the end (though I really loved Oscar Isaac as the character and would actually like to see him return in a better project). Ms. Marvel has largely felt pretty standard so far. The stylistic touches are nice but only surface level and don't hide the very basic story-telling that the original comic book run executed much better, IMO (at least going by the show so far).
I don't hate any single project from Phase Four, but my enthusiasm for everything outside of Spider-Man has just not been there, despite me wanting to really by into these shows and movies. I don't feel that excitement for the next big team-up like I used to, and while there are still projects that I look forward to (Thor: Love and Thunder in just a few weeks is still one I'm really pumped for despite all of my complaints so far), I'm mostly just kind of following this franchise out of habit at this point, which is never a good sign. Phase One was a rough start if we're being honest, but it was novel for it's time and I legitimately love Iron Man, Captain America, and The Avengers. Phase Two was better overall, aside from Thor: The Dark World (and I'm still one of the few who genuinely likes Age of Ultron despite it admittedly being a hot mess of an editing nightmare). Phase Three is probably my overall favorite with a pretty well-balanced assortment of movies and benefited the most from building to a unified end-goal so there was a sense of momentum to everything. At the same time, each movie still managed to largely feel like it's own thing. I wasn't a big fan of either Ant-Man and the Wasp or Captain Marvel, but really strongly enjoyed every other movie from that phase, and I still do.
Phase Four has just strongly lacked that for me so far, and while I know this series was inevitably going to continue because why wouldn't it when it has several of the highest grossing-movies in film history, on a practical level I feel like they really could have benefited from taking decently long break after Endgame to at least give the franchise some sense of finality to it for at least some point, and to avoid the inevitable burnout that everyone is eventually bound to feel from delving way too much into a genre with so many titles in such a relatively short period of time. I guess I'm just not feeling it right now with the MCU, but that's just my take.
Yeah, though I did really like NWH and Doctor Strange 2, the rest of the movies were just "Okay, fine, whatever". As for the shows, they've got the opposite problems the Netflix ones had where they all forget they only have 6 episodes instead of 13, so they end up shoving too much in the finale without giving anything room to breathe. There's that pattern where they have a really good penultimate episode, and then a finale that does too much without thinking how all the pieces work. Though honestly, I kinda prefer it over Phase One and Two. Aside from Iron Man, Winter Soldier, and Guardians, most of those movies then didn't go above "Fine" or "I guess I liked that?" for me.
I think the problem with Phase Four is there's too much of an interim period to it all. Half the Avengers are gone, but they don't want to immediately have the Fantastic Four and the X-Men show up, so it feels like they're twiddling their fingers and waiting. And shit like Chadwick Boseman dying, not fully owning the Spider-Man rights and having to talk with Sony, and letting Gunn go for long enough that he's doing a dozen DC projects instead of a dozen Marvel ones screwed up a lot of their plans.
And for what it's worth, Phase 4 hasn't produced anything as bad as Morbius yet. So they're doing better than the Sony front. Also, and I hope I'm not jinxing it, at least they're not dealing with one of their actors kidnapping a girl and going on the run like WB.
I think the TV shows have really put the MCU into overkill territory. There's just way too much content now, and little of what we're getting has been the franchise at its best. My opinions on each Phase 4 project largely overlaps you guys and it feels like I'm watching a lot of this, the shows in particular, out of obligation than personal interest at this point.
Granted, no we haven't had a Morbius or Inhumans-level disaster, but I also don't think that we've had a singularly great work like Black Panther, Guardians or (most of) Daredevil. NWH is probably the closest, but I don't feel comfortable putting it at that level, probably since it relies too hard on nostalgia to the Raimi and Webb films more than being its own movie.
Or maybe it's because the shows were always in excess years before the Disney+ era, it's just it was easy to think of them as their own thing separate from the movies. If anything, we've had less MCU content now than when Hulu, ABC Family, Netflix, and ABC were pumping out Runaways, Cloak and Dagger, the Defenders shows, and Agents of SHIELD all in tandem with each other.
Another issue the MCU has now that they didn't have previously is the lack of competition. For most of the first three phases, they had to compete with the X-Men and DC films. But now that Disney bought Fox, and DC's still going through growing pains with the Discovery buyout being one of them, they don't have any serious rival at the moment when it comes to making superhero films, and no serious rival means less reason to push harder. Like look at Sony's description of their Kraven film and tell me Feige and the rest of Marvel execs are genuinely worried.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FVwPYxAWAAEHaO2?format=jpg&name=medium)
Closest they have to a rival is all The Boys spinoffs Amazon is making.
The new Thor is not sounding very good, and this seems to be coming from all different sides. I'll admit that I'm not expecting much at this point, since Waititi's shtick doesn't do a lot for me, even if Ragnarok did grow on me, but I'm curious to see what the big deal is all about.
I probably won't get to see it until next week, though. I'm supposed to get a free ticket from D23, but it hasn't come in yet, and I really can't afford to pay currently.
Yeah, hearing from people who loved Ragnarok that Love and Thunder is a bust is concerning.
I'm probably in the minority in enjoying Love and Thunder on the whole. It's not as good as Ragnarok, IMO, but I feel like some of the criticisms levied against this movie are people being more irritated with the tonal dissonance whereas for me that part felt intentional and mostly worked in the movie's favor. That said, the movie makes some pretty big missteps in it's story-telling and it's biggest issue by far feels like it kind of ignored Thor's development from Ragnarok. I could accept the character inconsistencies between the first two movies and Ragnarok more since it was meant to be a soft reboot for the character, but it's rather irksome when it feels like this is another reset for Thor after Endgame already regressed his character.
That said, I'd say that the movie was still pretty enjoyable for me. I may be going too easy on it but I can't help but have fun with Waititi's style of humor. It just works for me.
After stewing on it some more, while I still personally "enjoy" tgis movie, it's definitely another Doctor Strange scenario where it has a ton of major story issues when you actually stop to think about it.
Most notably:
Spoiler
The whole thing with Eternity being able to grant a wish and Thor knowing about it is now a major retroactive plot-hole for Avengers Infinity War and Endgame, since it makes no sense for him to not even bring it up after the snap. Also, this movie feels like it rushed through both Jane Foster and Gorr's character arcs. This is oddly enough a case where the movie could have stood to be a bit longer and fleshed out these characters and story beats more.
It's odd, because even putting Ragnarok aside, Waititi has made movies where he's able to balance humor and serious character drama before (Boy, Jojo Rabbit, etc.), but this movie feels so much more clumsy in it's execution. Apparently, though, Waititi was given a lot of creative freedom on this movie, if behind-the-scenes reports are to be believed, so this doesn't seem to be the usual case where you can just blame all of it's shortcomings on studio interference. This may be a case like It: Chapter Two, where the director maybe should have been reigned in just a bit more to keep things more on-track and focused.
I was noticing on Twitter how many random bad superhero movies from at least 5 years ago keep getting tweets going "Why did we as a society sleep on this?", "This was an underrated classic and I'll never forgive the haters!" or some other way to say "bad movie was actually good movie". Thor 2. TASM 2. The 2017 Power Rangers movie. The fucking Halle Berry Catwoman movie. (https://twitter.com/halleberry/status/1452831358951243777)Reminds me how the SW prequels and Spider-Man 3 got reappraised, or why there's a bunch of adults celebrating Dan Schneider shows. Yeah, a lot of it's nostalgia, but it's still weird. I suppose it's a sign that superhero fatigue's hardly a thing if there are audiences wowed by TASM 2 of all movies. Fully expecting movies like Elektra or League of Gentlemen to get rediscovered by Twitter stans, or guys with bluecheck accounts begging Disney to make Sky High 2. And I know in the future, movies like Eternals or Wonder Woman 1984 will probably get some form of "Why did we hate this? These movies are great!" discourse that'll be just as confusing.
I actually did watch Elektra again a couple of years ago, and it's not THAT bad. It deserves some praise for focusing on the bond of two female characters well before this was something super hero movies were more apt at, even if that's mostly a discount Ripley and Newt. But it's still pretty dumb, and out classed by both WW movies and even Captain Marvel.
But you never know what movies matter to some people. I know someone who's a serious film buff, can write essays of well-researched and honest critiques of classic Hollywood and contemporary stuff, whose favorite super hero movie has been Supergirl ever since he was a kid. I still have a soft spot for Affleck's Daredevil, myself, even though I'd never pick that or most comic book movies from that era over more recent stuff.
Still, it really is telling that the MCU movies that arguably have the most creative control are the ones that are catching on the least successfully. Although I'd say with MoM, Raimi is not the problem at all, and if anything, it would have been a lot better if he wasn't forced to spilt the Doctor Strange movie he wanted with a WandaVision sequel he clearly had no interest in. And with Eternals, Chloe Zhao is talented, but she's still a weird choice for the MCU. She's honestly pretty humorless and really struggled to fit the studio's trademark banter into the heavier story she wanted, but even that suffered from a lack of balance between its cast and some clumsy ideas.
Can't speak for Love and Thunder yet, and who knows, I may even end up loving it. For every four or five people who came out annoyed, I do see someone who genuinely enjoyed it, although only a handful of those seemed to have truly loved it. But it's sounding like Waititi may just not be the best fit for super hero storytelling, and Ragnarok was possibly a fluke.
Eh, I bet MoM will be one of those superhero movies that catches on over time. While the attempts to shoehorn Wandavision are awkward, the movie still has a lot of fun with having Wanda as the villain. Kinda like how even though Raimi had no interest in Venom, the symbiote scenes in 3 are the ones everybody talks about.
The Marvel movies feel like they're going through the same uncertainty period they had in 2005-2007 (yeah, I know it was multiple studios in that case, but it's more jarring how more than one studio screwed up than just the one), with Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ghost Rider, X3, and even a couple before that like Blade Trinity and that one Punisher film I never hear anybody talk about without confusing it with War Zone. Admittedly, Phase 4 hasn't delivered anything as bad as those films yet, but it still reminds me of how the superhero movie craze doesn't really crash so much as it ebbs and flows. There's always that period every 7 or so years where it looks like it's about to peter out (see 1997, the period I just mentioned, 2013), but then a big rebound happens. And I wonder if we're in that period again.
That may be it, although The Batman and No Way Home are big enough successes to say that we're not quite at that level.
That said, I do think super hero fatigue, particularly MCU fatigue, is real. Again, NWH is a fluke, but from what I see with a lot of my friends, it does feel like each release seems to matter a little less, and a lot of the people who are still catching up seem to be doing so out of obligation more than interest. I do think that the shows are especially making it feel like there's just too much content, and not enough of it is worth sticking around for.
Obviously they've been doing shows alongside the movies for a long time, but you could skip most of those and not miss anything. The Netflix shows were largely doing their own thing, the people behind the movies almost purposefully ignored Agents of SHIELD, and stuff like Cloak and Dagger and Runaways basically didn't count. But now you need to see WandaVision and possibly What If? to understand MoM, Ms. Marvel is supposed to lead into the next Captain Marvel, and who knows what else. And almost all of these shows peak early.
I don't know. The thing about most of the movies is the characters usually go through a couple rounds of exposition to explain prior events so the audience won't feel like they needed to do homework. Like how Infinity War had a bunch of scenes where they reminded the audience what happened in Doctor Strange, Black Panther, GOTG Vol. 2, Civil War, etc. And MoM had a couple scenes that were clearly there for the audience that didn't watch Wandavision.
And I don't think superhero fatigue's a thing, or at least not in the form most people think. Yeah, there's a lot of capeshit being made, but at least there's a little more variety compared to the endless cycle of DC/Marvel cartoons and random Saban shows I went through as a kid. If the fatigue were a thing, I think it would've happened a long time ago, like in that mid-2000s period I mentioned. But like I said, it comes and goes in waves. There's always that one year where it feels like every superhero movie out in theaters is either mid or kind of sucks, but then a TDK or a Winter Soldier shows up and surprises you.
I guess what I'm getting at is how superhero movies can be slotted into eras. How the 90s was defined by the Batman movies and its copycats, the X-Men films dominating the early-to-mid 00s, the Nolan Batman films defining the late 00s-early 10s, then the MCU reigning from the early 10s up 'til now. We're probably due for a transition to another era, though I'm not sure what. Maybe Black Adam becomes a surprise hit and colors the next 7 years of superhero movies. Or maybe Kraven is somehow a 10/10 and Sony gets another chance at the seat.
I finally got around to seeing Love and Thunder, and it's definitely a step down from Ragnarok, but I don't think it's quite the trainwreck others have written it off to be. The humor does largely fall flat- even besides the constant tone shifts, it does seem like Waititi used most of his best gags in Ragnarok- but it also tries to write some big checks in terms of dramatic stakes that I don't think it can cash.
Still, I think his direction is solid, and the cast does their best. Hemsworth in particular seems to be having the time of his life, and clearly likes Waititi's style.
Just as expected, they are totally doing Namor and Atlantis in Black Panther: Wakanda Forever. The thing is, I always liked the rivalry between T'Challa and Namor in Hickman's run, having a mutual respect for each other as intelligent leaders, but at odds with each other in their ideological differences. The problem is, T'Challa isn't in this movie due to Chadwick Boseman's tragic passing, so I don't really know what to make of this yet.
Yeah, not being able to see T'Challa and Namor duke it out in the movies sucks. And I still wish they got M'Baku to be the next Black Panther instead of Shuri.
Marvel abruptly going "Phase 4 is now ending! The movies and shows you thought were Phase 4 are now Phase 5!" reeks of last-minute reorganization. And it makes sense in light of 4's lukewarm reception, but I'm curious what the nerves there are like at the moment. Assuming The Gray Man getting bad reviews is why they made a note of saying the Russos aren't doing Secret Wars/Kang Dynasty. And Watts bailing is certainly why F4 got delayed by another year. They're obviously not sweating that hard, otherwise Phase 5 would have a bunch of Wolverine movies and revealing Steve didn't die off-screen and Chris Evans is back, but it's still interesting seeing Marvel realize they can't just rest on their laurels or else another Top Gun Maverick might overthrow them at the box office.
Also a little disappointed that "Giancarlo Esposito will be revealed as the new Charles Xavier" rumor didn't come true.
On the DC side of things, it's fun watching Dwayne Johnson chew the scenery, even if he seems to think Black Adam's a Superman villain for some reason. I'm fully aware why they pushed their Shazam characters this year, but you'd think Keaton, Momoa, Gadot, or even Cavill could've showed up to give some pretense that they still have a broader idea of where their movies are going, or at least distract viewers from the elephant in the room.
Cavill returning was just a rumor with no real source to back it up, and as I recall he's currently filming another movie overseas, so it never really made sense for him to appear at this year's comic-con. I will say that both Black Adam and Shazam! 2 look like a lot of fun. Ironically enough they closer resemble the energy and (at least seemingly so far) the entertainment value that MCU movies used to have on a regular basis.
Going back to Black Panther 2, I will say that I appreciated the more emotional tone of the trailer, and how it restrained itself from that last-second stinger (usually containing a throwaway joke) that most MCU trailers tend to have. I still believe that recasting T'Challa would've been the best way to go, as passing on the torch to a new actor does not dishonor Boseman in any way, but I am still intrigued to see what they come out with. In any case, I really do want this movie to be great, as the MCU really does need a hit on their hands from one of their own IPs (Spider-Man obviously doesn't count). I still stand by really enjoying Doctor Strange 2 despite all of it's issues, but Thor 4 is something that I keep souring a bit more on as time goes by even though I initially had fun with it. And none of the D+ shows have been a home run. Shang-Chi is their only original movie that seems to have been better than just passable, and even that was still pretty safe and expected MCU-style film-making. It'd be nice to have another Winter Soldier tier movie on their hands at this point.
Also, I'm not going to lie: after seeing how they handled Wilson Fisk in Hawkeye, I'm more nervous than excited about Daredevil: Born Again.
As for the Russos, I don't necessarily think that they couldn't make more great MCU movies. Their original films have been sub-par, but they are essentially four-for-four with the MCU. I chalk it up to them probably being better suited to working in tandem with Feige and other big studio heads while just focusing on the directing aspect of those movies and utilizing their clear love of Marvel comic books. When they are also producing and more creatively in control of their own movies, it probably exposes more of their weaknesses that they didn't have to deal with nearly as much when working under Marvel. I could be wrong of course, but I don't think that they suddenly just got bad after they graduated from the MCU. It seems more likely to me that they probably prospered under those specific conditions whereas it may be the opposite scenario for certain other directors (such as Scott Derrikson).
Yeah, I get why Cavill wouldn't show up, but you'd think they'd do something to say "No, we still remember we have Superman. We definitely have a clue what we'll do with him in the future."
And they should've recast T'Challa. I understand why they didn't, since Chadwick Boseman was already in 4 movies so the scenario was harder than replacing Terrence Howard with Don Cheadle or switching Edward Norton with Mark Ruffalo, but that could've saved them a lot of trouble in hindsight.
I'm also confused why they brought back the writers of Daredevil Season 3 (along with some Better Call Saul writers) to write Echo instead of Season 4. Yeah, of course you need some really good writers to get people to care about an Echo show, but why not just can the Echo show and get all those writers to do Born Again?
Like I think the issue with Phase 4 is Feige doing double-duty and taking over Loeb's old job instead of finding another producer to be the new Loeb. It's stretched resources a little too thin, and it's turned the whole "Why don't the MCU shows have some impact on the movies for once?" question that fans and even the actors used to ask for years into a monkey's paw.
I wasn't expecting anything out of the Batgirl movie, but to shelve it even though most of the filming was already done? (https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1554567295699238912)
Once again... no one's ever really gone. (https://twitter.com/VancityReynolds/status/1574865217141481477)
Okay, so we got Stewart back, we got Jackman back, can McKellen put the helmet on just one more time now?
You'd think he would, if only just for some scene where he and Wanda meet and says something dumb like "I can't explain why, but I believe we must have some sort of bond."
Now I'm thinking about the old Marvel actors they won't randomly bring back for nostalgia bucks. I remember Wesley Snipes begged for them to let him play Blade again years ago, but Marvel read the same Blade Trinity behind-the-scenes horror stories we all did.
All I know is that as long as we're dealing with all of these multiverse shenanigans, I want to see Chris Evans cameo as The Human Torch just for the shits.
Or have Gorr, Vulture, and the Affleck Daredevil pop up and banter.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 27, 2022, 05:55:28 PM
All I know is that as long as we're dealing with all of these multiverse shenanigans, I want to see Chris Evans cameo as The Human Torch just for the shits.
Along with Michael B. Jordan's, right?
Although I just thought about something. Logan takes place in the future, a future where he, Xavier and Laure are the only surviving mutants... so how was Cable able to survive and make it to the future?
Either a family of Summerses were the ones in control of Eden, or branching timelines like I always assumed.
Some cool people made a silent film version of the 1989 Batman movie. (https://twitter.com/thesilentbatman/status/1575999381727170560)
Finally got around to watching Thor 4. The Gorr parts are great and I wish we got a lot more of that, more of him living up to being a God Butcher, and just more of Bale chewing the scenery and terrorizing the Asgardians. He carries this whole film. But then the parts without him feel like one of those Robert Rodriguez kids movies.
And didn't feel the Jane plot. Kinda wish they cut her out and gave her screentime to Valkyrie, since she isn't given much to do here. I heard the original cut was a lot longer, and you can see it. Watching this movie felt like watching a TV re-edit of a film.
Dang, I missed out on the No Way Home conversation from earlier this year. Sounds like my opinion lines up with a lot of people here had thought. That movie just made me really happy. Just seeing all the Spider-Man franchises come together like that was special. The conversation always used to be that Spider-Man got too many reboots, but this movie made it all worth it. It also reminded me that Garfield never got a fair chance. I feel like his movies got a bad wrap, and I'll admit I was never their biggest fan. But maybe that was because they came so soon after the Raimi trilogy? This movie also reminded me that he was maybe the bestSpiderman, even if he didn't have the best movies.
Also, William Defoe was as good if not better than he ever had been as the Green Goblin. I didn't even miss his mask, because he's just so expressive as an actor and fun to watch.
This, Shung-Chi, WandaVision and Loki have been my favorite parts of the current Marvel phase.
So yeah, Black Adam... it's not a good sign when the one time the theater audience reacted to anything was during the mid-credits scene. They were dead silent at everything else.
And I get it, since the movie's so mindlessly derivative of other superhero films ("Remember when Drax didn't understand sarcasm? Let's make Black Adam not understand sarcasm! Remember when Ant-Man did a funny? Let's make Atom Smasher do a funny! Remember when Doctor Strange used a Multiform technique and did that mirror thing? Let's have Doctor Fate use a Multiform technique and do that mirror thing! Remember when Diana murdered the shit out of those terrorists? Let's have Black Adam murder the shit out of terrorists!"). Like I know the whole movie's just a vanity project for The Rock, but it could've been a better vanity project.
Only character I liked was Fate, and that was mostly due to Brosnan doing his best to carry this film. Almost everyone else was meh, and I couldn't stand Atom Smasher. They try so hard to make him their own Ant-Man, but Noah Centineo can't even muster 1% of the charisma Paul Rudd has.
Spoiler
Also, how and when did Clark and Waller become allies? I can't even see it happening out of convenience since Adam didn't do anything that monstrous in the movie, and you'd think Clark would sympathize with him given his character arc in the previous DC movies. Pretty sure Diana's killed more people than Adam, and I'm not seeing Clark warning her that her actions make the world nervous.
And I found out WB didn't even want Cavill back and were just gonna use a stand-in like with Shazam and Peacemaker, but The Rock demanded they hire him to reprise Clark. (https://comicbook.com/movies/news/black-adam-dwayne-johnson-superman-return-claims-warner-bros-leadership-didnt-want-henry-cavill/) Which leads to wonder what the hell is going on that WB was more willing to work with Ezra Miller on reshoots that happened as recently as a couple weeks ago, while they had to be strong-armed into calling Cavill.
James Gunn is taking over DC Studios!
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/dc-movies-james-gunn-peter-safran-to-lead-film-tv-division-1235248438
I decided to redeem some of my Regal points for a screening of Black Adam, and it was fine. Not exactly the worst thing ever (but maybe I'm just more forgiving of super hero movies than some), but derivative enough that I understand why it's not winning many people over.
Although I didn't realize that this was also going to be a JSA movie, and that Cyclone would be in it. I read and enjoyed the first part of her run way back when and I enjoyed seeing her in the team. More than Atom Smasher, anyway.
The JSA, particularly Hawk Man and Doctor Fate, pretty much saved the movie for me. It has all of the problems that everyone has already pointed out, but that one aspect of the movie was genuinely enjoyable and I'd have liked to see a JSA movie before this one considering what happens to one of them.
Of course, more than anything I'd love to see a series of Starman movies (specifically of Jack Knight's Starman), but that's never going to happen, even if they could somehow get James Robinson's blessing to do it.
Still, excited to see what DC can bring to the table with James Gunn at the helm.
The JSA were a mixed bag. I really liked Fate, but everyone else was just there. Hawkman being the other half of the "Is killing evil people okay?" argument got tiring, especially in a universe that's been firmly "Yes, unless they have loved ones like a son or a mom" on the question with this film being no different. Still, I wouldn't mind if the JSA got a full movie somewhere around the road.
Anyway, my ranking of the DCEU so far:
1. The Suicide Squad
2. Peacemaker
3. Shazam
4. Wonder Woman
5. Justice League Snyder Cut
6. Aquaman
7. BvS: Dawn of Justice
8. Birds of Prey
9. Wonder Woman 1984
10. Man of Steel
11. Black Adam
12. Justice League Theatrical Cut
13. Suicide Squad
I think my list would be almost exactly the same as yours but with the Snyder cut and BVS being a bit lower and Man of Steel being a bit higher. My top 3 are exactly the same as yours.
I just hope Flash is either the worst or, against all expectations, the best DCEU film just to break the Suicide Squad bookend here.
Peacemaker is so much better than any of Marvel's shows that it isn't even funny. Yet everyone else I know who still regularly watches super hero stuff have slept on it and Gunn's Suicide Squad.
I wonder if they're turned off by the R-rated content, the people I'm thinking about in particular also largely sat out Marvel's Netflix shows.
Maybe they don't like John Cena?
Oddly enough, I find that of the popular wrestlers turned actors, John Cena has improved a good deal and can be enjoyable in the right role, like with Peacemaker. Bautista managed to find his groove under James Gunn as well. The Rock, who I always considered to be way more charismatic in the ring, has ironically been the most stagnant and dull in most if not all of his acting roles. I say ironic because he initially got booed for being a superficial, generic, vanilla baby-face and only gained a following after becoming a cocky heel in the Attitude era that the people eventually really got behind. Yet, his whole film career and success seems to be built around playing very generic vanilla characters (though to be fair, not always a straightforward good guy, like with Black Adam). I mean, it's good for him that he's found a successful way to brand himself, and he clearly has a strong work ethic, but it's also hard for me to see his appeal in film.
Of course, the best wrestler turned actor will always be Roddy Piper. The quality of the movie in question doesn't even matter, as he's always entertaining as hell to watch, even if some cases are for the wrong reason.
Yeah, Cena found his groove, and the people who don't like him presumably associate him back in the day when WWE made him the face of their franchise, and all those Nickelodeon Fred movies he starred in. The differences (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MJd-RSHTqs) are astounding. (https://youtu.be/bvlvfyuT9HI) Makes you think how many actors known for phoned-in schlock could tap into a great performance if they just had the right director.
Like how Bautista made a wise decision by doing Villeneuve films right after becoming Drax in the public's eyes. While the Rock, he's generally fine and he's never the worst part of a movie he's in, besides that CGI appearance in The Mummy 2, but he's always felt like those A-list actors who's A-list due to their ubiquity and little else.
Saw the new Black Panther and thought it was pretty good. As expected, it does feel like something's missing without Chadwick there, but I have to give the rest of the cast props for their performances. More than any other MCU movie that I've seen, this is a film that's carried by it's performances.
The movie does have some story and pacing issues, but I fall into the camp that wasn't too bothered by them. I have to say that if there's one thing in this movie that I did come out loving, it was Tenoch Huerta's interpretation of Namor. He very much is the embodiment of the morally complex character from the comics that I was hoping for. Him and Angela Bassett were easily the strongest performances of this movie.
So, now that Phase 4 is officially concluded with the release of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever I think I can safely say that this is the weakest phase of the MCU by a pretty wide margin. I didn't hate it like a lot of other people raging about all of their issues with it, but it was enough of a downgrade that I've cooled considerably on the MCU and find it hard to get excited about most of it's upcoming projects. If I had to rank this phase including the Disney + shows, it'd be:
15. She-Hulk: Attorney at Law
14. Hawkeye
13. Eternals
12. Thor: Love and Thunder
11. Black Widow
10. Falcon and The Winter Soldier
9. What If...?
8. Moon Knight
7. Miss Marvel
6. Doctor Strange: In the Multiverse of Madness
5. Loki
4. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
3. Wandavision
2. Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
1. Spider-Man: No Way Home
I excluded I Am Groot and Werewolf by Night because they are too short to really say much about, even if I did actually enjoy them. I genuinely dislike She-Hulk, and Hawkeye is also a real sore spot for me because it squandered the potential of adapting one of my favorite Marvel comic runs ever. Eternals was pretty much a bore for me.. Thor: Love and Thunder is a movie that I have soured more and more on over time. I don't think it's abysmal but I can honestly say that I don't care for it. Everything from Black Widow to Miss Marvel is OK but nothing I'd ever go back to. I still contend that Moon Knight started out strong but had a really weak second half overall (episode 5 brought it up a bit but the finale sucked). Miss Marvel is at least more consistent overall. Doctor Strange is probably ranked a bit higher for me than most because despite it's massive problems, I still can't help but enjoy it as a Sam Raimi movie. Loki, Black Panther, and Wandavision are pretty good but each have things holding them back from really being great. Shang-Chi isn't exceptional but I still see it as a good example of how a formulaic MCU movie can still be really well done. And of course Spider-Man is the only Phase 4 MCU movie that I can say that I genuinely loved.
Haven't seen Black Panther 2 yet, though my ranking would probably have Love and Thunder a little higher (still think Waititi made a 3 and a half hour movie that got cut up to under 2 hours, the crew have alluded to a ton of deleted scenes that could've caulked some of the voids in the film), and probably have Wandavision on 2nd place.
I also haven't seen Wakanda Forever yet- I'm very busy this weekend and won't be able to get to it until next weekend at the earliest- but I agree with the sentiment that Phase 4 was largely a bust. My rankings would be a little different, but I agree with most of your takes, particularly with the top 3 being the best of the phase.
For upcoming projects, I'm still anticipating Guardians Vol 3 and the Christmas special, since James Gunn has yet to disappoint me, and Loki's second season. I'm also cautiously optimistic about the Daredevil show, especially after how Hawkeye did Kingpin dirty, but Charlie Cox has at least been relatively on point as Murdock in Far From Home and She-Hulk (probably that show's only real highlight).
I'm not very excited for the new Ant-Man, I can say that much. The appeal of the previous two movies were its smaller stakes, while this is looking to go in the exact opposite direction. But at the same time, I don't think a third Ant-Man in that vein is really necessary, either? I got the impression that we've done everything with Peyton Reed's general vision that could be done.
So yeah, Wakanda Forever was good. Refreshingly a lot more polished compared to the other 2 movies this year, and I say this while thinking Doctor Strange 2 was still a lot of fun. It does great work in using T'Challa's death to concentrate its themes regarding loss and what occurs from that void. I'm also surprised they homaged the ending scene from Come and See.
And while Riri was surprisingly fine, if I didn't know about the Ironheart show, I would've figured M'Baku, Okoye, or Michaela Coel's character Aneka would have been the star of some Disney+ spin-off thing instead of her. Winston Duke steals every scene he's in like in the first BP. And Danai Gurira was very engaging here.
I'm also pro-Wakanda Forever. I don't think it's as tight as the first film, but considering the obstacles they had to go through, who was expecting that?
Namor absolutely crushed it, would like to see more of him soon. In fact, I wonder how he'll interact with Reed and Sue when the Fantastic Four inevitably make it in.
Considering that a lot of the older comic stories featured Namor trying to cuck reed by wooing and/or kidnapping Sue Storm in an attempt to make her his bride (with Sue in particular being treated more as a plot device than as a character), I'm going to take the safe bet and assume they won't be going that route in the movies. I'm thinking it'll be closer to their more modern relationship in the Illuminati where Namor has both a disdain and begrudging respect for Reed's intellect. I could see conflict between them in the movies with how he perceives Reed as a potential threat since he could elevate the technology outside the world of Wakanda and Talokan to a level that could compete with them (same reason he wanted Riri out of the picture).
I'm just glad that they didn't kill off Namor like they do most other MCU villains. Part of the fun of the comics is seeing the developing rivalries and dynamics between certain heroes and villains. It also makes for some great moments in bigger events where both sides have to put their differences aside to face greater threats. It's one of the things that disappointed me about Doctor Strange 2 since I wanted to see how the conflict between Strange and Mordo would shake out, but we just got an alternate Universe version of him instead.
Got bored, and I've been meaning to do this for a while but there were some films I hadn't rewatched in a while, so here are my Batman movie rankings. Just counting the theatrical ones because I'm too lazy to go through all of the DTV movies (Wikipedia lists 24), so sadly no Return of the Joker. Not counting ZSJL, Joker, or that recent Krypto the Superdog movie with Keanu Reeves either even though Bruce is in them since they're more their own thing, though some of them would probably be somewhere in the middle here.
13. The Killing Joke: Speaking of Wikipedia, they reminded me this was released in theaters a week before the video release. And since it counts, last place. A miserable affair with an abominable first half that doesn't even attempt to branch out the source material in any meaningful way and just slathers it with sleaze instead, and a lifelessly 1:1 second half that brings nothing new or exciting to Moore's words. All the ones after this have some kind of redeeming factor, while this feature takes one of the dream projects DC fans have wanted for decades and produced this schlock.
12. Batman Forever: Is it weird the one thing I like about this film is Tommy Lee Jones? I know people hate his Two-Face and wish Billy Dee Williams were here, but I'm oddly intrigued by him due to how much TLJ gets to play a role that's the opposite of his usual type. Or maybe it's because everything else in the movie is so blasé. It's the most thematically void of the Batman films, wish we got more of that Lost Boys/Phantom of the Opera Schumacher instead of this, but they doubled down and we got...
11. Batman & Robin: At least this one's more fun to watch, even if in all the unintentional places. If nothing else, it's never boring and it leaves some memorable imagery in my head, and you can tell Arnold and Uma Thurman are having a ball. Maybe time's been kind to it, particularly now that the Batman film franchise is more alive than ever, but there's also no way I'd call this a good entry either. Especially with how painful O'Donnell and Clooney are here.
10. Lego Batman: I liked the Lego Movie, but this one feels like its predecessor's reheated leftover. Not bad, mind you. Arnett, Cera, and Dawson are fun. I'd be lying if I said this version of Bruce wasn't hilarious.
9: Batman 1966: And I've got a similar feeling with this film, that while I enjoy the Adam West show, this just feels like more of the Adam West show than its own thing. And that's not a slight. Both this and Lego Batman are good, but they're little more than extensions. So they don't get me thinking about them as much as the ones below. Though the ending where Bruce and Dick accidentally scramble the languages and personalities of the entire UN council is great.
8: Batman v Superman: Maybe time's made me kinder to this film, but it does have a few genuinely wonderful scenes. Sure, the ending unravels into a big mess, Lois does almost fuckall in this and all the other DCEU films, and I still hate Eisenberg's Lex, but the director's cut helps fix a lot of the problems the theatrical version had, clearing up Bruce's character arc and his eventual confrontation and partnership with Clark. Don't get me wrong. It's still a very messy picture, but I don't dislike it as much as I used to.
7. Batman 1989: And in contrast, I've liked this movie a little less over time. It's still filled with great scenes and performances though, and you can absolutely why this helped breathe new life into the superhero film genre and led to a lot of blatant copycats like the first TMNT movie. But a lot of my criticisms I made months ago in this thread still stand.
6. The Dark Knight Rises: Like BvS, this one's also a mess, one that's in love with its Tale of Two Cities allusions but does little to transmute them into a thematic message, but I still really enjoyed this. It's Nolan fully unleashing his Bond fan-brain and filling his version of Gotham with over the top villains and Bruce forcing himself to transform against all odds. With a version of Selina I find underrated, probably because of how overshadowed she is by Pfeiffer's performance in Returns, and Kravitz's in...
5. The Batman: In the months since this movie's premiere, I've on occasion played the Giacchino Batman theme on loop. Every rewatch offers some new insight, because it's a Batman movie filled with detail and subtext. Pattinson takes all the experience he's gotten over the last decade of his life in acting and channels it all in this Bruce, all while facing off against Kravitz, Farrell, and Dano at the height of their own acting careers as well. While it doesn't shake up the playing field as much as Begins or TDK did, it definitely offers a new vision of where WB can go not just with Batman but with their DC movies in general.
4. Mask of the Phantasm: It pains me to admit I hadn't rewatched this one in a long time, and Conroy's passing was what kicked my ass into giving it another viewing. This film distills everything about the DCAU version of Bruce into his best and worst qualities. The man who will sacrifice even a chance at finding future love or family of his own just for a promise he swore long ago, while not knowing if he'll go down with Gotham or if Gotham will go down with him. Though the latest rewatch made me realize how much of this was a recycling of Returns' core plot (Bruce finds a girlfriend whose life was destroyed by corrupt businessmen, which leads to her insane quest for vengeance, donning her own vigilante costume, and almost losing her life at a final standoff in an abandoned Gotham City attraction). Which isn't a criticism, but it's nevertheless interesting seeing how Timm, Radomski, Dini, and the others make it their own.
3. Batman Begins: The one that reignited Batman as a film series, and its effects can still be felt 17 years after its release. It's hard to remember how back between 1997 and 2005, these movies were stuck in development hell and viewed with little of the acclaim they have now. But it was this one that dragged Batman movies into the 21st century, refining all the flaws of the preceding live-action films and turning it into a fierce acting battle between Bale and Neeson. Ra's in particular is great in how he's a dark mirror of everything Bruce wants to be and hopes to do, challenging him on levels few other Bat-villains can.
2. Batman Returns: I love how this movie's gotten tons of positive re-evaluation over recent years. Unburdened from being the hired gun he was in his last film, Burton gets to really mold Batman into his own image at the peak of his powers at the time, creating a vision where Gotham and its denizens celebrate their most morbid yet most romantic Christmas. It's easy to forget thanks to his dismal recent work, but Burton in the early 90s was one of the most exciting Hollywood directors. He was probably the first filmmaker I knew of where I was watching movies just because his name was on them. And one of WB's biggest shames was looking at this movie, looking at its box office success, and deciding to pressure him out of the director's chair.
1. The Dark Knight: Yeah, the boring choice. Just when I think everything that can be said about TDK has been said, someone always comes out with a brand new thesis. This movie is what every superhero movie in the last 14 years strives to be. Where Begins and TDKR were Nolan's tributes to Bond, here he goes "Let me show you why I love crime thrillers like Heat" and takes everything up to 11, all while making the most out of Bale, Caine, Ledger, Gyllenhaal, Eckhart, Freeman, Oldman, and everybody else. Bruce and Joker are whittled down into elemental forces waging war with each other for over two hours, and it's spectacular. I remember when I saw that movie for the first time, I walked out the theater thinking "How the fuck are they going to make a better Batman movie than that?" I hope Reeves' sequel steps up to that challenge.
That's a pretty good ranking, and I like how Returns only seems to further improve its reputation in years. I still have a soft spot for 89, but Returns belongs in that special place with Gremlins 2 as mainstream sequels that didn't have to be as bizarre as they turned out, but am grateful that they did.
A while ago, I saw videos showing concerned parents and kids talk about how unsettling and polarizing Returns was, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWxrHz-JORE) and it's so quaint compared to today.
In Gunn's first weeks as the DC Feige, those Black Adam 2 and Wonder Woman 3 films have been pulled. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/wonder-woman-3-not-moving-forward-dc-movies-1235276804/)
In exchange, gorillas. (https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/status/1600299768114163714)
Across the Spider-Verse trailer is out and I'm really digging the vibe it's giving off. The first one has since become my favorite superhero movie up to this point, so it makes me a tad nervous that a sequel can't live up to it, but I do have some hope that it's at least possible.
Yeah, I'm interested where they're going. Even if it's a third as good as the first one, that's still cool on its own.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fm3ap9eaYAEsvyo?format=png&name=900x900)
So Reverse-Flash has like zero role in this? Were the movie guys really that afraid they couldn't find a guy better than Tom Cavanaugh?
Gunn's new movie slate is up. (https://variety.com/2023/film/news/dc-universe-superman-legacy-batman-green-lantern-supergirl-booster-gold-1235507426/) We're getting Superman, Brave and the Bold with Damian, Supergirl, Swamp Thing, and The Authority movies. And shows for Booster Gold, Creature Commandos, Green Lantern Corps, Amanda Waller, and a Themyscira prequel.
I'm low-key hoping that Booster Gold becomes a lead-in to JLI, or at least a sequel show or movie with him and Ted's Blue Beetle teaming up.
Still kind of a shame that they're wiping the whole slate clean for Clark instead of giving Cavill another shot, while I'm really curious just what's in The Flash movie that the execs are open to keep working with Miller. (https://people.com/movies/james-gunn-calls-ezra-millers-the-flash-one-of-greatest-superhero-movies-ever/)
Why does Michael Keaton look like he's CGI?
Quantumania is not getting very good reviews, and... yeah, I was never very excited for this to begin with. But man, am I tired of the same damn Marvel discourse hitting Twitter.
Yeah, I wasn't expecting anything to begin with, never really dug the Ant-Man films and think Scott works better as a side character, especially with Michael Peña missing from the cast this time.
Watched the movie and, yeah, I can attest to it being a pretty big dud. Like most people, I at least like Johnathan Majors' performance as Kang, but even then the writing leaves a lot to be desired (the AEMH version of the character somehow comes off as more menacing in concept than the live-action interation).
I have to admit, my stock in the MCU is at an all-time low at this point. I'm still excited for Guardians 3 but that almost feels MCU adjacent since James Gunn mostly seems to be left alone to do his own thing (for the better), but it's the only MCU project by a long stretch that I currently have any interest in.
I'm still at a point where I will probably see all the movies out of a sense of obligation and maybe catch some of the Disney + shows if they manage to peak my interest, but I'm getting much closer to falling off the wagon altogether.
I'll still always fondly remember the Infinity Saga for the most part, but it's starting to feel more and more like the MCU should have ended there.
Yeah, it just reminds me of when the X-Men movies needed a wake-up call after X3 and Origins (to the MCU's credit, nothing in Phase 4 was as bad as either of those films, but still). I assume Guardians 3 will be cool, I'll probably end up watching The Marvels when it comes out on streaming and think "meh", and really hoping Captain America: NWO echos the good parts of Falcon and Winter Soldier.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FpCcrFeXgBczAQb?format=jpg&name=large)
Maybe I'll be more forgiving if they adapt this panel.
There are a couple of things that I liked about Quantumania, but it just isn't very good, and while I know Peyton Reed wanted a movie with higher stakes, I don't think he was ready to handle something this big. I'd much rather have a third Ant-Man like the first two, with Michael Pena and the boys, or maybe even a series. Because those worked fine doing their own thing while this has a lot of the franchise's biggest sins- poor CG visuals, weak comic relief during supposedly series moments, an underwhelming "all hands on deck" final battle scene.
As for what I did like, Jonathan Majors does good work with whatever they're doing with Kang, and I like the cast enough (even if I'll take 616 Janet over Michelle Pfeiffer's take any day) to appreciate some of what they're doing. I especially like how Cassie is basically her dad, thinking entirely about the present without having much regard for what goes next. Kathryn Newton gets a little annoying, though.
I came into Shazam! Fury of the Gods with an open mind, even though I respected the first film more than I really liked it, and it's just not very good. The story was weak and didn't quite add up, primarily for the kids/heroes. Freddie was probably the closest character to having a complete arc, but I thought that Billy and Mary's stories didn't go anywhere, while the other three were just there. And I appreciate the movie for trying new antagonists, but I was disappointed by Lucy Liu's lack of development. Helen Mirren turned out okay, and Rachel Zegler almost surprised me with her turn. The action was also unimpressive and the CG looked especially cheap.
If this is the end of this part of the DCEU, good riddance.
I will say this, though.
Spoiler
the ending reminded me of how badly I'm looking forward to Peacemaker season 2.
Spoiler
Yeah, I'm cool with James Gunn's wife being the DCEU's Coulson.
Also, something I just thought about- Mary's human actress now plays her in hero form, so was there a plan to replace the Shazamed-versions with their human actors when their characters turn 18? Billy is supposed to turn 18 soon in the movie's universe, so ostensibly he should be next, yet Levi is the face of the franchise.
I'd honestly be okay with it, because I prefer Billy's actor to Levi's performance, even though he's barely in this one. Although I've always hated the age swap trend where kids/teens who turn into adults act like much younger versions of themselves. I don't like it in Big, and it bugs me in both Shazam! movies.
(https://preview.redd.it/1a8px7nu2sqa1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=7c68d0f3c4da9b4fe65514fe4cb71187e6986a32)
Wouldn't have been my first choice, I'd have gone with Court of Owls, but okay.
It's a little surprising, since I felt like the first movie tried to double down on the realistic side of Batman, but this would definitely make it stand out from the Nolan trilogy.
Wasn't expecting Snyder and the Russos to break bread and talk to each other.
Just watched Guardians Vol. 3 and personally I loved it. Not sure I'd rank it above the first which I hold in high regard, but I need to watch it again. I can honestly say that it stuck the landing though.
I also don't get the complaints about the movie being too dark. It has some intense scenes for younger viewers, but no more than Infinity War or Endgame, and those movies weren't called too dark. I mean, God forbid that an MCU movie have some actual emotional weight to it instead of just being two hours of empty jokes.
Anyways, Gunn has yet to misfire for me, and I personally can't wait to see what he does with Superman.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 04, 2023, 09:51:49 PMJust watched Guardians Vol. 3 and personally I loved it.
Same. I think it's the best film Marvel or Gunn have made, genuinely moving and beautiful in a way I didn't expect. I must have spent like 20 minutes of its runtime crying. Haven't gotten emotional like this over a piece of media in a long time. Just a wonderful movie all around, and I don't understand how people can complain about it being too dark when a lot of similar content has been in movies aimed at much younger audiences for decades. Kind of shocked the MPAA let them get away with that face reveal though!
Quote from: Foggle on May 08, 2023, 02:10:56 AMQuote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 04, 2023, 09:51:49 PMJust watched Guardians Vol. 3 and personally I loved it.
Same. I think it's the best film Marvel or Gunn have made, genuinely moving and beautiful in a way I didn't expect. I must have spent like 20 minutes of its runtime crying. Haven't gotten emotional like this over a piece of media in a long time. Just a wonderful movie all around, and I don't understand how people can complain about it being too dark when a lot of similar content has been in movies aimed at much younger audiences for decades. Kind of shocked the MPAA let them get away with that face reveal though!
I still need to mull it over on whether I would rank this or Captain America as my favorite Marvel trilogy, but needless to say, I do love all three of these movies (the second one really does get better with each re-watch for me).
It really is the most raw emotion that I have ever gotten out of an MCU film. It's always interesting to me how much that can make-up for other shortcomings when a filmaker, cast, and crew are all talented enough to get you so emotionally invested in fictional characters. Like, if you asked me which was better between this and the first movie, it'd be very hard for me to answer since I do think that the first movie is actually much tighter in terms of pacing and editing and still has a very strong balance of humor and some genuine heartfelt emotion, but this movie really managed to bring those emotions out to the forefront of my mind in a way that very few films really can, but at the same time I do recognize that it has some sloppy execution and editing at certai parts.
More than anything, though, it's movies like this which is why I don't fully acknowledge the idea of "Superhero Fatigue" as so many people like to bring up. Don't misunderstand me, it is entirely possible to get sick of a genre and we are seeing that right now. Like many other people, I have been pretty burned on a lot of recent offerings whether it be Marvel, DC, or otherwise. But to me, it's never really the fault of a genre if what's being dished out is sub-par, it always comes down to how much actual passion is put into it by people who care and if it is actually executed well. James Gunn continually proves to me that he understands how to speak to an audience through his films, regardless of how silly they may be on the surface (that is probably the most endearing thing about them to me). The core of his stories are always about human relationships and our varying emotional responses and developments to them.
What's interesting to me is that, while the reception to the movie has been mostly positive from what I can tell, the vocal naysayers are kind of baffling to me in some of their criticisms. Like, there are definitely valid reasons to not like this or any of James Gunn's movies, but when I see people complaining about things that clearly have a reason behind them in this movie it just makes me tilt my head and be puzzled by what I'm hearing or reading in how much people can seem to miss the point. For example, one review I came across said that this movie was too "been there, done that" because the whole quirky space shtick was old hat now that other MCU movies have done that as well. I mean, yeah, the general amalgamation of tone and genre set to a licensed music track has been copied to death ever since the first Guardians of the Galaxy. But, I mean, do these people not comprehend that there is difference in how well that style is actually executed. Guardians and The Suicide Squad and Peacemaker work because James Gunn makes that quirky tone his own and his song choices actually make sense of the context of his stories to evoke an emotional response. Movies like 2016's Suicide Squad or Thor: Love and Thunder or Ant Man and the Wasp: Quantumania don't work because despite attemptin to do something similar, they are jumbled messes of stories that fail to really make you connect with the characters or deliver on any kind of emotionally satisfying themes. To me, complaining about Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 because it's in the same genre as other not as good movies is like if you complained about The Shining for being a psychological horror movie and you have seen a lot of other horror movies that are not good, so somehow that makes this movie in question worse. It's an argument that makes no sense to me.
Finally watched Quantumania, and it felt like a really long Rick and Morty episode, but without the Roiland self-banter. Which you'd think is a good thing, but that means you're stuck with all the Beth/Jerry/Summer nagging that's just as annoying. Nothing but annoying generic jokes and the characters just being tired and lifeless, with a Quantum Realm that looks like something out of a bad Robert Rodriguez kids' movie. Never really liked any of the Ant-Man movies all that much, greatly prefer Scott as a side player than the lead, and this one emphasizes why his own POV doesn't work.
Which honestly made GOTG 3 far more enjoyable by comparison. There was more effort put in to make these alien worlds unique and still coherent, High Evolutionary is a fun villain who steals every scene he's in, and everything about Rocket's flashbacks are filled with so much dread because you just know even from the beginning that his animal friends aren't gonna make it. I don't get the "too dark" complaints either. Aside from maybe one face-off scene near the end, and maybe MCU movies need more shit like that.
Spoiler
Pretty surprised that Drax lives considering how vocal Bautista's been about being absolutely done with Marvel. What's great is the movie knows the audience is fully aware of that, so they throw a bunch of fakeout Drax deaths just to troll us.
I feel like every time Marvel is close to losing me, they win me back. Love and Thunder was a worst of both worlds scenario, but I loved Wakanda Forever. Then Quantumania lost the charm of the previous Ant-Man movies without picking up the stakes or weight that made the Avengers films matter, and just before I'm considering back out, Guardians Vol. 3 reminds me of why I love Gunn's super hero work. I think the heavier moments work here due to how well he's succeeded at making the characters likable and as well-defined as they are.
It's as fun as the previous films and Christmas special, but also the emotional finale these characters deserve. Honestly, I thought this was a better finale than Endgame, and I kind of wish that this could have ended with autographs from the cast ala that and Undiscovered Country.
So next is The Marvels, and I have to say that as someone who didn't have much use for Captain Marvel, this one is looking pretty fun so far. I think part of that is that I really liked the MCU's take on Kamala, and I get the feeling that making this a Ms. Marvel movie as much as CM 2 is the right direction to take the franchise. I don't have much of an opinion on Monica yet in the MCU (she didn't get much to do in WandaVision), but I'm happy to see her as a fan of her run in the Avengers back in the 80's. I'm not a Brie Larson hater but I can take or leave her as Carol.
Yeah, I'm really hoping there isn't a Marvel curse where only every other movie is good. Maybe hopefully, Kraven can take the blow so The Marvels can be the other movie.
I went into Across the Spider-Verse (and remember, Into the Spider-Verse is my favorite superhero movie of all time) with high expectations and also knowing that it was going to be a part one of two. I walked out being thoroughly exhillerated by the experience and that fucking cliffhanger ending still caught me off guard because I was so damn into the story that I completely forgot that the movie's runtime was coming up.
This was an awesome fucking movie that reminds me why superhero stories can still be great.
I loved the movie, felt too short even though it was 2 and half hours, but someone on Twitter pointed out something that's been annoying me.
Spoiler
Why was every single Spider-Man but Miles okay with a system where several of their loved ones have to die as a scientific law? I can get Miguel doing it because he's heavily pragmatic throughout the movie, but every Peter? Even the ones who would absolutely break the laws of physics or make pacts with the devil just to save their friends and family? You'd think one of them would at least ask about what essentially amounts to human sacrifices, especially since Miles saved Pavitr's loved ones from deaths they were apparently supposed to face, and that didn't lead to his universe unraveling or becoming some kind of incursion. And how the Spiderless Earth-42 we see at the end is still intact despite also breaking the rules.
On another note, I guess this means the Captain Stacy of SSM died and left Peter forlorn enough to implicitly agree with all the others that these premature deaths are a logical inevitability?
Spoiler
In the case of a lot of these Spider-Men their tragic event has already happened, so I think it's easier for them to buy into the logic that the sacrifice was for a greater good since there was nothing they could do about it anyways. Miles is actively fighting to stop what hasn't happened yet regardless of what the consequences may be, so his perspective is different. And as we see by the end, several of his old friends from the first movie and even some new ones from this movie have changed their stance in favor of Miles.
That said, it is still a weird implication that seemingly nobody would object to this before Miles, as I definitely couldn't see TSSM Spider-Man ever being down with this himself. It would have been a better writing choice and made more sense if Miguel had a majority of the Spider-People in his organization dark to the part about the sacrifice being part of the canon except those closest to the top. As far as they were concerned the mission was just to stop anomalies like The Spot. Then in the third movie when the rest of them learned the truth, several of them would turn on Miguel. Though I predict that will happen anyways, just under different circumstances.
Spoiler
Though I assume the Canon Events for every Spidey don't end, so it doesn't just stop at an Uncle Ben and a Captain Stacy, but a Gwen, a Jean DeWolff, a Harry, an Aunt May, etc. Miles had two mentors in his life die but that wasn't enough, so it's almost assured that even if he willingly let his dad be sacrificed, his mom or Ganke would eventually be next. And you'd think more of the Spider-Men would be open to the idea of preventing others from sharing that pain, especially for newer Spideys who've gone through less tragedy than the ones who've gone through it all. We know the Andrew Garfield Spider-Man certainly wouldn't have wanted that when he saved MCU MJ's life, and he and the other live-action Peters were all for changing predetermined fates.
So how are the Authority gonna work in Superman Legacy? (https://www.ign.com/articles/superman-legacy-will-reportedly-introduce-the-authority-superhero-team) Adapting "What's So Funny About Truth, Justice, and the American Way?" wouldn't exactly work when you're trying to sell newcomers on the Authority since that whole story is just "Here's why these trademark-friendly Authority knockoffs are dumb and why Clark is right". But can't see a Superman and the Authority or a Change or Die adaptation happening either because those require an older, more tired Clark for the tone to work, and they fired Cavill and are doing tryouts with younger actors.
After all of the hype and controversy and delays, The Flash is finally out. I genuinely didn't expect this movie to actually be made a few years back (probably even less than Black Adam, which was also in development hell). That said, now that it finally made it out to theaters, and being praised by all manners of individuals months before it's actual release, what do I think about it?
It's pretty decent. Not quite buying into the accolades so many people were giving this movie before release, but it's definitely enjoyable, and probably about on par with an above average MCU movie. Michael Keaton was fun to see again, some of the humor works, and I actually really like that this movie forgoes a main villain in favor of having the core conflict be with Barry trying to solve a problem that he created. That said, the movie has some gaping logical inconsistencies (as most time travel stories tend to have, to be fair), a good chunk of jokes fall flat outside of the bits that work, and the CG is really wonky in quite a few scenes.
I still enjoyed it on the whole, so it's worth watching, but it does feel like it treads a lot of familiar ground that other superhero movies have done better, IMO.
It's funny this movie's an ideological opposite to Across the Spider-Verse, right down to whether it's right or not to save your parents vs maintaining the multiverse.
Even ignoring all the Ezra Miller news and this film becoming one of the lynchpins of the ongoing Zaslav controversy, I have really mixed feelings. For what it's worth, it's more tonally coherent and interesting than Black Adam or WW1984, at least it wasn't boring. And Sacha Calle is good enough to make you wish she got a Supergirl movie. But I've said this before when talking about the Justice League movie, both versions, this version of Barry is so annoying. He acts and behaves like all the worst stereotypes of a wacky superhero. 2013 Barry's even worse because of his giggle and how he always does that "Blue skiddoo, we can too!" thing from Blue's Clues right before running. And besides a few small scenes with Iris and his dad, there's no supporting cast to ground him or make him seem like a person. Yeah, there's Bruce and Kara, but they're too alien or disconnected to really make a real emotional bond with Barry. Either of them.
Spoiler
I thought it's hilarious that out of all the actors from the CW show to cameo, they got the guy who played Zoom/the fake Jay Garrick.
So Reverse-Flash just doesn't exist in the DCEU and Barry's mom was killed by some guy? Because I can't imagine Eobard giving up and not doing anything thanks to one less shopping trip.
And I guess the Schumacher re-evalution is now in full swing if we're getting George Clooney cameos.
I'm really not surprised that the movie is shooting below expectations. This is meant to be the grand finale to a franchise that audiences just aren't that enthused about, starring a character few consider a favorite to be the lynchpin. And I know that they were hoping on nostalgia for Michael Keaton to bring audiences in, but I think that they're ten years too late to properly capitalize on that, and are also ten years too early to do the same for Bale like others suggest (or, at least, it's ten years too early for him to feel nostalgic enough to put the cape and cowl back on).
That said, I might be able to squeeze it in on $5 Tuesday, based on my budget and schedule. It doesn't sound that bad, but also doesn't sound as good as Zaslav was hoping for.
I think what annoyed a lot of the audiences was how it wasn't meant to be the grand finale for a while. All the reports about this being the first of a string of "Guess what, Keaton's back!" Batman films with Batgirl and Beyond on the way, and Calle talking about how she was developing a good rapport with Cavill while in rehearsals, only for all that to get thrown in the trash after Black Adam bombed and Gunn got hired. And since that was big news last year, alongside all the shit with Ezra, even casual audiences knew all about this.
And what's going on with Gadot's contract? Diana just keeps randomly cameoing in these movies and then leaving after a minute.
I'm wondering if they have to burn off her contract with these pointless cameos now that Wonder Woman 3 was canceled.
Although if Gadot really isn't getting another solo WW film, you'd think that there would be an attempt to give her run as the character some sort of closure. I'm not even the biggest fan of her acting, but it would be disappointing and kind of weird if her era just went out with a whimper, considering how big of a deal her initial appearances were.
Doesn't help how she keeps flip-flopping on if she's done or not. (https://twitter.com/Croc_Block/status/1671392443860918273)
I wouldn't mind a 3rd WW movie, as long as it's less like the 2nd one and more focused. Like if it was like that recent Wonder Woman Historia comic in tone, I'd prefer that.
Bad news for anybody who wanted Nicholas Hoult as Clark. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/superman-legacy-cast-david-corenswet-rachel-brosnahan-1235358907/)
I have no opinion on the guy playing Supes, but while I thought that Marvelous Mrs. Maisel wore itself thin pretty quickly, Brosnahan was always good and she seems fit for the punchy dialogue you'd want for Lois. I think her casting was a good call.
As for Perry White, it's almost a shame that Jeffrey Wright just played Gordon, because I think that he'd be a perfect fit.
Oh yeah, and I did see Flash last week. Maybe if we didn't recently have Across the Spiderverse or even No Way Home, it wouldn't feel so derivative and unimpressive, but I just spent the entire time not caring. But at the same time, Miller's Flash sucks, and they can't convincingly play straight.
Yeah, I'm sure having Ezra Miller play the straight man to another Ezra Miller sounded like a fun idea on paper, like on paper from before 2017, but actually seeing it...
And I'm trying to remember what Fishburne even did as Perry in MoS. 2/3rds of the cast in that movie were total ciphers.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0rc3EJWwAEhAJB?format=jpg&name=large)
At last.
Saw that Spider-Man Lotus movie, AKA "the Racist Spider-Man fanfilm" that it's otherwise known as thanks to leaked DMs and memes. Even when understanding this is not a professional film and many of the shortcomings come from understandable issues like lack of budget and an amateur cast (Mary Jane's actress in particular just isn't good at all), the film is still a garbled mess with no sense of pacing or even chronological storytelling. Felt like someone in the editor's room intentionally jumbled scenes out of order.
It also seemed strange how in a cast the production prided itself over for its faithfulness to the comics right down to their outfits, Harry's actor is inexplicably doing a halfhearted Neil Gaiman impression for most of the story.
On another note, I was reminded of how few good adaptations there are of Mary Jane Watson. There aren't many I genuinely dislike, but the only one I can think of that was any interesting was SSM's, and the show unfortunately ended before she could do much. Meanwhile, Dunst's version is so frustrating that there are a significant amount of fans wondering what Peter saw in her and didn't instead date Mr. Ditkovich's daughter, the TASM 2 one was apparently so bad that we still haven't got her deleted scenes yet, Zendaya's fine but like SSM wish could be explored more. Or the one from the 90s cartoon who was often overshadowed by her awful Aunt Anna, and went MIA and replaced by a water clone soon after.
Blue Beetle was solid, feels like the fun kind of low-stakes comic book movie that would be a summer highlight in a less crowded market. I wasn't sure, since I'm hit or miss on the character (really liked him in TBATB, hated his take on Young Justice), but he was handled well here and had an enjoyable supporting cast. Easily the best DC movie since The Batman, which doesn't sound like much, but when you realize that this was the third out of four underperforming releases this year (Aquaman sounds like it's not going to be much better), it really sounds exhausting.
Spoiler
What a bizarre coincidence that we're 3 for 3 in Kelsey Grammer reprising roles in subpar installments these past few weeks.
I'm seeing The Marvels on Tuesday, although I'm not super hyped. Even the most enthusiastic reviews seem somewhat underwhelmed.
But hey, at least Loki's second season was good.
Madame Web's trailer looks like it's gonna make The Marvels look like Into the Spider-Verse by comparison, but I'm kinda hoping the "Adam Scott is Uncle Ben" rumors are true because that would drive the internet insane for a week.
I was waiting for this, and much to my disappointment, he's a "Forever good, Returns bad" guy.
At last, the secret's revealed.
Spoiler
(https://preview.redd.it/herbie-is-in-the-movie-instant-peak-v0-tlxm7oixqlic1.jpeg?auto=webp&s=e7ed04d752add6b998d4f654525c3ff0b342d95a)
HERBIE's now in the MCU. Everybody's favorite Marvel character.
It's probably a coincidence, but it feels like Marvel is going into overtime this week between the Deadpool and X-Men trailers and Fantastic Four reveal to hide from Madame Web's disastrous release.
I'll believe it when Feige suddenly announces that Stahelski-directed Blade movie everyone wants but we haven't gotten for whatever reason in the next few days.
I'm calling it now- that's not happening at all anymore. Maybe it never was in the first place.
Watched Madame Web, and my biggest impression was thinking Dakota Johnson has no idea how to open a can of soda. And the pure confusion in seeing Madame Web knowing that some crazy spider-guy wants to kill three teenagers, so he locates said teenagers, and then abandons them in a forest. And then she abandons them again to take a trip from New York to the Amazon.