|
Wedemeyer posted:Tony Stark is doing the 'show my butt and chest/boobs' pose now, and Back Widow is carrying Thor's hammer. Okay then. Maybe it's because I can't see their feet, but their respective heights is weird. Stark, Thor and Captain America look like giants. I'll give it that, it's pretty much a gender-reversal of usual comicbook cover poses.
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:27 |
|
|
Aatrek posted:The new Avengers one-sheet. Is the Hulk really supposed to be three stories tall? So are they ordered by how well their individual movies did? Because I'd have thought Captain America would be placed more prominently than Thor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 18:50
|
|
|
RDJ's head and body are not from the same picture, and yeah, Captain America is like 50 feet tall. I'll blame Joss Whedon for that poster because why not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 18:54
|
|
|
I think Hulk is standing on top of that car but that poster isn't for "us". I don't think Iron Man ever fights without his helmet off (that sounds so nerdy).
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
Stare-Out posted:RDJ's head and body are not from the same picture, and yeah, Captain America is like 50 feet tall. I'll blame Joss Whedon for that poster because why not. Given that he usually escapes all blame for any problems involved in his works, sounds pretty fair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
I like how they tried to make all the lighting come from the same direction but didn't quite pull it off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:The new Avengers one-sheet. Is the Hulk really supposed to be three stories tall? As far as I know, comics Hulk has sometimes been a fixed-height, and at other times he gets bigger the angrier he is. The first Hulk movie used the latter, to the point that he's something like 20 feet tall during the Hulk-Dogs fight. The newer Edward Norton Hulk film seems to keep him at a fixed height.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:17
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:The new Avengers one-sheet. Is the Hulk really supposed to be three stories tall? Perhaps I am naive when it comes to film marketing, but do they really have to photoshop in the pictures from other sources? With the gazillion dollars spent on marketing, would it really be that difficult to get all the actors to take a bunch of photo for sole purpose of making decent film posters? itrorev fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Feb 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:23
|
|
|
itrorev posted:Perhaps I am naive when it comes to film marketing, but do they really have to photoshop in the pictures from other sources? With the gazillion dollars spent on marketing, would it really be that difficult to get all the actors to take a bunch of photo for sole purpose of making decent film posters? How often does this question come up in this thread? I think it's every twenty pages or so, I'm not sure. I'd have to go through the old one to get a clearer picture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:The new Avengers one-sheet. Is the Hulk really supposed to be three stories tall? No, but I'm pretty sure that's just some cardboard cut-outs that are used to distract the not-Skrulls during the climax of the film, so...
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:42
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:How often does this question come up in this thread? I think it's every twenty pages or so, I'm not sure. I'd have to go through the old one to get a clearer picture. It's a fair question though. I know it would be difficult to get all the actors together with hectic schedules and all, but why cant they just take an hour on one of the days where they're shooting a group scene and take a picture? It seems so simple but I'm sure it's wildly impossible for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:So are they ordered by how well their individual movies did? Because I'd have thought Captain America would be placed more prominently than Thor. Thor made significantly more money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
Ez posted:It's a fair question though. I know it would be difficult to get all the actors together with hectic schedules and all, but why cant they just take an hour on one of the days where they're shooting a group scene and take a picture? IIRC it's because actors have specific headshots that they like that they want to be used for posters. You could do a group pic but if anyone or their agent is unhappy it all has to be changed. I'd imagine when it comes to this many stars it'd be almost impossible to please everyone so they just settle for photoshop wankery on pre-approved headshots. FoneBone posted:Thor made significantly more money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:49
|
|
|
Who is the idiot on the left of the poster? I don't do comics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
echoplex posted:Who is the idiot on the left of the poster? I don't do comics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:56
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:Huh. Colour me surprised. Me too. I thought Thor was a ridiculously bad movie. Captain America wasn't great or anything, but it was certainly better than Thor. Did CA's association with "RAH RAH! GO AMERICA! USA! USA! USA!" hurt its chances overseas?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:57
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Me too. I thought Thor was a ridiculously bad movie. Captain America wasn't great or anything, but it was certainly better than Thor. Pretty much. Speaking as a Brit I enjoyed The First Avenger, and I felt it was at least as good a movie as Thor (which was not bad, whatever you say), but Cap is too "America-centric" a character to do well abroad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 20:45
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Me too. I thought Thor was a ridiculously bad movie. Captain America wasn't great or anything, but it was certainly better than Thor. If I remember correctly, there wasn't much RAH RAH AMERICA at all. 'Captain America' was a pathetic propaganda pawn for buying bonds, his powers came from a foreign scientist and his team consisted of several different ethnicities and nationalities. Or am I forgetting it wrong?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 20:49
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:If I remember correctly, there wasn't much RAH RAH AMERICA at all. 'Captain America' was a pathetic propaganda pawn for buying bonds, his powers came from a foreign scientist and his team consisted of several different ethnicities and nationalities. It's the whole "American won the war and was loving awesome,and,and look we have a super soldier!" thingy that wasn't very liked by people who aren't comic book readers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
Desperado Bones posted:It's the whole "American won the war and was loving awesome,and,and look we have a super soldier!" thingy that wasn't very liked by people who aren't comic book readers. That's loving stupid. Never mind the fact that he didn't win the war. He just defeated the fictional nazi off-shoot, Hydra.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
Desperado Bones posted:It's the whole "American won the war and was loving awesome,and,and look we have a super soldier!" thingy that wasn't very liked by people who aren't comic book readers. They made a point to show he was not fighting Nazis. Also he was allied with non-americans.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:IIRC it's because actors have specific headshots that they like that they want to be used for posters. You could do a group pic but if anyone or their agent is unhappy it all has to be changed. I'd imagine when it comes to this many stars it'd be almost impossible to please everyone so they just settle for photoshop wankery on pre-approved headshots. Jedit posted:Pretty much. Speaking as a Brit I enjoyed The First Avenger, and I felt it was at least as good a movie as Thor (which was not bad, whatever you say), but Cap is too "America-centric" a character to do well abroad. Actually, it made the majority of its worldwide grosses outside the US - not the case for many superhero films in the past decade (both Iron Man films, both Nolan Batman films, most of the X-Men movies). FoneBone fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Feb 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
Man that Avengers poster is weird. The whole thing is stylized enough where you'd think they could just go crazy with the contrast and HDR on everyone and have them all come out looking roughly uniform, but somehow it still has that copy-and-paste effect. And as for the sizes of the characters... I don't even know where to begin. Dissapointed Owl posted:If I remember correctly, there wasn't much RAH RAH AMERICA at all. 'Captain America' was a pathetic propaganda pawn for buying bonds, his powers came from a foreign scientist and his team consisted of several different ethnicities and nationalities. But if you aren't seeing the movie in the first place, all you know about it is the phrase "Captain America" and that probably gives off enough of a "this movie isn't for me" vibe on its own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:They made a point to show he was not fighting Nazis. Also he was allied with non-americans. Dissapointed Owl posted:That's loving stupid. Never mind the fact that he didn't win the war. He just defeated the fictional nazi off-shoot, Hydra. I think it was a very risky movie, because we all know there are a lot of countries that got and still get a lot of poo poo from some Americans(not all of them, some of you are cool), so Captain America isn't a very loved character, no matter if he is fighting real Nazis or not. Anyways, why don't we forget about it and keep posting movie posters? Uh? Here, for the nostalgic goon: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
McFarlane toys did a "3d" version of that poster along with others, they are pretty great.    
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:The new Avengers one-sheet. Is the Hulk really supposed to be three stories tall? I like how even the poster has them just posing on some random city block, like the trailers. Is that seriously the best they can come up with? "The whole world is at stake, but how about we just fight this war on this one block of fake-New York City". Awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
Desperado Bones posted:I love this poster because it highlights one of my favorite things about the movie-- that Robo drives a beat-up Ford Taurus. Which, if you look at his legs, he can't even fit into right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 23:57
|
|
|
I really like this alternate cover for that lovely movie: Almost makes me want to give the black and white version a try. Almost.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:I really like this alternate cover for that lovely movie: Take it from someone who considers that movie to be great, the black and white version is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
The Triumphant posted:I love this poster because it highlights one of my favorite things about the movie-- that Robo drives a beat-up Ford Taurus. Which, if you look at his legs, he can't even fit into right. Yeah, when Weller drove he did so without the bottom half of the suit right? Also there are no full body shots of him getting out of a car in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
The Triumphant posted:I love this poster because it highlights one of my favorite things about the movie-- that Robo drives a beat-up Ford Taurus. Which, if you look at his legs, he can't even fit into right. He can't afford the new 6000 SUX with a cops salary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:I really like this alternate cover for that lovely movie: While I love the movie, I love it even more in black and white. It's very much a feature length Twilight Zone episode without the Serling narration.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
Guess I'll give the b/w version another shot, just to see if I hate it less. (it had its good points though) Hey! Guess what abomination most of us forgot about!  
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 01:07
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:Guess I'll give the b/w version another shot, just to see if I hate it less. (it had its good points though)  Hahahahahahahahaha What the gently caress? Aside from not having his real body, the way his head was deformed so it could fit in the first poster is hilarious !
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
I think we agreed that the posters reminded us all of those Mac Tonight ads. http://youtu.be/LaDgTkqF7rY
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
Captain America should at LEAST be in front of Hawkeye.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 02:33
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:
I really, really, REALLY hate this film. I rented it out of curiosity and just sat in annoyance at a cast filled to the brim with smug arseholes. When the uber-"pretentious" movie-within-a-movie in your "HEY GUYS ISN'T THE MOVIE BUSINESS WACKY!?!!" flick looks like it might actually be a half-decent film, you're doing something wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 03:35
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:
Not only did I remember, I went through the old thread to dig these photoshops out:  
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 04:47
|
|
|
What is up with actors not playing Hulk more than once? All the Avengers are played by the same people but Hulk has had 3 actors in 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:27 |
|
|
oldpainless posted:What is up with actors not playing Hulk more than once? All the Avengers are played by the same people but Hulk has had 3 actors in 10 years. Bana film being another studio and a box office failure. Norton being a huge rear end in a top hat to work with and would take control of the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 05:34
|
|