|
AnonSpore posted:I didn't kill him, I just hit him a lot and then he stopped breathing spontaneously The Eric Gardner defense.
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:00 |
|
|
Yeah the answer to "Is a Hand ninja really dead?" is "Has that ever stopped them?". Hell, it doesn't even matter if you aren't a Hand ninja. They will Mormon style convert your rear end to evil ninjaism in the grave. No fucks given. Enjoy your new demon boss!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:I think we're all forgetting a basic fact: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:The reason Man of Steel blows is Superman is both hosed up, and nobody involved in the film seems to understand how hosed up he is. Or how dumb everyone is. His father's death is one of the most hilariously pointless deaths ever. I chalk it up to Zach Snyder's low-brow interpretation of characters and his knuckle-dragging dialogue.This seems to be his trademark. I've determined that you cannot watch Man of Steel sober or not stoned... otherwise it makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Okay, okay, so how does a movie like Ant-Man get made (like, not to knock Ant-Man but he doesn't strike me as movie material). I just don't understand it, especially since...Daredevil freaking exists now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Okay, okay, so how does a movie like Ant-Man get made (like, not to knock Ant-Man but he doesn't strike me as movie material). I just don't understand it, especially since...Daredevil freaking exists now. I'm not really sure I understand your argument. Are you saying that they should have made a separate Daredevil movie instead of Ant-Man, in addition to have a Daredevil netflix series? Also the answer to why Ant-Man got made is because there is big money in the MCU.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:09
|
|
|
Snak posted:I'm not really sure I understand your argument. Are you saying that they should have made a separate Daredevil movie instead of Ant-Man, in addition to have a Daredevil netflix series? It's more that Ant Man doesn't seem like movie material to me. Something could probably be done with the premise but even the trailers make it look like a Generic Action Movie starring Generic Action Guy Seeking Redemption as the Strong Female Character beats him up until he finds his inner strength. It reminds me of the trailers for the Green Hornet. The Daredevil comparison is my disbelief that a quality Netflix show can come out of the same company that makes a boring looking mess like Ant Man. Compartmentalization is a thing, obviously, it still just...astounds me a little.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Okay, okay, so how does a movie like Ant-Man get made (like, not to knock Ant-Man but he doesn't strike me as movie material). I just don't understand it, especially since...Daredevil freaking exists now. To be fair, Iron Man was a lesser property (compared to Spider-Man and X-Men) they felt like was a gamble, and it ended paying off big time. Guardians of the Galaxy was a property they felt like was a gamble, and it paid off big time. After Ant-Man, they're making movies about Black Panther, Ms. Marvel, and The Inhumans. Just having the Marvel backing carries a lot of weight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
HIJK posted:It's more that Ant Man doesn't seem like movie material to me. Something could probably be done with the premise but even the trailers make it look like a Generic Action Movie starring Generic Action Guy Seeking Redemption as the Strong Female Character beats him up until he finds his inner strength. It reminds me of the trailers for the Green Hornet. I do not know if you have noticed, but the MCU is entirely composed of safe, mass-market friendly, visual effects set-piece spectacles. This isn't necesarrily a mark against them, but I feel like you've just come from an alternate dimension where the MCU is mostly Oscar-Winning dramas.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
Snak posted:I do not know if you have noticed, but the MCU is entirely composed of safe, mass-market friendly, visual effects set-piece spectacles. This isn't necesarrily a mark against them, but I feel like you've just come from an alternate dimension where the MCU is mostly Oscar-Winning dramas. Haha, I suppose. It's probably my personal dislike of the charactet then, but god loving Ant-Man why the gently caress would you make a movie about Ant-Man he's such a boring soul sucking char
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
Ant Man is being made because Edgar Wright likes the character and had been working on it since before the MCU was a thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Radish posted:This is the most Frank Miller thing ever. Well that depends if she had a word balloon before hand that went like "I'm just a WHORE like this WHORE CITY that never stops WHORING in the NIGHT"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Well that depends if she had a word balloon before hand that went like "I'm just a WHORE like this WHORE CITY that never stops WHORING in the NIGHT"? Close  
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
I will say before he went crazy, Frank Miller at least had a reason to set that scene there that didn't just involve T&A with the whole sensory overload thing. Not having read many of the comics I can't imagine how badly TV Daredevil would react to murdering a random person on accident. Also now I totally want a character who's entire thing is accidental collateral damage. Blazing Ownager fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Jul 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Close That's pretty remarkable. I suppose Marvel's never really had an issue with its heroes killing people. Has Batman killed anyone on accident or intentionally in the past 30 or so years in a mainstream comic? The most recent one I can think of is Killing Joke, and even that's subject to interpretation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
DC has a lot of weird steadfast editorial rules regarding Batman or Superman, like how you should never depict Batman sitting down (don't know if they've gone back on this after being ridiculed about it), so not that I know of outside of an Elsewords comic. That's why it was such a big deal when he at least had the intent to kill Darkseid in Final Crisis. But yeah Marvel is generally more flexible about that stuff, even if the hero has a moral obligation to avoid killing. Though they've always gone back and forth about, for instance, Hulk, who has literally destroyed cities without apparently killing anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
NowonSA posted:That's pretty remarkable. I suppose Marvel's never really had an issue with its heroes killing people. Has Batman killed anyone on accident or intentionally in the past 30 or so years in a mainstream comic? The most recent one I can think of is Killing Joke, and even that's subject to interpretation. Darkseid in Final Crisis, arguably. There are a few other minor ones (random mooks dying due to <something> indirectly) but that's easily the biggest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Haha, I suppose. It's probably my personal dislike of the charactet then, but god loving Ant-Man why the gently caress would you make a movie about Ant-Man he's such a boring soul sucking char Well, they are using the less boring Scott Lang Ant-Man instead of doing Hank Pym is Ant-Man(he's the old man Bruce to Scott's Terry). Also it's apparently largely a heist movie. Hakkesshu posted:That's why it was such a big deal when he at least had the intent to kill Darkseid in Final Crisis. But yeah Marvel is generally more flexible about that stuff, even if the hero has a moral obligation to avoid killing. Though they've always gone back and forth about, for instance, Hulk, who has literally destroyed cities without apparently killing anyone. Look, Banner's subconscious is just super mathing up physics, chemistry, and trigonometry and using that to redirect all of Hulk's actions so that all the ensuing opposite reactions to Hulk Smash don't hurt anyone. It's completely reasonable and not at all something that would make Bruce Banner even smarter than Reed Richards in a dashing thinking cap.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Also now I totally want a character who's entire thing is accidental collateral damage. The Dirty Pair! They mostly ignore it though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Haha, I suppose. It's probably my personal dislike of the charactet then, but god loving Ant-Man why the gently caress would you make a movie about Ant-Man he's such a boring soul sucking char You make a movie about Ant-Man because the last time a cult director wanted to make a movie out of a weird obscure superhero it wound up being the second highest-grossing film of 2014 and it's not like a guy who can shrink and command insects is any less silly than a talking raccoon and a tree fighting crime in outer space so gently caress it, you greenlight it and cross your fingers and hope that lightning will strike twice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Close I don't care how stupid the back story is, I want loving Typhoid Mary in this series. One of my first memories of Daredevil was her screaming at herself about the Typhoid costume under her clothes and it was legit unnerving. Plus Typhoid had the greatest crazy face and a costume that was basically Solid 1980s crafted into clothes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Sleeveless posted:You make a movie about Ant-Man because the last time a cult director wanted to make a movie out of a weird obscure superhero it wound up being the second highest-grossing film of 2014 and it's not like a guy who can shrink and command insects is any less silly than a talking raccoon and a tree fighting crime in outer space so gently caress it, you greenlight it and cross your fingers and hope that lightning will strike twice. Edgar Wright isn't directing anymore though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
No, but the movie was practically ready to start shooting when he left the project. Ant-Man is a weird aberration, because it's clearly not part of whatever they're doing with the next 6+ movies, so it just seems like a legacy thing that was planned long before Marvel actually had a solid strategy up until 2020. Well maybe he'll show up in Civil War or something if it's a success, but I doubt it will be (at least on the level of Guardians), I can definitely see it being put into the same drawer as the Ed Norton Hulk in that they'd rather forget it ever existed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
We know Paul Rudd is definitely in Civil War.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Ant-Man will be part of Black Panther be sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:I can definitely see it being put into the same drawer as the Ed Norton Hulk in that they'd rather forget it ever existed. We know Thunderbolt Ross is definitely in Civil War
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
Rarity posted:We know Thunderbolt Ross is definitely in Civil War And they've made reference to Blonsky on Agents of SHIELD. And I like the Ed Norton Hulk. It has the virtue of not being the Bana Hulk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
Wilson and Vanessa and Wesley were an adorable team and I felt sorry that things went so badly for them. All their interactions were incredibly heartwarming. I'm glad Wilson realized that finding someone to share your fancy omelettes with is important. Wesley was a great friend and the scene where Wilson finds his body was touching. I hope Vanessa will be okay!
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:And they've made reference to Blonsky on Agents of SHIELD. Nobody likes Hulk when he's Ang Lee.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Nobody likes Hulk when he's Ang Lee. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Nobody likes Hulk when he's Ang Lee. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Nobody likes Hulk when he's Ang Lee. ...You son of a bitch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Nobody likes Hulk when he's Ang Lee. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
They're making an Ant-man film, I assume at least partially because he was one of the founding creators of the Avengers, and while talking to ants is kind of a silly power dude can still shrink and presumably at some point, grow, which is visually dynamic/cool and can make for some good action scenes. Talking to ants is no more silly at the end of the day though than your team's heavy hitter being a dude who can turn in to the jolly green giant on steroids with an anger management problem. And personally, I wish it was Hank Pym who was the main character and not Scott Lang. I have a soft spot for his Science Adventurer days though, and hate that the Janet slap is essentially what he's most famous for these days when other heroes have done far worse over the years. Including more famous ones. I'd like to see a version of him that just ignored that poo poo and concentrated on him as a manic scientist who likes to go around having adventurers and doing oddball poo poo for it's own sake. I suppose that's kind of Tony Stark, but Tony is more of a business man and reluctant hero looking to the bigger picture than a guy designing gear that allows him to miniaturize anything and then going off to the middle of nowhere to see what he can do with it for the fun of it and screw the money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Hank Pym wasn't just a human garbage fire because of the slap though. The huge bulk of his career has been spent being a human garbage fire. His science adventurer days were far eclipsed by him being a human garbage fire.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
kudos on using garbage fire 3 times in 41 words.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Human garbage fire. That's the X-factor right there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Hank Pym wasn't just a human garbage fire because of the slap though. The huge bulk of his career has been spent being a human garbage fire. His science adventurer days were far eclipsed by him being a human garbage fire. That's true of a lot of characters though. I mean, even keeping it to the thread relevant Netflix stuff Luke Cage and Danny Rand have had a pretty awful history until the last decade or so by all accounts. If you go wider though, Mister Fantastic was a boring character for a good chunk of the history of the Fantastic 4, many of the X-Men have rarely ever had good stuff for them, even lead characters like Cyclops and so on. Carol Danvers has rarely ever had anything good in her 40 odd years of comics and she's headlining her own film, as the premier female Marvel stand-alone heroine no less. You don't judge a character based on the bad, because most, if not all of them have had some awful, awful dreck littering their history - you judge them based on their potential and the good that does exist. And Hank Pym has had some cool stuff over the years. Not much, but some. He discovered and harnessed a new form of physics for all intents, utilizing it to help the world. He has an interesting character, because he has some psychological issues that can be taken advantage of, between his inferiority complex and the physical personification of that in Yellowjacket along with his rather manic love of science and adventure. Scott Lang's a fun character, but there's no reason he has to be Ant-man because his character works based on the fact he's a rogue done good, not because of the powers he uses or anything like that. You could make a Scott Lang film using almost anything in Marvel. You could only really make a Hank Pym film using Ant-man or Goliath, which is just reverse Ant-man. And how many other characters exist where the character could conceivably be the villain in a part of his own trilogy/franchise while a secondary character like Janet becomes the heroine in said entry? If the groundwork had been laid right Hank could have been the hero of Ant-man, become the villain Yellowjacket in Ant-man II while Janet becomes the hero and had both as equal partners in the third Ant-man or something. tsob fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jul 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
The best thing about Hank Pym is that he sucks so much he's not even the leading authority on Pym Particles.tsob posted:They're making an Ant-man film, I assume at least partially because... All of that is wrong. They're making an Antman film because Edgar Wright likes Antman and he got the rights to do a movie about him. Edgar Wright also takes for-loving-ever to get anything done so it took so long it landed in the middle of the MCU. It's Scott Lang because the guy who got the rights to it and wrote the movie likes Scott Lang more than Hank Pym, like any right thinking person should.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:00 |
|
|
Edgar Wright didn't sign on for 3 years after production started on the movie - though production in this case is basically just the company going "we want to make one". The rights were bought up and announced years before the MCU was even a real thing but was about the time those movies were starting to become in vogue in general as far as I can tell, so he was presumably just taken because he's one of the founding Avengers, the rights probably didn't cost too much compared to others and not because Edgar Wright anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 02:45
|
|