|
I saw it Saturday night. The little thing that keeps sticking with me is that Diablo's declaration that he's not going to lose another family was totally unearned.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:59 |
|
|
I loved that character in basically every moment except that one. Friends I can buy. Family, especially from a character that would not throw that word around lightly, felt super out of nowhere. How can you consider Harley family when she took the first chance she got to bail on all of you?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I saw it Saturday night. The little thing that keeps sticking with me is that Diablo's declaration that he's not going to lose another family was totally unearned. I took as him just being swept up in the moment. They had all just had fantasy hallucinations presented to them by Enchantress and he was still running off that adrenaline and memory. Unless I'm forgetting when he says that line. It was when he was about to go full Fire God right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 14:53
|
|
This is better than IMDBquote:Trivia
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
That Joker quote is fuckin' incredible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Kris Straub is a treasure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
Speaking of unfunny jokes
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
AAA DOLFAN posted:Speaking of unfunny jokes but enough about your posting
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
I've seen a lot of people say Joker could've been cut out completely, but I don't think that's the whole truth. The flashbacks aren't particularly great, but I think in a version of the movie where they just make Harley the main focus they all work. None of them take away from the movie. And him showing up at the end to bust Harley out could've been a great stinger. It's everything he does in the present that came off as totally pointless to me. Really unnecessary. EDIT: In the event someone saw what was previously unmarked spoilers, I offer my sincere apology. I realized my mistake as soon as I hit post, but SA is/was being DDoS'd and I couldn't fix it. SonicRulez fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Aug 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
SlimGoodbody posted:I've been seeing a lot of chatter lately about the imminently bursting bubble that is the Hollywood studio blockbuster, with BvS and SS specifically noted as canaries in the coalmine. It's less the concept of the blockbuster and more the concept of a "cinematic universe" which could potentially be dying or dead. The big trend of the 2000s - early 2010s was the movie series planned as a saga, usually based off a book series (Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter most obviously, but also Twilight and Hunger Games and Maze Runner and Hobbit and on and on, even including stuff that hasn't gotten official sequels yet like Prometheus and Avatar and notable failures like Eragon and Last Airbender that were seeding sequels heavily). It was a stable model that allowed for a continuing narrative to form and a brand to build, but needed a strict narrative structure to work (Which is why they were usually based off book series) and thus usually had a specified endpoint. And we saw the sort of grasping movie studios were doing to keep brand management going when the narratives the franchises were based on ended which is why that trend of the final movie in the series usually being split up into two parts (Hunger Games, Harry Potter, and Twilight, and they somehow wrung three loving movies out of the goddamn Hobbit, most absurdly) was so hot in the late aughts. But then Marvel changed the game with the MCU - or, more accurately, the final maturation of television as an art form did with a focus on continuing, expansive narrative changed how people consumed media, with more and more audiences at home desiring longer-form stories set in a particular universe. Marvel rode that rising wave of interest with its movie series (by basically taking what worked in TV and adapting it to the big screen). And now every other movie studio realized that that's where the money is, because unlike a book series a "Cinematic Universe" has no definitive endpoint. If you do it right - and I would argue that Marvel definitely did - you can basically keep it going forever, because it's all part of a continuous overarcing story. You can avoid issues with sequel-itis or audience disinterest by just shifting focus while still building off a brand, so like if tomorrow suddenly everyone hated/got tired of RDJ Marvel could just pivot away from having the MCU include Iron Man, and I would argue that they've built a strong enough core that the MCU would survive the loss of its founding character. The problem is that for it to work, you need both a strong central narrative vision and to put your very best foot forward, because in order to make people interested in the nebulous concept of a "cinematic universe" you have to give them a reason to care and a feeling that it's all going somewhere or is building to something. DC (more accurately, WB) has very clearly failed at the latter. Love it or hate it, comparing Man of Steel as an introduction to a cinematic universe directly to Iron Man as an introduction to a cinematic universe throws into high relief how necessary the latter was to build the MCU to the strength it is today, and Man of Steel is a divisive-at-best film that doesn't work anywhere near as well as an onboarding point for audiences. But what's especially weird with SS is that it feels like WB ceding the "strong central narrative vision" point as well. I think Zack Snyder's a bad director (good cinematographer, bad director) and an even worse storyteller, but at least I could respect that MoS and BvS have a strong narrative vision that feel of a piece even if I think they're both especially bad films. If everything I've heard about the behind the scenes editing shenangians with SS are true, then it's indicative of there being no guiding figure or figures for the DCEU. It's all reactionary, chasing-the-dragon moves on WB/DC's part, which makes me wonder why I should give even the slightest gently caress about where they're building the DCEU to if they're so willing to throw everything out at the slightest sign of turbulence. Everyone wants to make that Marvel money but as WB is unpleasantly discovering, you can't just snap your fingers and do that.Although if Fantastic Beasts makes the mad cash it almost certainly will, be prepared for the Harry Potter Cinematic Universe to be their next big focus (especially if Suicide Squad's a big ol bust in the box office).
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Everyone wants to make that Marvel money but as WB is unpleasantly discovering, you can't just snap your fingers and do that.Although if Fantastic Beasts makes the mad cash it almost certainly will, be prepared for the Harry Potter Cinematic Universe to be their next big focus (especially if Suicide Squad's a big ol bust in the box office). They've already greenlit a sequel to Fantastic Beasts, so yeah I think they're full steam ahead on that one tbh I can definitely see an open ended Harry Potter Wizardverse working well, since almost everyone has strong associations and background knowledge of the brand and fictional world but it's not an IP that's burdened with ~80 years of Legacy & Iconic Characters/Stories
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
Still rooting for Hanna Barbera Cinematic Universe to be the next thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Toxx, that was a really good effortpostmycot posted:Still rooting for Hanna Barbera Cinematic Universe to be the next thing. I don't know how it could possibly work, but yes
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
mycot posted:Still rooting for Hanna Barbera Cinematic Universe to be the next thing. Because the Flintstone movies worked out great!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
SlimGoodbody posted:I don't know how it could possibly work, but yes Solo Magilla Gorilla, Yogi Bear, Huckleberry hound, and Top Cat, followed by a Wacky Races movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Surprisingly enough Yogi Bear was, and is still considered, the first official movie in the Hanna-Barberaverse. They're just making sure they get the rest of the scripts as tight as that one was. Can't dip in quality after the first masterpiece. The Smurfs are in an X-Men type situation wherein they're not part of the shared Barberaverse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 08:43
|
|
|
mycot posted:Still rooting for Hanna Barbera Cinematic Universe to be the next thing. Didn't they announce one? Or am I thinking Hasbro? They announced a Hasbro Cinematic Universe, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:It's all reactionary, chasing-the-dragon moves on WB/DC's part, which makes me wonder why I should give even the slightest gently caress about where they're building the DCEU to if they're so willing to throw everything out at the slightest sign of turbulence. The solution is to learn to watch movies as movies again instead of as makeshift television.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
catlord posted:Didn't they announce one? Or am I thinking Hasbro? They announced a Hasbro Cinematic Universe, right? Hasbro is going toward one, but I think they're still focusing on Transformers movies at the moment, as their other ventures haven't really paid off (Battleship & GI Joe). I mean, drat, it takes a lot to make people not want to see a movie with The Rock in it. They are doing a combined Comics universe that combines TF, GI Joe, MASK, Action Man, and Rom. That starts in a bit, and I think it involves Optimus Prime as a bad guy that has "Conquered" Earth (To stop Galvatron or something worse from taking it over). X-O posted:Surprisingly enough Yogi Bear was, and is still considered, the first official movie in the Hanna-Barberaverse. They're just making sure they get the rest of the scripts as tight as that one was. Can't dip in quality after the first masterpiece. The Smurfs are in an X-Men type situation wherein they're not part of the shared Barberaverse. I'm not massively familiar with HB stuff, so who can they Terrigen Bomb to become "The All new, all different Smurfs?"
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
The one I remember was that Dracula movie from a few years ago with Luke Evans and Charles Dance, because there was some sort of statement from its studio or production company or whoever (whoever it is that actually makes movies) about how they were treating it as a movie second and as the springboard for a new shared universe of other properties they had. I don't think that's a terribly good strategy either creatively or business-wise. I understand the new King Kong movie that's coming out is meant to have Kong fighting Godzilla from the Gareth Edwards movie eventually. I'm not really sure about that. Godzilla is a science-fiction thing while Kong is more of a pulp adventure idea to me. They don't necessarily mix. Maybe if you're making them both period pieces, but as far as I'm aware that's not the case here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 12:26
|
|
|
I'm much more interested in the probably-shelved Pacific Rim/Godzilla crossover film.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 12:32
|
|
|
The Dracula one was a weird case because they filmed it before all the shared universe stuff started getting big and so originally it was just supposed to be a stand alone thing but then they went back and did some reshoots. Which is kind of funny because the reshoots are just cheap as hell. If you look at old trailers you'd see that Charles Dance's vampire originally lived in this big ancient Roman ruin but in the finished movie he's just in this tiny cave.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
They've revealed that John Goodman's character works for Monarch, the secret monster-hunting organization from Godzilla. I'm pretty excited for the possibilities of a kaiju franchise, especially if they have the sense to keep most of the humans unique from movie to movie. I really don't want to see the family from Godzilla again but I would love to see Serizawa again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
Optimus Prime was a bad guy like 2 movies ago from what I've seen. He straight-up executes a begging Megatron at the end of 3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 12:53
|
|
Travis343 posted:They've revealed that John Goodman's character works for Monarch, the secret monster-hunting organization from Godzilla. I'm pretty excited for the possibilities of a kaiju franchise, especially if they have the sense to keep most of the humans unique from movie to movie. I really don't want to see the family from Godzilla again but I would love to see Serizawa again. I just don't understand why they decided the boring soldier son and his boring family was the right character to focus on, instead of the obsessed mad scientist dad played by Bryan Cranston. Those loving scenes where all there was on screen was soldiers using military lingo might as well have been dead air.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:They've revealed that John Goodman's character works for Monarch, the secret monster-hunting organization from Godzilla. I'm pretty excited for the possibilities of a kaiju franchise, especially if they have the sense to keep most of the humans unique from movie to movie. I really don't want to see the family from Godzilla again but I would love to see Serizawa again. Kaiju franchise, sure. I would enjoy that. Like I say, I'm not sure if Kong fits into that, purely because Kong climbs the Empire State Building while Godzilla would probably tower over it. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
It's just weird to me when people say "the Shared Universes bubble has popped", because it's hard to call something a "bubble" when only two groups seem to be doing it deliberately and well: Marvel and Quentin Tarantino. Everyone else is either recharacterizing existing films as Universe-Building or going through in post and ham-fistedly recharacterizing what are essentially finished movies into something they're not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I just don't understand why they decided the boring soldier son and his boring family was the right character to focus on, instead of the obsessed mad scientist dad played by Bryan Cranston. Those loving scenes where all there was on screen was soldiers using military lingo might as well have been dead air. Heisenberg money is a lot higher than Kick-rear end and... bad Oldboy remake money?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
I have been informed by a coworker that Suicide Squad is the best movie of the year and the best movie he has seen in five years. It is the citizen Kane of superhero movies. WB has done it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:50
|
|
Plastik posted:It's just weird to me when people say "the Shared Universes bubble has popped", because it's hard to call something a "bubble" when only two groups seem to be doing it deliberately and well: Marvel and Quentin Tarantino. Everyone else is either recharacterizing existing films as Universe-Building or going through in post and ham-fistedly recharacterizing what are essentially finished movies into something they're not. I'm not sure Quentin Tarantino's work really counts. Sure, he might've made sure it all fits together, but not in any way that matters to a general audience or that can be used in marketing. Aphrodite posted:Heisenberg money is a lot higher than Kick-rear end and... bad Oldboy remake money? The film didn't strike me as being on a tight budget.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
In addition to the MCU and DCCU, we have: -Universal monsters shared universe -Kaiju shared universe -Transformers/GI Joe -Hanna Barbara (I don't believe this will happen) What am I missing
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
The Kevin Smith cinematic universe.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
There were rumors, at one point, of a Robin Hood cinematic universe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
I think there's a Lego Cinematic Universe? At least, Lego Movie 2 is in development and as far as I'm aware the character in Lego Batman is the same one from Lego Movie 1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Anora posted:Solo Magilla Gorilla, Yogi Bear, Huckleberry hound, and Top Cat, followed by a Wacky Races movie. Nah, it'd be a Yogi's Treasure Hunt movie. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
I have a radical theory that "cinematic universe" is just a glossed up marketing-speak for "a movie series, including spinoffs".
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
They should really just bring together all the lovely adaptations of old cartoons into one cinematic universe. Garfield, Smurfs, Yogi Bear, TMNT... in their teamup movie they can teach kids about saying no to drugs by fighting a bunch of scary cartel people
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
OnimaruXLR posted:They should really just bring together all the lovely adaptations of old cartoons into one cinematic universe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:In addition to the MCU and DCCU, we have: Star Wars I guess you could add LOTR/Hobbit, I think that well is dry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:59 |
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I have a radical theory that "cinematic universe" is just a glossed up marketing-speak for "a movie series, including spinoffs". It used to mean "Completely disconnected movies except Samuel L Jackson shows up at the end."
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 16:17
|
|