|
I don't know how anyone can not be super loving hyped about Luke Cage, it looks awesome and Mike Colter is absolutely perfect.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
No one calls actually calls Hell's Kitchen Clinton lol.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Mover posted:No one calls actually calls Hell's Kitchen Clinton lol. Careful, somebody might accuse you of having been to New York!
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
You care an unreasonable amount at least
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
AngryBooch posted:And that ninjas and yakuza are not in fact invading hospitals in that neighborhood? That you know of! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Yeah, I bought the rationale of "rich people can afford to leave the blown-up alien warzone, and did, and property values kinda suck there now on account of being an alien warzone that smells like rotting space leviathan or whatever the gently caress those giant snakes that Hulk and Iron Man and Thor kept killing and leaving to cook in the New York summer."
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 06:34
|
|
|
After I got home from Suicide Squad last night, I got dragged into watching Catwoman and Fantastic Four (2005) with some friends. That Catwoman movie was like some sort of fever dream, Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 06:34
|
|
|
Finally saw Suicide Squad and good lord what a mountain of hot garbage. The tragedy is I can see the skeleton of a decent movie trying desperately to crawl it's way out from the crushing weight of poor editing, bizarre character choices, and oddly wobbly CGI. There were so many individual things that I actually loved and it sucks that they're buried deep inside this nightmarish slog of corporate panic. I can only hope against hope that there's someday a Rogues movie and Jai Courtney gets way more screen time because I loved what we got to see of his Digger.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:Which includes Degrassi and possibly the Flarrowverse. (Jay cameoed in an ep of The Flash that Kevin Smith directed) 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 13:10
|
|
|
Also Jay was just some random rich guy in that episode of the Flash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Yeah I don't think Mewes was playing Jay in his Flash cameo. efb
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Don't forget that Scream 3 is an official View Askewniverse tie-in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Wowzers. I'd love to hear his opinion on The Killing Joke.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
In related news, Ghostbusters 2016 looks to be heading to, at a minimum, a $70 million loss. It's apparently so bad rumors are flying that Sony's shuttering their entire live action slate for GB and focusing solely on animated efforts from here on out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:In related news, Ghostbusters 2016 looks to be heading to, at a minimum, a $70 million loss. It's apparently so bad rumors are flying that Sony's shuttering their entire live action slate for GB and focusing solely on animated efforts from here on out. That sucks
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Ghostbusters is gonna be an interesting case study in how not to market a movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:That sucks Well to be fair so did the movie. It was a waste of all the main stars talents, especially Wiig and McCarthy. The two current SNL cast members managed to be standouts despite a threadbare script, bewildering editing, and Feig doing his trademark "point the camera and just tell people to riff, fix it in post".
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Yeah but so did the first two and they did fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
greatn posted:Well to be fair so did the movie. It was a waste of all the main stars talents, especially Wiig and McCarthy. The two current SNL cast members managed to be standouts despite a threadbare script, bewildering editing, and Feig doing his trademark "point the camera and just tell people to riff, fix it in post". The movie was actually fine for the most part, and seeing it in a theater packed with Girl Scouts highlighted who it was for and how much they enjoyed it. It has the issues you laid out, I can't deny that though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Like so many other Sony properties, it would have probably been massively better if Disney was making it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
greatn posted:Like so many other Sony properties, it would have probably been massively better if Disney was making it. I humbly disagree.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
The trailers were god awful and the impression I get is that the writing is terrible. It felt like a cheap cash in to me with all of the product placement and distracting CGI. I think one thing people forget about the original is that at times the performances are very subtle and the characters are extremely well written. It's too bad they had all of those issues with Winston's character being downgraded from an original script since he was a good fit with the rest of them as the skeptic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The trailers were god awful and the impression I get is that the writing is terrible. It felt like a cheap cash in to me with all of the product placement and distracting CGI. I think one thing people forget about the original is that at times the performances are very subtle and the characters are extremely well written. It's too bad they had all of those issues with Winston's character being downgraded from an original script since he was a good fit with the rest of them as the skeptic. The writing in the actual Ghostbusters 2016 film is actually a fair bit more subtle than in the trailers and while it has some exaggerated moment it actually does some good character building beats too. It's not as good as the original by any means but it's better than the trailers make it out to be. The writing is less of a problem than the editing which is genuinely pretty bad and there's at least one major character beat noticeably absent from the film. That said I disagree that the characters were well written in the original Ghostbusters though. A lot of them were entirely saved by their performances. Peter Venkman on paper is a tire fire of a character. He's a horrifying abusive molester who spends his time insulting an EPA agent for wanting to check their unlicensed nuclear reactor. If anyone else but Bill Murray played him he'd be unsalvageable. Ghostbusters is a film saved entirely by its incredibly strong cast and direction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
Yeah people tend to look at the original ghostbusters with extreme rose tinted glasses at least when looking from a critical point of view.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Kind of a shame about Ghostbusters because I liked it a lot, even if it was pretty much just edited together from footage of the actors yes-anding each other for hundreds of hours.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Save two franchises with one stone and make Paranormal Activity x Ghostbusters. You'll never believe the hijinks these ladies get up to when paired with a shaken suburban family that is hiding a very witchy secret.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
It surprised me that McCarthy in particularly was so weak, because in my opinion of the cast she's the best there is at yes-anding. There are so many middling movies where her performance is the best thing and elevated the whole film. For example This Is Forty is fairly weak as a whole but then she shows up in a mostly improv'd principles office scene and had me in complete stitches. And in Spy she's just amazing throughout. In Ghostbusters she's so oddly insubstantial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
The original script had her in the Leslie Jones role, basically playing a version of her character that she always plays. Apparently she didn't want to do that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
greatn posted:It surprised me that McCarthy in particularly was so weak, because in my opinion of the cast she's the best there is at yes-anding. There are so many middling movies where her performance is the best thing and elevated the whole film. For example This Is Forty is fairly weak as a whole but then she shows up in a mostly improv'd principles office scene and had me in complete stitches. And in Spy she's just amazing throughout. Not that she needed to be a whackjob, but having her play everything so straight and earnest was a missed opportunity. She didn't need to be like her Bridesmaids role. Like you said, in Spy she's incredible. God, Spy was the whole reason I was looking forward to Ghostbusters. A McCarthy-Feig genre send-up that beautifully mixed action and comedy. They just needed to make the same thing but about ghosts and not James Bond.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
The weird thing is I thought in Bridesmaids her best scene was the one where she was reserved and talked real to Wiig about what friendship was and how she was being lovely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
I thought Spy was awful and why I wasn't at all interested in seeing Ghostbusters. (That and the really dull trailers.) I think I just don't like Feig movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
I may have enjoyed Spy more because I watched it on a 12 hour flight, so it's going to be the best thing happening to me at the time in comparison to the rest of my environment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
I'm definitely the odd man out among our friends for liking Spy and I thought (probably like they do) it'd be another eye-roller like Tammy or The Boss or whatever, but I was really surprised. A lot of those same people really liked Ghostbusters, actually 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Michael Chernus is playing Tinkerer in Spider-Man Homecoming http://deadline.com/2016/08/michael-chernus-spider-man-homecoming-villains-1201801646/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter And there are rumors that Bokeem Woodbine's character is Shocker
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Dacap posted:Michael Chernus is playing Tinkerer in Spider-Man Homecoming How many villains do we need in a Spider-Man movie? Didn't they learn from Spider-Man 3 or more recently, The Amazing Spider-Man 2? Although, it might work if the Tinkerer works with the Vulture and is the one that helps create his wings or whatever. Time will tell I guess. Also, some Aquaman movie speculation regarding the villain: The Wrap posted:The Wrap has exclusively learned the bad guy of the movie will be Aquaman’s deadliest and most-famous opponent — Black Manta. “Aquaman” diehards should go nuts for the film’s adherence to DC lore — “Aquaman” first introduced the villain in 1967. In DC’s “New 52” reboot, Black Manta is a man in a suit with no innate super powers. Not surprising, I could see Black Manta translating well onto film. I'm not sure who else is in Aquaman's rogues gallery that would work, as I haven't really read any solo Aquaman comics. Jonny_Rocket fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Aug 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Jonny_Rocket posted:How many villains do we need in a Spider-Man movie? Didn't they learn from Spider-Man 3 or more recently, The Amazing Spider-Man 2? Although, it might work if the Tinkerer works with the Vulture and is the one that helps create his wings or whatever. Time will tell I guess. What if they finally do what people have been speculating since 2001 and have a little montage of Spidey taking out a few of his b-listers on his way to homecoming or something? Could be really fun if they do it right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:What if they finally do what people have been speculating since 2001 and have a little montage of Spidey taking out a few of his b-listers on his way to homecoming or something? Could be really fun if they do it right. That's true! I didn't really think about it that way - I totally agree it could be fun. On a side note - too bad we couldn't get someone like King Shark in the Aquaman movie, that'd be so awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:43
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Yeah people tend to look at the original ghostbusters with extreme rose tinted glasses at least when looking from a critical point of view. I've heard old men call it "The best comedy of all time" and it's like... that was a comedy? I mean there's jokes in it but it's mostly just a movie about a weird concept with some humor peppered throughout.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Blazing Saddles is the greatest comedy of all time. I love Ghostbusters but it's not even the funniest movie Bill Murray has been in. It is however the funniest movie Dan Aykroyd has been in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
Travis343 posted:Blazing Saddles is the greatest comedy of all time. I love Ghostbusters but it's not even the funniest movie Bill Murray has been in. You can go screw yourself as long as Blues Brothers exists. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:53
|
|