|
twistedmentat posted:They've said she's going to be in Infinity War. They also haven't said if she's going to have powers in infinity War. Rick Sanchez posted:Well looky here The Chain is a loving amazing song. https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/status/836801138439643136
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
I can't help but think She (that's the golden lady right?) is partially based on the ideas for Jodowsky's Dune's version of the Emperor. Wait, so we still don't know what Sly is doing in the movie right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I can't help but think She (that's the golden lady right?) is partially based on the ideas for Jodowsky's Dune's version of the Emperor. Isn't she based on the Celestial from Heroes Return?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
Ayesha/Her/Kismet are all the same character basically. http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Ayesha_(Earth-616) Not to be confused with the similar character Goddess, from Infinity Crusade.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
Looks good! I hope Bautista runs away with this one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
That trailer really didn't do anything for me. Still excited for the film, but the trailer didn't tingle my hypebuds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
Man, the MCU is loving awesome. I don't know why so many of you have no joy in your lives!
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
teagone posted:That trailer really didn't do anything for me. Still excited for the film, but the trailer didn't tingle my hypebuds. That's fair, it's hard to top "I need some tape for the death button."
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
WB just needs to scrap the entire DCCU, when your goofy lego cartoon has a better emotional arc and character development than your franchise tentpoles, you have hosed up. Go see Lego Batman, it was wonderful
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:That's fair, it's hard to top "I need some tape for the death button." Yeah, that teaser trailer was way better. The Super Bowl spot also got me mad hype. I'm already sold on the film, but this recent trailer was just ehh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 09:39
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:The Chain is a loving amazing song.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 10:09
|
|
|
That trailer would've be good if they'd cut out all the dialogue. "So we're saving the galaxy again?" "Yup." "AWESOME! We're really gonna be able to jack up our prices for two-time galaxy-saving!" Rhyno posted:Man, the MCU is loving awesome. I don't know why so many of you have no joy in your lives! Well, GotG is really just cynical and dishonestly sentimental, so its joys are ultimately hollow. When you actually look at what it says and does with its themes, it's rather obscene. - The protagonist is a white American manchild living out the fantasy of being a space adventurer, and this is presented as a good and heroic thing to do. This would be a fine satirical device about a superhero trying to sell his own brand-image, but the movie is played straight. As a hero he makes no sacrifices, and has no need for discipline or duty. The hardships he faces amount almost solely to physical danger and slight mockery (why doesn't Rocket castigate Quill like he does with Drax?). Even the death of his mother is used to vindicate his overextended childhood ("My little Star-Lord"). This is something that a children's film like Lego Movie, also starring Chris Pratt, criticises. A lego figure's journey features more hardship and emotional turmoil than GotG does. One also recalls Incal's far superior bumbling hero, John DiFool. - For all its uses motifs and imagery of death, the movie hardly has any courage to deal with it. Despite all the destruction and tragedy, most deaths are either pitilessly efficient (the prisoners dying offscreen, Nova Corps and henchmen dying by droves) or ultimately reversed. Groot comes back to life. Even Quill's mother "returns" when he finds substitutes for her in form of Gamora and a second mix-tape, instead of just overcoming loss. The one exception is the Collector's slave-girl who dies a sad and pointless death, and is never acknowledged again. - The Guardians unite as a makeshift family and use the power of familial love in order to kill a foreign terrorist. This is something that actually happens and is played straight. Of course there's kind of cool setpieces and action, but you have to ask what purpose those all those cool setpieces and action serve. All the talk of how fun it is seems like a distraction from a deeply cynical story. Soonmot posted:WB just needs to scrap the entire DCCU, when your goofy lego cartoon has a better emotional arc and character development than your franchise tentpoles, you have hosed up. It seems like that because children's movies are generally made to be as widely and immediately appealing as possible, even if they're not necessarily as sophisticated. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 11:27 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
teagone posted:That trailer really didn't do anything for me. Still excited for the film, but the trailer didn't tingle my hypebuds. Same, but I admit that's partially due to how much I hate Fleetwood Mac.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
Speaking of The Incal, has there been anything on Winding Refn's supposed Incal movie? I'm torn on that idea by now. The director's great, the material's great, but they don't seem to fit. Like, visually alone there's the detailed bombast of the Incal, and there's Winding Refn's colored lighting and mirrors and off-center framed characters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
A quick Google brings up this not very substantial thing which says he's not doing it anymore. Nothing newer than that. His current project seems to be an Amazon crime series.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 10:54
|
|
|
Well, like I said, that may not be a bad thing. Still wouldn't mind an Incal movie but I'm hard pressed to think of who could do it short of Jodorowsky himself or Gilliam.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Well, GotG is really just cynical and dishonestly sentimental, so its joys are ultimately hollow. Yeah, it's great!
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 11:15
|
|
|
So is the tentacle monster supposed to be anything from Marvel lore, or am I allowed to imagine this is a crossover with the Star Wars universe where they're fighting an oversized Rathtar?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
purple death ray posted:The thing about BvS is that most of this stuff he's saying is actually true, but the finished product is so poorly edited and badly directed that it undermines itself expressing these themes and ideas to the point that most people watching the movie aren't going to pick up on them. It's really not just a case of "Batman shouldn't be killing people!" or "Superman frowns too much!", even though both of those things are probably true, the movie has much much deeper problems than that. I hesitate to say this because it really sounds condescending, and that's certainly not the intent, but a lot of people who watch movies (and I'm including myself here) don't really do much more than a surface reading of a movie. Was it fun? Was it dour, was it grim, how did it make me feel, can I understand the plot / motivations? Watching Transformers for instance, the surface level reading is that Autobots = good, Decepticons = bad. A deeper reading would in fact reveal that Autobots = Dicks, Decepticons = Not bad. I intensely disliked Prometheus because I didn't get it, for instance, and found it a confusing mess. Others loved it, because they totally understood what Ridley Scott was going for. A film can, as a goal, have more than having the viewer feel good or have fun. It'¨s an artistic medium, and the creators have license to strive towards other goals. To compare to a different movie, in Inglorious Basterds, Tarantino is drawing direct parallels between us, the viewers, cheering for the murderous basterds killing a sympathetic nazi, and the nazis in the cinema cheering on their nazi warhero murdering allied soldiers. Many people missed that parallel. Is that Tarantino's fault? Should he have been more obvious? Was the movie badly put together? How much onus do you put on the viewer to figure these things out, and how much is on the director/producer to clarify these things? Futurama said it the best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBhR4QcBtE McCloud fucked around with this message at 12:15 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 12:12
|
|
|
teagone posted:Yeah, that teaser trailer was way better. The Super Bowl spot also got me mad hype. I'm already sold on the film, but this recent trailer was just ehh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 13:14
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Well, GotG is really just cynical and dishonestly sentimental, so its joys are ultimately hollow. When you actually look at what it says and does with its themes, it's rather obscene. Ha ha ha, no. A cynical reading of an earnest movie doesn't make the movie cynical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
Rick Sanchez posted:Well looky here  It is gonna be real good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Ha ha ha, no. A cynical reading of an earnest movie doesn't make the movie cynical. What's inaccurate about it? Peter Quill, for an example is an immature thirty-something living out a childhood fantasy of being "Star-Lord," as inspired by his mother. He parses the world through media he consumed as a kid, and the sound-track is his favourite childhood nostalgia tracks. He is trying to play the part of a space adventurer, and there's jokes about how he's trying to be something he isn't. In the end, he's been legitimized in his childhood fantasy identity. This isn't even a cynical reading, it's what the movie presents as basic facts about his character. He's a very clearly satirical character in a non-satirical movie, and one result is the cynical lesson that immature fantasies are rewarding. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:What's inaccurate about it? "Oppositional reading" doesn't mean just completely misunderstanding the themes clearly presented in a film. Hope that helps you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:"Oppositional reading" doesn't mean just completely misunderstanding the themes clearly presented in a film. Hope that helps you. Again, what's inaccurate about it? Is Peter Quill not, in fact, a lovable schlub living out a childhood-inspired fantasy of being a space adventurer?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Again, what's inaccurate about it? Is Peter Quill not, in fact, a lovable schlub living out a childhood-inspired fantasy of being a space adventurer? So you're gonna just stick with the most shallow, superficial reading of a movie to justify your derision of it? I'll give you a hint: do you really think Peter Quill is "happy" living out his "awesome" childhood fantasy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:So you're gonna just stick with the most shallow, superficial reading of a movie to justify your derision of it? Quill's a very unsatisfied character, especially since the fantasy life is a way of coping with his terrible life after his mother's death. Things don't live up to his fantasy. The shift from poseur to hero happens when he discovers how dangerous the Inifnity Stone is. So there's a hint of maturation that's never really followed upon: instead we get the Guardians as a makeshift family to substitute for his mother (with the image of Gamora turning into her), and him being honoured as a real hero. He didn't go through any hardship or sacrifice to become a hero. Quill never abandons his fantasy-life, the world simply starts conforming to it. What's especially odd is that the Guardians needed to be his makeshift family when he already had one in the form of the Ravagers. Maybe they were too ugly and non-PC. The movie starts with him leaving his adoptive family and job, presumably because they weren't conductive to his Star-Lord fantasy. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 15:12 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Quill's a very unsatisfied character, especially since the fantasy life is a way of coping with his terrible life after his mother's death. Things don't live up to his fantasy. The shift from poseur to hero happens when he discovers how dangerous the Inifnity Stone is. So there's a hint of maturation that's never really followed upon: instead we get the Guardians as a makeshift family to substitute for his mother (with the image of Gamora turning into her), and him being honoured as a real hero. He didn't go through any hardship or sacrifice to become a hero. Quill never abandons his fantasy-life, the world simply starts conforming to it. You're so close!
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
Well I'm loving out of here, I'm not reading this horseshit two days in a row.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:You're so close! I think you should just state your opinion clearly. I think GotG appeals to white male immaturity, how do you think it avoids that? BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 15:18 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
purple death ray posted:Well I'm loving out of here, I'm not reading this horseshit two days in a row. Amen brother.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I think you should just state your opinion clearly. How does GotG, in your opnion, avoid what I think is legitimization of white male immaturity? Guardians of the Galaxy is about arrested development. It doesn't legitimize it. You're mistaking it being an ostensibly fun adventure for it saying that's a totally awesome way for people to be. Everyone in Guardians is miserable and broken. Peter is miserable with the Ravagers because he's unable to form a bond with them. Yondu is uncouth and brutish, yes, but he's also trying to connect with Quill. Neither of them have the emotional maturity to do it, though. And Quill's transition from wannabe to heroic figure also happens to coincide with moments of genuine emotional catharsis: him bonding momentarily with Gamora over music, Rocket finally lashing out at being called vermin. Those are moments where Quill is able to open up a bit and actually empathize with others. The end of the movie isn't just a continuation of the status quo, it's Quill moving forward as a person and actually connecting with people. Gamora isn't "replacing" his mother. The Guardians aren't "replacing" his old family any more than a man moving out, marrying, and having children is "replacing" his old family.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:He's a very clearly satirical character in a non-satirical movie, and one result is the cynical lesson that immature fantasies are rewarding. They are indeed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
Notorious comic book movie scoffer A.A. Dowd gave Logan an A- on the AV Club so I'm officially unleashing the hype.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Guardians of the Galaxy is about arrested development. It doesn't legitimize it. You're mistaking it being an ostensibly fun adventure for it saying that's a totally awesome way for people to be. Everyone in Guardians is miserable and broken. Peter is miserable with the Ravagers because he's unable to form a bond with them. Yondu is uncouth and brutish, yes, but he's also trying to connect with Quill. Neither of them have the emotional maturity to do it, though. And Quill's transition from wannabe to heroic figure also happens to coincide with moments of genuine emotional catharsis: him bonding momentarily with Gamora over music, Rocket finally lashing out at being called vermin. Those are moments where Quill is able to open up a bit and actually empathize with others. The end of the movie isn't just a continuation of the status quo, it's Quill moving forward as a person and actually connecting with people. Gamora isn't "replacing" his mother. The Guardians aren't "replacing" his old family any more than a man moving out, marrying, and having children is "replacing" his old family. I think you need to look at what you're leaving out of your reading. Namely, you're presenting the story as a feelgood family-building exercise, ignoring all the corpses piled up along the way. The nucleus of Guardians as a family is that they go on exciting space adventures where they kill bad guys in cool ways. Since Quill is "moving forward as a person and actually connecting with people," what is this person he becomes and who he's connecting with? Peter Quill stays almost exactly the same, just now he gets to do heroic things. What does it mean that we only learn the origin of "Star-Lord" in the end and not the beginning? If Quill's mother had called him Star-Lord in the opening scene, it would've painted him throughout as an overgrown child. But placing it in the end makes it a fait accompli. It's the height of GotG's cynicism, because it dishonestly sells an immature fantasy as emotional catharsis. That's why there's no scene of Rocket chewing him out Quill as a poseur, or him abandoning his Star-Lord identity. And remember that it's not the only revelation in the end: it turns out that he has unusual DNA and was Special all along (in stark contrast to the Lego Movie). What does it mean that Quill can't bond with the Ravagers but makes connections with the other Guardians? Well, in the movie's context the Ravagers represent duties, responsibilites, ugly realities of life... in other words, family. The Guardians serve also as a fantasy of relationships without responsibility, so they're not a very good represntation of family. They're a collection of freaks and weirdos, so there's also a veneer of social rebellion over something completely nonthreatening. Contrasts to the original comics are helpful here, because in the comics Star-Lord was driven by desperate and ruthless sort of altruism, and the Guardians were an utilitarian organizaton formed for suicide missions. The creators of the movie instead of went for the theme of family of bonding, but don't properly exploit it all with the tools the setting grants (where is the vast emptiness and bleakness of space to emphasise the characters's search for each other?). Adventures of Tintin is in contrast an entirely wholesome movie, where the principal dramatic arc is Haddock trying to live up to his ancestor's legend. Adventure and combat serve as a way for characters to reclaim the past. Tintin is a genuinely earnest movie, even if one can detect the cautious care they took to excise all the politically troublesome parts of comics. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I think you need to look at what you're leaving out of your reading. Namely, you're presenting the story as a feelgood family-building exercise, ignoring all the corpses piled up along the way. The nucleus of Guardians as a family is that they go on exciting space adventures where they kill bad guys in cool ways. It's him coming into his own. Again, you're focusing on the superficial aspects of the movie: he goes on cool adventures! He has a cool ship! But does he seem like a whole, fulfilled person doing these things? Throughout the movie, he's desperate to be known as "Star-Lord", to be called by the name his mother gave him, but he hasn't earned it. Star-Lord isn't something you're called, it's something you are. He can only really become that person by becoming a fully realized adult, which he can't as long as he refuses to accept his mother's death. That's why it's revealed at the end, because it recontextualizes his seemingly goofy need to be called by a superhero name throughout the movie as a need to connect with his lost mother. But the only way he has left to connect with her is by accepting her death. He isn't immediately completely changed by the end of the film because that's not how change works. The film ends with him finally discovering himself as a whole person and starting a new life with genuine connections. And you can snarkily try to diminish the film by using terms like "feel-good", but that doesn't make it less poignant. I'm sorry your cynicism prevents you from having genuine feelings? quote:What does it mean that Quill can't bond with the Ravagers but makes connections with the other Guardians? Well, in the movie's context the Ravagers represent duties, responsibilites, ugly realities of life... in other words, family. The Guardians serve also as a fantasy of relationships without responsibility, so they're hardly a family. They're a collection of freaks and weirdos, so there's also a veneer of social rebellion over something completely nonthreatening. Contrasts to the original comics are helpful here, because in the comics Star-Lord was driven by desperate and ruthless sort of altruism, and the Guardians were an utilitarian organizaton formed for suicide missions. The creators of the movie instead of went for the theme of family of bonding, and they don't properly exploit it all with the tools the setting grants (where is the vast emptiness and bleakness of space to emphasise the characters's search for each other?). The Ravagers don't need Quill. The Guardians do. It's really very simple.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
The nucleus of Guardians as a family is that they make an attempt to understand each other, a simple privilege not afforded to them previously due to their poor upbringings and status as weirdos. Star-lord never saw his life a a fantasy fulfilled, but a child stunted. He listens to classic music not because he has nostalgia for the era, but because it is his only link to his mother, whose death he doesn't overcome until the end of the movie. He doesn't bond with the Ravagers because they use him as a tool, and their idea of bonding is to remind him that they never cannibalized him as a child. The Guardians actually accept responsibility by attempting to stop Ronin instead of focusing on self preservation, as they would have in the past. The emotional catharsis is the Guardian's shared realization that they are not limited to the roles fate has dealt them, but together can grow beyond, possibly even into heroes, though they are far from complete in that journey.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
purple death ray posted:Well I'm loving out of here, I'm not reading this horseshit two days in a row. This is our burden. We must keep BravestOfTheLamps in this timeline and SuperMechaGodzilla in the other, for ever if the two should meet, it would mean the end of the world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:It's him coming into his own. Again, you're focusing on the superficial aspects of the movie: he goes on cool adventures! He has a cool ship! But does he seem like a whole, fulfilled person doing these things? Throughout the movie, he's desperate to be known as "Star-Lord", to be called by the name his mother gave him, but he hasn't earned it. Star-Lord isn't something you're called, it's something you are. Now you need to look at what "Star-Lord" actually means. It's a child's fantasy of being a space adventurer. That's not something you need to or should earn. It's not the actual moral duty or responsibility as a hero that Quill is after, he's after the satisfying a fantasy. You're complaining that I'm not having "genuine feelings" about a grown man's aspirations to be Han Solo or Flash Gordon. That's a bit silly, isn't it? BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Now you need to look at what "Star-Lord" actually means. It's a child's fantasy of being a space adventurer. That's not something you need to or should earn. It's not the actual moral duty or responsibility as a hero that Quill is after, he's after the satisfying a fantasy. Star Lord doesn't mean anything. It's a silly name Peter's mother gave him because she believed his father was an interstellar angel. It represents her hopes and dreams for him, not to become a space adventurer, but just to be a good, fully realized man. The same thing any parent wants for their child. I'm having genuine feelings for someone who's having trouble coping with the death of a loved one. If you can't empathize with that...I guess that's good for you? Losing someone is horrible, and I don't wish it on anyone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 17:23
|
|