|
Just back from seeing Inhumans, I had low expectations going in but ended up really liking it. It looked good, and apart from a few cases of bad acting/dialogue it really held up. Just realize that it is a mid-budget mini series and not a movie, and the effects reflect that.
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
We're seeing it tomorrow. I love AoS enough that I'll give it a shot. I'm interested to see how many other people will be watching it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Without spoiling, are there any ties to AoS or the world building it did around its own inhumans?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
Slashrat posted:Without spoiling, are there any ties to AoS or the world building it did around its own inhumans? Inhumans from AoS get mentioned (none by name) as being a thing that exists and that some people on earth are aware of; the group of characters we follow in Inhumans are wholly new. The only real spoilery part, and even that's iffy is Its made explicit that the ones from Attilan are full-blooded Inhumans and all the ones on Earth are descendants of older Inhumans that were left behind when the city of Attilan was founded
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
That's pretty much what I figured. If you're a comics reader is like the Attilan Inhumans and the ones created by the cloud released after Infinity like Ms Marvel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
It's so painfully obvious that these characters (as a concept) are basically rebranded X-Men. They have to have a special gene to have powers, everyone has different powers...literally the only difference is "having to go through terrigenesis"
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
That's always been the case, even before Marvel started using them that way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Yeah, even I've gleaned that much from all the discussion about Inhumans throughout these 4 threads. Inhumans have a huge showy spectacle about how they're changing and becoming different but Mutants just have you suddenly be different. Like, depends on the Mutant of course, if you're Charles or Rogue no one would notice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
The weird symbols that Coulson was obsessed with are also shown quite a lot.RareAcumen posted:Yeah, even I've gleaned that much from all the discussion about Inhumans throughout these 4 threads. Inhumans have a huge showy spectacle about how they're changing and becoming different but Mutants just have you suddenly be different. I would say that there is a slight difference in overall look. In general most mutants we see look like normal humans, they just have super powers, Inhumans tend to show more radical changes. Inhumans the tv series seems to have a modest budget, but it does show a few good examples of more radical changes that Inhumans can go through. Oasx fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Sep 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
Oasx posted:I would say that there is a slight difference in overall look. In general most mutants we see look like normal humans, they just have super powers, Inhumans tend to show more radical changes. Inhumans the tv series seems to have a modest budget, but it does show a few good examples of more radical changes that Inhumans can go through. Oh okay, so my impression was actually backwards on it. To be fair though, when I think X-Men I'm going by the animated stuff because I never really watched the show that much. So that'd be Frog, Nightcrawler, Iceman, Beast, Storm, Cyclops, Rogue, Blob, Gambit Mystique, Magneto, Wolverine and maybe Colossus. And aside from Mystique and maybe Colossus I don't think any of them can turn off their weird appearance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
While I've never read a lot of Inhumans comics and I don't plan to see the Imax release, Inhumans can also be differentiated from mutants/X-Men in that they are very much a kingdom. They have a clear class system and a set of royalty. They have a society with their own cultures and norms. They're very much a society. Mutants typically haven't been portrayed as their own unique culture probably because so many of them end up somewhere in the superhero world or with the X-Men. I'm not expecting that level of depth from a Scott Buck production.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
RareAcumen posted:Yeah, even I've gleaned that much from all the discussion about Inhumans throughout these 4 threads. Inhumans have a huge showy spectacle about how they're changing and becoming different but Mutants just have you suddenly be different. Also, most mutants manifest abilities during adolescence, so it works way more directly as an analogy for queer sexual identity. Which is I assume why Bryan Singer is so invested in the franchise. That and for the money and influence it takes to keep himself flush in 19-year-old model/actors who aren't sure about this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:Things I would rather not see attempted on a weekly network TV VFX budget: seven foot tall green rage monsters. She-Hulk's not super roid rage like her cousin, 6'4" super athetic and snarky would be fine. You could get that with a tall fit lead and some clever angles/platforms. I would absolutely love for them to just treat it is "LA Law: Gamma Edition" if they're going to go down the JJ road and have her day job be the focus of the show.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
Of course now I want a She-Hulk movie with Charlize Theron.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
RareAcumen posted:Oh okay, so my impression was actually backwards on it. To be fair though, when I think X-Men I'm going by the animated stuff because I never really watched the show that much. So that'd be Frog, Nightcrawler, Iceman, Beast, Storm, Cyclops, Rogue, Blob, Gambit Mystique, Magneto, Wolverine and maybe Colossus. *Toad. Iceman's not like Thing, and permanently encased in ice. Storm has white hair, so not that outlandish. Cyclops wears Ruby Quartz sunglasses, Rogue has a white streak in her hair, Magneto can take off the costume, Wolverine Also, Nightcrawler has an image inducer he wears, making himself look human. Almost every mutant has a "secret identity", we just rarely see them, because they're almost never relevant to the plot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Yeah, traditional X-Men stories seemed to focus more on the emotional and psychological affect of powers like Rogue's. She can walk around and no one necessarily knows she's a mutant, but it affects how she lives and how she can never experience physical intimacy like others. Hence all the easy LGBTQ comparisons. Nightcrawler, Beast, Angel, and the Morlocks are always there and have their own side story of physical "freakishness" but that was always a side thing. Inhumans on the other hand always struck me as just a society of people who recognize being different. Of the Royal Family only Black Bolt, Crystal, and Medusa "pass" as human and Bolt and Medusa both have their things. I actually always thought that was part of the Crystal spoiled "princess" character that she's the one who can just go gently caress off to Earth and fit in easily to get with boys without a care in the world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Sentinel Red posted:Christ, that was the premise for the old TV drama Remington Steele in the 80s. A woman sets herself up as a private investigator but, as no one took her seriously, ends up inventing a suave, professional English 'tec to front the agency, hiring Pierce Brosnan to play him to clients while she does all the actual sleuthing work. "Hiring" is a relative term. Didn't Brosnan play a conman who figured it out and just stepped into the role and glory? That was a good show.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:That's always been the case, even before Marvel started using them that way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Does this make Spider-man Newman O's?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:I thought Kirby invented the InHumans first and that this is a Hydrox/Oreo situation Uncanny X-Men debuted in 1963, and the first Inhuman story was in 1965. No idea if they were floating around in Kirby's head before that though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
Kheldarn posted:*Toad. Well, I meant to make it clear that I was talking about people who walk around looking totally not human like Nightcrawler and Beast when I said 'turn off their weird appearance' but I guess I wasn't as specific about that as I thought I was. Cyclops walking around with glasses all the time won't stick out sure, but again, I'm not familiar with X-men so even ground floor knowledge like Nightcrawler having something to fix his impish appearance is totally new to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
drat, I just remembered AoS is not coming back until late 2017 or (worse) 2018. And I just found out they skipped SDCC, so there's no news, no teaser promo for the new season and no season 4 blooper reel. And this Inhumans show does not look at all like something that will be a decent replacement. I hope I am wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 08:54
|
|
|
Early buzz says it is *checks notes* .. "trash"
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:13
|
|
|
AbstractNapper posted:drat, I just remembered AoS is not coming back until late 2017 or (worse) 2018. Smoke on the street says they're coming back immediately after Inhumans ends, no break between shows.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:45
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:She-Hulk's not super roid rage like her cousin, 6'4" super athetic and snarky would be fine. You could get that with a tall fit lead and some clever angles/platforms. I liked the comic that was pre-Civil War that was basically Ally McBeal meets Harvey Birdman. Superheroes seem to be in a place right now where they could probably make it an hour long drama type thing, even if they don't punch baddies every week.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:Smoke on the street says they're coming back immediately after Inhumans ends, no break between shows. Are you sure? I don't think they'll finish filming by Sept 30.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
3 DONG HORSE posted:Are you sure? I don't think they'll finish filming by Sept 30. http://ew.com/tv/2017/08/06/agents-of-shield-return-date/ Seems legit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
They don't have to finish filming as long as they're far enough a head. They never film all 24 episodes in advance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Saw Inhumans yesterday. It was ok, about as good as your average CW DC show episode. I'll probably watch the season and see if it goes anywhere interesting like I did with AoS. At least it's a short season.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
CaveGrinch posted:They don't have to finish filming as long as they're far enough a head. They never film all 24 episodes in advance. Not only that, they don't even have all the episodes written yet
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Wow, Inhumans hit a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. What the flying gently caress were they thinking with that. At least this is good news for Shield, as Inhumans sure as gently caress won't be replacing it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
I find Rotten Tomatoes to be completely worthless in general, so I don't find that particularly useful. I just hope people give the show a shot when it comes on tv, there seems to be a big minority that actually thinks that the first two episodes were good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
I'll watch anything, but my nefarious viewing doesn't count. Sorry bro's i tried, i'll register my good will on the Internet, if there is any.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
I loving refuse to believe Inhumans could pull off a worse score than the Emoji Movie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
I haven’t looked at the reviews for Inhumans, or even the Rotten Tomatoes page, but I think it’s worth remembering that for RT’s purposes, a review that says “Eh, probably not worth your time or money” is the same as a review that says “This film is a crime against humanity.” I’d be willing to bet that most of the reviews for Inhumans fall into the former category.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
SaintFu posted:I haven’t looked at the reviews for Inhumans, or even the Rotten Tomatoes page, but I think it’s worth remembering that for RT’s purposes, a review that says “Eh, probably not worth your time or money” is the same as a review that says “This film is a crime against humanity.” I’d be willing to bet that most of the reviews for Inhumans fall into the former category. ... and it'd only take a handful of reviews for Emoji Movie to go "Eh, I guess it'll make the kids laugh?" for it to rocket past Inhumans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
Inhumans isn't unwatchable but it is extremely mediocre. Imagine the early Shield episodes but with a less interesting cast to carry it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
hamsystem posted:Inhumans isn't unwatchable but it is extremely mediocre. Imagine the early Shield episodes but with a less interesting cast to carry it. Less interesting than punchy shooty man Grant "I don't work well with others" Ward, female asian Grant Ward, two british scientists that are basically the same character and hacker van lady? Sure they became an amazing cast later, but early on they didn't exactly seem stellar. My wife and I thought Brett Dalton was one of the worst actors in genre TV... Until turn turn turn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
I didn't say they were great. Also I was mostly taking about Clark Gregg. Edit: and that to me is really it's biggest failing. You have all these super powered individuals and they're completely uninteresting which given how Iron Fist turned out I shouldn't be surprised. I guess that's a good litmus test for deciding if you want to check Inhumans out. hamsystem fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Sep 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:I thought Kirby invented the InHumans first and that this is a Hydrox/Oreo situation I was referring to how they got their powers. Not just anyone could be an Inhuman by breathing the mist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 22:49
|
|