Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Happy Noodle Boy
Jul 3, 2002


smug n stuff posted:

For people who know about the comics. So the little girl at the end has some kind of laser eyes powers. Does she have some kind of comics analog? She’s played by Hemsworth’s daughter, so I would assume it’s just stunt casting and she won’t be back for more movies but I’m curious.

If you take that small glimpse where she still looks like Eternity as she approaches Gorr as the real her or a form of herself then the closest thing you could say she may be is Singularity



She’s a “recent” character (last decade) and hasn’t been in much but she basically played the part of incredibly powerful child.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

tsob
Sep 26, 2006

Chalalala~

smug n stuff posted:

For people who know about the comics. So the little girl at the end has some kind of laser eyes powers. Does she have some kind of comics analog? She’s played by Hemsworth’s daughter, so I would assume it’s just stunt casting and she won’t be back for more movies but I’m curious.

If the recent run of movies is any indication, he'll pawn her off on an ally 5 minutes into the next movie and she'll barely ever be relevant again. That said, they might intend the character as another possible successor to Thor as cosmic God in the MCU. They're probably creating several (Valkyrie, Mighty Thor, Hercules, Love etc) to see which captures audience attention, as well as to hedge their bets in case one or more just aren't a good fit for the MCU for some reason or even die as in the case of Chadwick Boseman. They'd probably re-cast her in the case they wanted to do more with her though.

That said, I don't think there's any direct analogues for the character in the comics. Gorr is driven by his son's death rather than a daughter's in the comics going off Google, and Eternity has no direct avatar. Eternity does empower some individuals somewhat indirectly through the "Enigma Force" though, with them becoming the current incarnation of Captain Universe. Which usually only last a short while. Spiderman among others has held the power for a couple of issues, before he had fulfilled his purpose or whatever and so the power leaves them.

stratdax
Sep 14, 2006

This is like in The Inhumans where the show wanted us to root for the royals who subjugate people into the slave mines, and framed the people who were rebelling against that as the bad guys. Completely back asswards.

garycoleisgod
Sep 27, 2004
Boo
Caught this one today, I actually thought it was on par with most Marvel films, but I think most Marvel flicks are bad so that's not a compliment.

I am amazed at the professionalism of British actors though, even though this is trash there's Christian Bale giving his all for a nothing part in a nothing movie, god bless him. Highlight of the movie by far.

I don't think it actually had more jokes than usual for the MCU, I just think maybe that formula's getting tired and even fans are turning on it. Exacerbated by the fact that most of the jokes weren't funny I suppose. Never thought I would see someone do Con the Fruiterer in 2022 but there's little Rus Le Roq giving it his all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3su5C4knWhs

The main problems were all the usual ones I had with Marvel movies, it looked like poo poo, the action scenes were flat and uninteresting and the villain was right again, but they couldn't admit it. Best shot in the movie was the first one with Gor's shadow on the sand, and I only mention it because that's a really unremarkable shot, everything else is just so much worse.

Although this movie did clarify something for me: I think the reason everyone reacts so much to green screen work; or volume work in this case; is because the most unnatural thing is it means every scene takes place on a perfectly flat floor, but it's shot in a studio and having sloped floors or even just natural uneven terrain won't work indoors. You might have different levels and things above other things, but each level is flat as a tack. Scenes in New Asgard, the shadow realm, Zeus's Orgy Palace, Eternity, all perfectly level floors, that's the details that keeps tripping my (and presumably other people's) brains to not believe these are real spaces.

Gor tracking across a perfectly flat desert, to find a perfectly flat Oasis with his god chilling, just screams shot in a studio. No little dips or rises in the ground.

Everyone
Sep 6, 2019

by sebmojo

TIP posted:

it's true, if you have enough food, water, medical care, and internet you're literally the same as a billionaire

this is a smart thing to think

truly I should use my incredible resources of endless student loan debt to help end the inequality


kill all gods and masters

No but "rich" is still relative and "Kill all of some vaguely defined group of people" seems like a bad concept. I think wealth redistribution and trying to reduce political influence of the super-wealthy is probably the better way to go.

Bringing it back to the movie, figure that along with Zeus and his court of lazy rear end in a top hat gods, there's plenty of other small "gods" of specific trees/streams/etc. putting in the work of caring for their area of responsibility (and maybe paying off their own student load debt) and Gorr was going to kill them too because kill all gods/rich.

Ferrosol
Nov 8, 2010

Notorious J.A.M

Just seen this today and well..

This was a pretty garbage movie. I'd describe it as almost the movie. In that the jokes almost landed, the plot almost made sense, the villain was almost threatening, the love story was almost believable. Add in some shockingly bad cgi to your movie and you get one of the worst movies marvel has made yet.

The REAL Goobusters
Apr 25, 2008
Just came out of the morning showing and yeah that sucked and yeah those definitely were child soldiers.

Lol

massive spider
Dec 6, 2006

I just considered that set piece might have made more sense if they’d made use of the astral projection thing earlier in the movie, so they kids are imminently under threat and Thor can’t do anything except watch because he’s not there, until he realises etc etc

But then their presence in the movie is kind of an afterthought anyway since they’re not really part of Gorrs plan, just bait. But then he terrorises them a bit anyway just for fun?

Everyone
Sep 6, 2019

by sebmojo

massive spider posted:

I just considered that set piece might have made more sense if they’d made use of the astral projection thing earlier in the movie, so they kids are imminently under threat and Thor can’t do anything except watch because he’s not there, until he realizes etc etc

But then their presence in the movie is kind of an afterthought anyway since they’re not really part of Gorr's plan, just bait. But then he terrorizes them a bit anyway just for fun?

I didn't really see that bit as him deliberately terrorizing them. Instead I think Gorr was trying to connect with them in a weird. Except that Gorr's a broken person who lost his home, people and finally his own child. Right after that he experiences a "miracle." He meets the mighty god of his people. And that god mocks and dismisses him, leaving Gorr completely open to the blandishments of the Necrosword, which has been twisting him into an instrument of its purpose. The thing to bear in mind is that Gorr isn't really the villain of the movie. The real villain is the Necrosword itself. Gorr loved his daughter. By extension he likely cares for other children. Consider that Axl is the child of the god, Heimdall and has inherited his father's powers - making him something of a god himself. Gorr didn't kill him, though. There was still a core of decency underneath his grief, rage and the Necrosword's influence.

AlternateAccount
Apr 25, 2005
FYGM
Gorr wishing for all gods to become mortal would have been a cooler punishment.

Shageletic
Jul 25, 2007

Happy Noodle Boy posted:

The more I think about New Asgard the worse it gets. The comics played with the idea of Asgard in Earth for a few years so this isn’t even new! Asgard once got stuck in Oklahoma and they were there for years. You know what they didn’t do? Turn into a capitalistic vacation hellhole where they were forced to whore themselves with tourism to survive because Asgardians were still pretty much gods to us! They still live for apparent literal centuries, maybe millennia. They will be around long after we’re gone. Why are they bothering to play human at all? What happened to the medics and magical technology from Thor 2? Asgard was destroyed but did the knowledge? Odin ruled and then guarded nine realms, all equal magical and fantastical realms. Sure like 4 of them may hate Asgardians but that’s still better than the alternative! You don’t have anyone exploring to rebuild what you had? Reclaim some of the magic tech you’ve used your entire existence? Best you can do is… settle for how humans live? With all that befalls?


In the comics, they hung out near the town of Broxton but they never dropped their culture or way of life. Sure Broxton got destroyed a couple of times, once to capitalism, but that was more of collateral rather than Asgardians falling to human ways. Taika turned Asgard into a pathetic punchline where every aspect of their new way of life is a different joke.

Uh none of this poo poo is real

Shageletic
Jul 25, 2007

Anyways Thor 4 owned bones. Definitely not as smooth a watching experience as Ragnarok but nothing really is. Def has weirder and more involved turns and interesting ideas than any other in this franchise. Really impressive for a 4th outing. Hope they never stop making Thor adventures if it's this quality still.

PantsBandit
Oct 26, 2007

it is both a monkey and a boombox

Everyone posted:

I didn't really see that bit as him deliberately terrorizing them. Instead I think Gorr was trying to connect with them in a weird. Except that Gorr's a broken person who lost his home, people and finally his own child. Right after that he experiences a "miracle." He meets the mighty god of his people. And that god mocks and dismisses him, leaving Gorr completely open to the blandishments of the Necrosword, which has been twisting him into an instrument of its purpose. The thing to bear in mind is that Gorr isn't really the villain of the movie. The real villain is the Necrosword itself. Gorr loved his daughter. By extension he likely cares for other children. Consider that Axl is the child of the god, Heimdall and has inherited his father's powers - making him something of a god himself. Gorr didn't kill him, though. There was still a core of decency underneath his grief, rage and the Necrosword's influence.

He threw the disembodied head of a demon snake at them.

AlternateNu
May 5, 2005

ドーナツダメ!

PantsBandit posted:

He threw the disembodied head of a demon snake at them.

That was the best scene in the movie. Just Christian Bale being weird and creepy to a bunch of frightened ensnared children. :v:

Edit: Also, it will never not be funny when goons try to read political and social messaging from their corporate created entertainment.

AlternateNu fucked around with this message at 07:39 on Jul 17, 2022

BioEnchanted
Aug 9, 2011

He plays for the dreamers that forgot how to dream, and the lovers that forgot how to love.

AlternateNu posted:

That was the best scene in the movie. Just Christian Bale being weird and creepy to a bunch of frightened ensnared children. :v:

Edit: Also, it will never not be funny when goons try to read political and social messaging from their corporate created entertainment.

Also he was clearly trying to point out their own hypocrisy but in a childish "sesame street if the street was a murder capital" kind of way. "What? You thought it was FUN when THOR did it."

josh04
Oct 19, 2008


"THE FLASH IS THE REASON
TO RACE TO THE THEATRES"

This title contains sponsored content.

Everyone posted:

The thing to bear in mind is that Gorr isn't really the villain of the movie. The real villain is the Necrosword itself. Gorr loved his daughter. By extension he likely cares for other children. Consider that Axl is the child of the god, Heimdall and has inherited his father's powers - making him something of a god himself. Gorr didn't kill him, though. There was still a core of decency underneath his grief, rage and the Necrosword's influence.

You realise this is a little bit like saying "the real villain of the French Revolution was the Guillotine itself", right? Everyone in this film has a magic weapon they use for murdering - axe, hammer, lightning bolt - and they even explicitly whisper in your ear the whole time. Jane's hammer is even killing her in the same way, but no-one thinks the hammer is controlling her.

Everyone
Sep 6, 2019

by sebmojo

josh04 posted:

You realise this is a little bit like saying "the real villain of the French Revolution was the Guillotine itself", right? Everyone in this film has a magic weapon they use for murdering - axe, hammer, lightning bolt - and they even explicitly whisper in your ear the whole time. Jane's hammer is even killing her in the same way, but no-one thinks the hammer is controlling her.

The Necrosword wasn't controlling Gorr. It didn't turn him into some kind of meat robot to allow itself to be wielded. But it was clearly influencing him. Gorr grabbing the Necrosword and killing his god was understandable. In the moment it was even self-defense. After that moment it turned into genocide of "gods" because the Necrosword's purpose is to kill "gods" and unlike the Guillotine it has an intelligence and a desire to actively pursue that purpose. A similar thing is true about Mjölnir. It wants to be used in battle by a worthy wielder. It's not as pushy about that as the Necrosword was but it clearly cared less about Jane's life than it's own desires.

BioEnchanted
Aug 9, 2011

He plays for the dreamers that forgot how to dream, and the lovers that forgot how to love.
That's probably what they were going for with Stormbreaker being a jealous bitch the whoel movie. Just because a powerful weapon chose you, doesn't mean it's on your SIDE. Thor MADE Stormbreaker and it still acted out when it felt ignored.

josh04
Oct 19, 2008


"THE FLASH IS THE REASON
TO RACE TO THE THEATRES"

This title contains sponsored content.

Everyone posted:

The Necrosword wasn't controlling Gorr. It didn't turn him into some kind of meat robot to allow itself to be wielded. But it was clearly influencing him. Gorr grabbing the Necrosword and killing his god was understandable. In the moment it was even self-defense. After that moment it turned into genocide of "gods" because the Necrosword's purpose is to kill "gods" and unlike the Guillotine it has an intelligence and a desire to actively pursue that purpose. A similar thing is true about Mjölnir. It wants to be used in battle by a worthy wielder. It's not as pushy about that as the Necrosword was but it clearly cared less about Jane's life than it's own desires.

Okay then - so the sword is corrupting Gorr by suggesting ideas to him that he agrees with. Gorr and his friend Necrosword come up with a plan to kill all the gods together, which is interrupted when Thor executes Necrosword with the help of the hammer that is murdering his ex-girlfriend.

Metis of the Chat Thread
Aug 1, 2014


I liked this movie. Thought it was fun. All right, time to forget about marvel until the next Thor comes out, I guess!

Cyks
Mar 17, 2008

The trenches of IT can scar a muppet for life

AlternateAccount posted:

Gorr wishing for all gods to become mortal would have been a cooler punishment.

That seems like such an obvious idea and I love it. Now I can't help think of how much better the movie would have been written if that was the ultimate goal (and Gorr succeeding).

Lampsacus
Oct 21, 2008

After watching this I went back and finally watched Thor 2 Dark World. My god is it a different tone. All the characters talk in this outdated gen x sarcasm which is really grating. But then Thor 4's ironic dry dead pan is also too grating. Am I just finding all sascasm grating now? No! It is the movies that are wrong.

A True Jar Jar Fan
Nov 3, 2003

Primadonna

AlternateAccount posted:

Gorr wishing for all gods to become mortal would have been a cooler punishment.

This would have been good, and then would be immediately followed up by Thor getting his god status back in the next crossover movie and never be mentioned again

Everyone
Sep 6, 2019

by sebmojo

josh04 posted:

Okay then - so the sword is corrupting Gorr by suggesting ideas to him that he agrees with. Gorr and his friend Necrosword come up with a plan to kill all the gods together, which is interrupted when Thor executes Necrosword with the help of the hammer that is murdering his ex-girlfriend.

Pretty much. I think there's a little more nuance to it than that. Gorr agrees with the Necrosword's ideas because he hates the gods for their selfish indifference. But that hatred grew out of his love for his daughter and that love was still there. Even with the Necrosword destroyed, Gorr still got to Eternity and he still hated the gods, but he loved his daughter more. That's what the Necrosword's whisperings were clouding within him. As for the hammer as much as it wants what it wants, I don't think it would have come to Jane's bedside at the end if Jane hadn't wanted it to do so. Jane's a scientist. A physicist. She knows how forces work. Three powerful beings (herself as Mighty Thor, King Valkyrie and Thor) armed with three legendary powerful weapons (Thor's Hammer, Stormbreaker and Zeus's Thunderbolt) went after Gorr to rescue the children and stop his genocidal crusade. And he pretty much handed them their asses. They lost Stormbreaker, failed to rescue a single child and barely escaped with their lives. And now Thor, by himself, was going to go back their and take on Gorr again. The most likely result of that "equation" was Thor's death. His only hope was an additional factor in that equation. So, Jane could either sit out the fight and live (for a few more weeks/months, maybe with a miracle decades) and Thor would die, as would the children, most likely. Leaving aside the whole "all gods die" bit, that outcome would leave a horrible wound in the souls of the people of New Asgard. Or she could join the fight and almost certainly die herself, which is what she did.

Shageletic
Jul 25, 2007

BioEnchanted posted:

That's probably what they were going for with Stormbreaker being a jealous bitch the whoel movie. Just because a powerful weapon chose you, doesn't mean it's on your SIDE. Thor MADE Stormbreaker and it still acted out when it felt ignored.

It's funny that he didn't end up with it then. Kinda sweet that Love was weilding8it.

Btw aren't we done with spoilers? It's been 2 weeks.

Shageletic
Jul 25, 2007

Oh and about Gorr, I agree with the poster up top saying that the movie didn't reach the over the top heights found in the comic run. But in a couple respects Thor 4 one up-ed them, and I say this as a massive fan.

One, Gorr's arc is much more sympathetic and fleshed out here than the run. Yes we see him suffer, but the simple thoroughline that Wakiki put in of focusing on his relationship with his child, rather than Gorr's general menace and unrelenting war on the Gods, gives the end of his character choosing to give up everything to just save his kid, that much more of a substantive feeling end for him than I felt in the comic.

Two, Jane actually dies here. In the comics, due to comic bullshittery (awesomely drawn and depicted of course) she gets her cake and eats it too by surviving her turn as Mighty Thor. Her actually dying gives her actions that more heft and meaning, and also allows people to pull out how it relates to poo poo everybody goes thru in this horrible world. It makes it more meaningful.

I still wish they had made it more a mystery but what can you do. At least in the two points above, the movie done good.

smug n stuff
Jul 21, 2016

A Hobbit's Adventure
The main thing that Thor 4 did wrong was that it did not have a long segment featuring Jesus Christ hanging out at the big god orgy palace

Hollismason
Jun 30, 2007
An alright dude.
I just got back from seeing this and I loved it. I thought it was really good but it didn't have as memorable characters as Ragnarok. I loved the screaming goats. I laughed every loving time.

TIP
Mar 21, 2006

Your move, creep.



smug n stuff posted:

The main thing that Thor 4 did wrong was that it did not have a long segment featuring Jesus Christ hanging out at the big god orgy palace

Hobo Clown posted:

Valkyre pointed off camera to the "God of Carpentry" who I'm going to assume is MCU Jesus Christ, the uncaring Orgy-Enjoyer

https://twitter.com/nathanfielder/status/620060895209779200?t=uRVmmGr_9DTcs5h3lzAFLg&s=19

Thorn Wishes Talon
Oct 18, 2014

by Fluffdaddy
Just saw the movie. I thought it was OK. Definitely nowhere as good as Ragnarok, but also not total poo poo.

  • Would have been nice to see some quick scenes of Gorr killing lots of different gods, just to drive home the point that he's a huge threat.
  • The humor was a bit overdone. Might be just MCU humor burnout in general.
  • The screaming goats were fantastic.
  • Really, really didn't like that Jane died in the end. It kind of ruined the lighthearted mood of the entire movie for me. Also disliked the whole "every time you use the hammer you get closer to death" thing. It seemed hugely in conflict with Mjolnir reassembling itself to protect her. That whole bit of writing was just bad IMO.
  • I still cannot loving believe that they armed a bunch of kids and had them hacking and slashing monsters. That whole bit just rubbed me the wrong way.

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

Everyone posted:

Well, sure. Why did Tony Stark recruit some Spider-kid from Queens instead of y'know, using the Iron Legion?
Because Ultron took them all over and they didn't exist anymore.

But even if that weren't the case, a lot of people's complaints about Marvel movies since the original Avengers begin and end with "why didn't they just...?" and I really can't stress enough that movies would not be better for stopping to explain those things.

If you can do it in ways that serve two purposes, that can work; one that sets up something that's actually important to the film you're watching while simultaneously being another that allays folks' surface questions of "why don't they just use the time turner to defeat Voldemort," but we absolutely do not need a scene in every single MCU film going forward explaining why the Avengers aren't there because it can be inferred by the fact that they aren't that they can't be, and it super doesn't matter why, and this applies to most instances of "why don't they just." The answer to that question is, almost always, because that wouldn't make the film better.

They don't not explain those things because they're bad at making movies. They don't explain them because they're much, much better at making movies than the Cinemasins ding crowd.

Buuuuuuuut...

TIP posted:

If making money is your sole metric of success sure, but I think this last phase has mostly sucked and most people I talk to say the same thing.

Phase 4 movies so far:
Black Widow
Shang Chi
Spider-Man No Way Home
Multiverse of Madness
Eternals
Thor Love and Thunder

My friends and family who used to see every MCU title on release have mostly lost interest and I feel like it largely comes down to the half assed sloppy scripting.
This is the real problem. Phase 4 might get rehabbed once we know where it's going, but the combination of Covid and Feige spreading himself too thin with the D+ shows and countless films (to say nothing of now also working on Star Wars) is showing up in the watchability of the films now. Eternals is one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my life.

Of those listed, I only really liked No Way Home, MoM, and Thor, and didn't love any of them. And the latter two had issues that have been spoken of at length with which I agree. They just didn't ruin the films for me as they did so many others.

I was a production manager/1st AD on a flick made by a very young director who kept concerning himself with tiny details at the expense of watchability because somebody at a screening of his last film asked him a question about why a toothpaste tube had its cap off in one shot and not in another, and I told him, "buddy, if they're looking for those things, they either want to hate the flick or we've already lost them emotionally." If the films were as magical as previous phases, people largely wouldn't concern themselves with Why Didn't They Just. They'd be too busy being emotionally invested.

I still like the MCU, but of everything that's happened post-Endgame, while much of it is good-to-great, only Loki and Ms. Marvel had that old magic for me.

Thorn Wishes Talon
Oct 18, 2014

by Fluffdaddy

LividLiquid posted:

Of those listed, I only really liked No Way Home, MoM, and Thor, and didn't love any of them. And the latter two had issues that have been spoken of at length with which I agree. They just didn't ruin the films for me as they did so many others.

I saw No Way Home last week and thought it was not just the best Phase 4 movie by far, but also one of the best Marvel movies period. I think I only liked Iron Man 1 and CA:WS more.

CelticPredator
Oct 11, 2013
🍀👽🆚🪖🏋

Kids fighting monsters is badass. Not in this movie so much. But in general. It’s usually pretty neat.

Gnome de plume
Sep 5, 2006

Hell.
Fucking.
Yes.

Thorn Wishes Talon posted:

[*]I still cannot loving believe that they armed a bunch of kids and had them hacking and slashing monsters. That whole bit just rubbed me the wrong way.
[/list]

All he did was empower objects to protect them from the horde of shadow monsters that they were all very scared of getting killed by. One object being a stuffed bunny ffs.

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

CelticPredator posted:

Kids fighting monsters is badass. Not in this movie so much. But in general. It’s usually pretty neat.
Exactly. They're power fantasies for children. You can't start putting child soldier readings on something like that unless the imagery is invoked whether intentionally or unintentionally and it just way wasn't. Superpowers don't exist in real life and they're not metaphors for guns in these flicks. They're metaphors for empowerment and the choices you make when granted same. Villains on the whole choose to use it for lovely reasons and heroes use them for good ones, and a large part of why Marvel works is that it asks those questions and often comes down on the side of "it's a lot more complicated than we think, but right and wrong do exist, and whether we succeed or not, we have to keep trying to do good."

Thorn Wishes Talon
Oct 18, 2014

by Fluffdaddy
yes, showing kids casually and delightedly ripping open creatures in violent ways is definitely cool and good

Everyone
Sep 6, 2019

by sebmojo

LividLiquid posted:

Because Ultron took them all over and they didn't exist anymore.

And/or Tony was very interested in someone who had both a high degree of scientific aptitude and intrinsic superpowers. I mean think about the Avengers at that time. Of that group the only one with intrinsic powers was Wanda unless you wanted to count Vision who was a robot - which is a little like saying that commercial airlines have superpowers because they can fly. So intrinsic powers were pretty rare at that point outside of actual aliens. There's plenty of reasons you can pick for why Tony recruited Peter, but the only one that counts is "because this is the movie where we're introducing Spider-man to the MCU so Tony needs to loving recruit Spider-man."

CelticPredator posted:

Kids fighting monsters is badass. Not in this movie so much. But in general. It’s usually pretty neat.

It really is.

Thorn Wishes Talon posted:

yes, showing kids casually and delightedly ripping open creatures in violent ways is definitely cool and good

Again, it really. Are you guys thinking that Thor is somehow recruiting for the Democratic Republic of the Congo or something?

Everyone fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Jul 18, 2022

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

Thorn Wishes Talon posted:

yes, showing kids casually and delightedly ripping open creatures in violent ways is definitely cool and good
Yes. Yes it is. Because they're monsters, and kids want to have the power to defeat their monsters. Said monsters can represent their parents, their bullies, their teachers, and to your point, yeah, they can represent something reprehensible too, but you can't just pull reprehensible out of your rear end. If I tell you that my reading on that is that the monsters represent literal dildos, people don't have to come to defense of being sex positive because my reading wouldn't be connected to anything outside of my own mind.

Thorn Wishes Talon posted:

I saw No Way Home last week and thought it was not just the best Phase 4 movie by far, but also one of the best Marvel movies period. I think I only liked Iron Man 1 and CA:WS more.
I'll need to watch it again before I ultimately decide on what I think of it, but I'll do that in part thanks to you. I liked it on first-viewing, but it didn't stick with me, and often that's down to how something was marketed, what my expectations were, and the film going what can be great places that were nonetheless less interesting than where I hoped it would go. Time honored film geek problem, that, and one I try to recognize in myself so I don't ever again have to be loudly and proudly absolutely wrong before I can understand what, say, a No Country For Old Men is actually doing vs. how I interpreted it on first-viewing.

Xander B Coolridge
Sep 2, 2011
How on point is my take that this is a loose adaptation of the book of job?

For a movie that conservatives are so upset about it's a surprisingly christian movie

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Metis of the Chat Thread
Aug 1, 2014


Hollismason posted:

I just got back from seeing this and I loved it. I thought it was really good but it didn't have as memorable characters as Ragnarok. I loved the screaming goats. I laughed every loving time.

They got a huge laugh in my cinema when they smashed into the planet and screamed. I loved em.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply