|
Chickenwalker posted:I think it's hilarious that Facebook is blowing up with all these clickbait articles about "OMG HUGE ACKMAN LOOK OLD NOW?" It has to be makeup for Old Man Logan, and even then, poo poo, dude's like 50. People get wrinkly. Any time I see someone go "Oh my god what happened to [celebrity name], they got so old!?" I just wonder what they think happens to people over time. I also wonder why they think they have room to criticize when Pierce Brosnan and Hugh Jackman and Ellen Mirren and so on still look better in their advancing age than the person criticizing looked at their long-past peak.
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
Yeah but this happened in the course of a month or so.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
The screenwriter for the Captain Marvel movie has stated that they're going to rejigger Carol's origin somewhat because they want to avoid any comparisons to Green Lantern. She says she wants to make it fit in more with where the movies are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
So probably random alien tech, or more infinity stone shenanigans. I'm sure people will have hot takes that you HAVE to have Mar-vell as part of the story because, reasons. All that's important is she has her powers and what she does with them. The funky 60s/70s origins for her are completely irrelevant for the current state of the MCU. Also, I am pretty sure outside of nerd circles, people have pretty much forgotten Green Lantern, them and people writing Buzzfeed "100 references in Deadpool" articles. DC needs to stop being afraid of that entire aspect of their universe. I was thinking, if I magically became head of DC movie production, first thing I'd do is ban Synder and Goyer from the lot for ever, and never let them have another word on how the films are made. Then I'd go and say "Okay, we're making a Batman film" and find myself people who have written great Batman runs and have them work a veteranscreen writer to come up with a solid script that isn't all grimdark, but isn't silly like Batman 66. The only rules would be ; Batman has to investigate things, not just punch people; Batman is not alone, Batgirl and Nightwing are there, not as sidekicks, but partners (think Falcon and Widow in Winter Soldier) ; NO loving JOKER, he can be mentioned or referenced if it's important to the plot, but he cannot appear on screen, or affect the plot in any way ; The main Villain can not be someone who appeared in any of the Nolan movies; you cannot reference any Alan Moore or Frank Miller comics at all. It would feel part of the DCCU that is already being built, but it is not slavishly devoted to it. Catwoman should be there, as a morally grey character, but clearly make it that her and Bruce's affections for one another are honest and true. Have Bruce become engaged with the world after his experiences, he rebuilds Wayne Manor, he becomes more engaged with the city, his outings as Batman become less violent as his anger is tempered by him finding a place in the world. The big thing though, is the movie would permit the director and writer to make their own movie. I'd keep the execs off their back, Because god drat I don't know why they think exec meddling is the way to make movies. I honestly think the fans loving these films is more because "Oh poo poo I saw Batman/Harle Quinn on screen!" and enjoy it for fan service, rather than anything to do with a story. I mean, I know I feel that way. Why I don't think I'll ever get an honest opinion of the movie, because I just loving love this poo poo so I forgive many, many errors. They're like the Star Wars prequels; do I like them? Yes. Are they good? Hell no, but have a lightsaber fight or a bunch of starfighters flying around, and I'm loving it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
NO loving JOKER, NO loving BATGIRL
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:NO loving JOKER, NO loving BATGIRL There has never been a Batgirl on screen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:There has never been a Batgirl on screen. Whoosh
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:There has never been a Batgirl on screen. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Statement still stands and any movie proving otherwise does not exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Also it's Harley with a Y, why do you keep doing that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Madkal posted:Statement still stands and any movie proving otherwise does not exist. Exactly. Aphrodite posted:Also it's Harley with a Y, why do you keep doing that? I don't know. Dyslexia is a big problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:Oh one last point, did anyone remember the scene where Flagg says to Waller that she should just let him make his own squad. That he'd get "Some Tier 1 operatives and make them into some real Pipe Hitters." Marsellus Wallace was talking about crackheads. Flagg was talking about the Pipe Hitters Union. http://www.pipehittersunion.com Its a term for private military companies that employ ex-military, special forces and police. They're mercenaries. Why would Flagg want to take some tier one operatives and turn them into crackheads?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Heathen posted:Marsellus Wallace was talking about crackheads. Huh...I didn't know that. Whenever I heard Masellus Wallace's line in Pulp Fiction, I genuinely thought given the context he was talking about getting a bunch of his boys with lead/iron pipes and instructing them to beat another guy to a pulp*. As in a bunch of dangerous, armed men.Not that he was going to entrust the task to drug addicts. And even after I see the link, I still feel that's the connection or image invoked when referring to people as pipe hitters. Like I don't know anything about the history of the Pipe Hitters Union, but it could have been formed by people who really liked that line from that movie. Or maybe it is from historical allusions times when criminals/neer do-wells were thugs walking around on the street with lead pipes from the Victorian era. It just has a lot of really dodgy connotations. *= Fiction! That's Anchoring, folks! The Question IRL fucked around with this message at 09:32 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
catlord posted:That's a huge shame, I really, really liked the new Ghostbusters. The only issue I had with it was that third act fight scene. I haven't seen Spy, but from that scene I get the impression that Paul Feig just doesn't really have a grip on directing action because that scene just felt very flat to me. But other than that I loved it. I mean, it doesn't beat the original, but then again, neither did Ghostbusters 2. It's been a while since I last saw that, but I feel like I'd tentatively put the new one slightly above 2 even. Watched it last night, tried desperately to hate it. Couldn't manage it. gently caress it was funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:Huh...I didn't know that. He literally says they're going to "go to work with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch", so yeah he was talking about his dudes that do drugs via pipes
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
Rocksicles posted:Watched it last night, tried desperately to hate it. Couldn't manage it. gently caress it was funny. Thought the same. Though the Zuul post credits stinger kinda made me cringe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:He literally says they're going to "go to work with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch", so yeah he was talking about his dudes that do drugs via pipes What They are going to torture him with their drug parphanalia? This is a thing that you think?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
Happy Hippo posted:What No I'm saying his assumption that calling them "hard pipe hittin' (gentlemen)" meant they are going to beat them with pipes is wrong, because Marcellus specifically names the implements they are going to use to torture the dude. He is saying "I'm going to hire some hosed up crackheads to hurt this guy, using pliers and blowtorches". In what universe are pliers and blowtorches drug paraphernalia???
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
Pliers, blowtorches, and pipes are all the kinds of thing blue collar burlymen you would hire to rough someone up have from their blue collar burlymen jobs. Have you never played River City Ransom? Who even roughs someone up with crackheads?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
You hire drug addicts to do hosed up poo poo because they always want money, wont ask questions, nobody belives them, and they will probally die quickly on their own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
Whizbang posted:Pliers, blowtorches, and pipes are all the kinds of thing blue collar burlymen you would hire to rough someone up have from their blue collar burlymen jobs. Have you never played River City Ransom? Who even throws brass knuckles at someone?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Also Marcellus Wallace is a gang boss, and logically has way more crackheads working for him than blue collar burly men.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Rubiks Pubes posted:Thought the same. Though the Zuul post credits stinger kinda made me cringe. Was 100% sure that was going to be the fart joke again. Would have preferred it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Was 100% sure that was going to be the ftfy
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:Also Marcellus Wallace is a gang boss, and logically has way more crackheads working for him than blue collar burly men. Case in point: Vincent Vega.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Was 100% sure that was going to be the fart joke again. Would have preferred it. Same.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
Please don't be true. Please don't be true. I really want the Wonder Woman movie to succeed. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
That letter was obvious bullshit from seeing jaded fanboy. It's very popular among my idiot friends currently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
Considering the absolute nightmare that was SS' behind the scenes shenanigans, it would be completely unsurprising to me if the WW is a total loving mess, especially considering how ugly the Michelle MacLaren exit was. Oh by the way, WW looks good but I gotta say, how the gently caress do you hire one of the best action directors and storytellers currently working, for your action superhero female solo film, and then get super upset that she wants to make...a super action-heavy movie? How is that a surprise? How do you get Michelle MacLaren helming your Wonder Woman movie and then gently caress that up? What the loving gently caress Warner Brothers?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
...Wait, how was the Michelle MacLaren exit "ugly?" As far as I know, she and WB disagreed over some stuff and she left...simple as that. It happens all the time, even with Marvel. edit: Zach Snyder is a great action director as well. Just throwing that out there. BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Aug 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:...Wait, how was the Michelle MacLaren exit "ugly?" As far as I know, she and WB disagreed over some stuff and she left...simple as that. It happens all the time, even with Marvel. A whole bunch of rumors came out when she left that the usual "creative differences" line ran a lot deeper than that, to the point where WB and MacLaren were so split it sounded fairly close to a Wright/Marvel situation. Especially considering the sheer persistence of the rumors, it sounds like a camp (probably MacLaren) did a controlled leak. There definitely seems to be bad blood over the split, especially considering she left like literally right before production started. I'm still really kinda bitter over the whole MacLaren exit. She really deserves a shot on the big screen considering the incredible small-screen work she's done over half a decade, and she has a long-rear end list of director credits where the movie she proposed making is exactly the sort of film you'd hire Michelle MacLaren to direct. It shouldn't have been surprising to WB, at all, she wanted to make an action epic. Again, the WW movie we're getting looks really good but of all the proposed director/movie DCEU combinations MacLaren and WW seemed completely loving perfect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 05:59
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:
He's a great cinematographer. He can film a shot like nobody's business and has a great eye for angle, but his storytelling is slipshod at best and his editing work is laughable. Plus his scene direction is pretty trash, considering the best parts of BvS/MoS are when a great actor puts in a performance basically by themselves, like when Michael Shannon somehow is inexplicably the best and most sympathetic part of MoS or Gal Gadot basically acts in her own, much better film in BvS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
Michelle Maclaren isn't an 'action director' either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
Is it bad I kind of want Wonder Woman to fail? Hatred of Gal Godot aside, I'd like the crashing and burning of the current cinematic universe to hurry up and conclude so we can start over with one whose bedrock isn't Man of loving Steel.
WickedHate fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Aug 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:Is it bad I kind of want Wonder Woman to fail? Hatred of Gal Godot aside, I'd like the crashing and burning of the current cinematic universe to hurry up and conclude so we can start over with one whose bedrock isn't Man of loving Steel. As much as I hate Man of Steel, it's much too early for the "salt the earth and start again" strategy. That would only work if Warner and DC were prepared to let the franchise lie fallow for at least a few years, and I really doubt they'd be willing to do that when when the age of the superhero franchise is hitting its peak.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
You say hitting it's peak, I say about to bust the bubble.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
Wait why do you hate Gal? She isn't a good actress but she isn't in a ton of things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Wait why do you hate Gal? She isn't a good actress but she isn't in a ton of things. Pro-IDF. Not to Joan Rivers levels, but still, that's an issue that sticks with me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:Pro-IDF. Not to Joan Rivers levels, but still, that's an issue that sticks with me. ... You, uh, you are aware she was literally part of the IDF, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
ImpAtom posted:... You, uh, you are aware she was literally part of the IDF, right? I thought so, but wasn't sure and didn't feel like checking. So yeah, just, that whole thing. Really sours me on her as a person.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 07:46
|
|