|
That's pretty loving impressive for a TV show.
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 01:15 |
|
|
The poor cars.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Consequences are fine, plenty of people die in The Avengers. The grimness of Man of Steel is that Superman doesn't really enjoy his job of fighting aliens. Phil and some random German guy. Brother Entropy posted:It's not just a 'lack of snark' issue imo, MoS has to be grimdark because it doesn't fit the pop culture image of Superman being the guy who saves everyone forever always even to the point of turning back time by spinning the Earth back real fast. People are cool with consequences in general but the Avengers don't have the mythos of Superman so a Superman succeeding but with consequences gets judged more harshly. And that judgment is stupid as gently caress.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
I momentarily mistook the photoshop for Craig Robinson, which would also work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 12:35
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:Now I'm remembering when Kate Mara was on Craig Ferguson to promote Iron Man 2 and after she showed the 15-second clip of her serving Tony with some papers, she was like, "Yeah, that's literally my entire role" and they just forgot about Iron Man and shot the poo poo for 10 minutes Reminds me of when Sam Jackson was supposed to be on Letterman to promote Star Wars 3, and they just argued about Golf for twenty minutes before showing the clip with no introduction.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
I get the feeling that they're going to set out to make movie where nobody is in the wrong, and end up making a movie where everybody is wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Jutsuka posted:Taking a closer look at the screen where Thunderbolt Ross is showing the clips from previous films the canon deathtoll is as follows: But so many cars.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
To go back to Civil War a moment, since pretty much everything that's happened has been Stark's fault, him suddenly deciding to get behind registration (or the equivalent) is him going "Okay, I admit it, I'm an alcoholic. Starting monday, nobody is allowed to drink."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
Those amazing essays on the Happy Madison films over in the BvS thread doesn't make those movies not terrible, it just makes them non-meaningless. It's not a comment on quality.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
I only have a couple for not capitialising, but I rarely post.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2016 05:55
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:destroying people's property This happens once.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2016 11:40
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:She's an Oscar winner and one of the two or three most sought after actresses in Hollywood. Whatever they may be able to pay her for an X-Men movie, she could get more starring in something that might actually get critical acclaim, and help her career. X-men is an ensemble, they aren't going to offer her 20+ million for the amount of screentime Mystique typically gets. Its not like Hunger Games where she's the entire franchise. Which they also paid her gently caress all for. JediTalentAgent posted:I sort of figure give her and them a year or two and have someone try to pitch a Mystique solo film to her. It would maybe make sense from the Fox side of things to try it. WB will have Wonder Woman, Marvel will be probably close to getting Capt. Marvel going. With the exception of Elektra, Fox wouldn't have a solo female-lead superhero flick despite having the rights to probably most number of the popular Marvel female characters. Mystique is maybe their most popular character who seems to have an arc and a gimmick that could lend itself to a few solo stories pretty easily that they could keep as close or as far from their main X-Men franchise as they wanted. Super-powered spy movie. There you go. Boom.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
The most telling thing about AoU is that, while I've heard a lot of people call it genuinely terrible, I'm yet to encounter anyone who thinks it's great. The strongest positive reaction I've heard is "yeah, it was okay"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:"AGE OF ULTRON: It exists." "Unlike some other hypothetical movies I could name, it exists and you can watch it. Take that, movies that have never left someone's imagination.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:In the same movie it's also made abundantly clear that the public now hates the Avengers, so much so that they have to take cover at Hawkeye's little house in the prairie. Creating Vision does not undo that. Public approval was a non-factor outside of Stark's celebrity status.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:Then why was that bit about public approval in the movie? Because the script is a loving mess. quote:Also, how is Stark's celebrity status irrelevant? The man lives and dies by how many friends he has on Facebook. So the consequences for the world nearly ending is that Tony Stark has fewer Facebook friends. I'm so glad there was a two and a half hour, 300 million dollar movie with bucketloads of expensive fight scenes about this. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Mar 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Not to mention that what makes Edgar Wright special is the execution, the countless little touches and the expert editing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:the World's End is widely considered his weakest of the Conetto films but it is my absolute favorite. It tackles the heaviest theme and so has the hardest job balancing humour and pathos. It's bloody brilliant.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Hot Fuzz is three quarters of a brilliant film. The last few action scenes drag. They aren't quite good enough to be action scenes, but aren't quite funny enough to be comedy scenes. It's still good, but not nearly as densely packed as the rest of the movie.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
Tezcatlipoca posted:I disagree. The model town/Lethal Weapon/kaiju scene was fantastic. That was great. The half a dozen faux Michael Bay/John Woo scenes leading up to it, less so.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:So you are just handwaving away the reading that would give those parts meaning with arguments that would get you laughed out of other threads? Not really. You haven't told me their meaning. Just their existence. "They would be less popular" is not a meaning, that's a consequence, like someone being dead. Why does that matter? What would change if they were popular? What changes going forward now that they're not. In a series of films where they've specifically operated outside of any mandate, either public or governmental pretty much since the beginning, why is popularity/public approval suddenly a thing that has inherent weight? It pops up right at the end of the first Avengers movie, the first time any of them are publicly acknowledged, then is irrelevant the rest of the time. It's comparable to the "SHIELD is completely gone, oh, wait, we found some helicarriers." Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Honestly, I'm still trying to figure out what I'm saying because I feel like BvS broke me, kinda? There's something about that whole movie that bothered me on a deep level and I'm trying to wrack my brain around it. Like, outside of the editing, the film makes me feel just awful. And it's not really about killing or not killing, but about character, ultimately. And how Superman's character just doesn't jive with me. Based on this and your many other posts in the thread, you should probably just be very careful about the media you consume, because you seem to take it to heart in very strange ways. Getting genuinely upset (I'm kind of inferring there) because the villain of a film threatened to do something terrible is showing an astonishing capacity for empathy. If movies where Superman saves everyone (albeit at cost) leave you feeling hopeless, you may want to think very hard about going to see movies.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Please judge me as a human some more. You've written hundreds of words about superhero movies leaving you feeling depressed, defeated, empty and vanquished. I'm not judging you, at this point I'm kind of worried.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Yes, the return of movie fight.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:"Hm, someone threatening to burn Superman's mom alive made you feel bad? You should probably stop watching movies, I'm worried about you." - the voice of genuine concern Not bad. Defeated, or empty. That's a different, stronger word with a different, stronger meaning. That he has spent many hundreds of words elaborating on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
Yaws posted:People are perfectly within their rights not to like the darker tone of the Snyder DC movies. There's a quote somewhere in this thread that the darkly humorous tone of Suicide Squad will clash with the super-serious tone that all DC movies have, which would essentially mean that Suicide Squad's tone would clash with its tone. While tone is a legit criticism, there are also plenty of people who do not know what it means.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Yaws posted:What would Hawkeye gain from running straight at Iron Man? Relevance?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
broken clock opsec posted:I'm more thinking the sweet release of ... from his contract. I get it, like a cry for help?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I can't wait for the stream of bitching that will ensue when Spider-man is in less than 10 minutes of the film. After all, we only have five full length movies of him
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Accident Underwater posted:Isn't everyone basically divided up at the end of AOU (aside from Spider-Man )? Well, we don't even fully know what the issue is and the guy who introduces it in the trailer wasn't in AOU. So no.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
As a child I spent an unhealthy amount of time on the McFarlane Toys website.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
Yeah, that just sounds like a very particular manifestation of mental illness.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Daredevil series 1 does the 'reaction to destruction caused by heriocs' thing well while being both lighthearted and self serious at the same time. No, it's just really self serious and completely loving self-indulgent. Hat Thoughts posted:Suicide Squad is also already funnier than most Marvel movies on account of the Leto-based marketing People's reaction to Leto's casting was hysterical. I was skeptical, then I remembered that the last time I was skeptical about comic book casting was the last time they cast the Joker, so I kept quiet. Burkion posted:I hope I never piss off anyone enough to get a new avatar. I wish I could give a strong enough impression of myself to get an avatar. Sir Kodiak posted:Like any number of David Ayers films, her being awful could be used to good effect, but her whole voices-in-her-head bit is impressively painful in an otherwise fun trailer. Mireille Enos' character in Sabotage kind of felt like a dry run for the character anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:I mean the show itself, not Daredevil as a character, who is absolutely dour. I knew what you were talking about.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
Man, the very deliberate visual style Ang Lee chose keeps getting cited as some kind of mistake. It's really weird.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Fair enough. Somebody more erudite than me can break it down better, but that clip really displays how each cut was there to make a point, from establishing geography, to establishing intent, to establishing how loving cool it is when Damon breaks through your window. That scene is dramatic in the best way, it keeps ratcheting upwards, from first contact, to fists, to weilding books, then chair legs, then knife-fighting, each step more desperate and cutthroat than the last. It tells a story with each camera change, the blurriness and rawness there to evoke how completely hosed the situation is, until the end, where there is a longish cut on the Desh, lying dead, which is honestly kind of depressing. The third Bourne movie did it well. The second one was really loving bad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyZU7lfGjyk This is all those same ideas executed poorly. The Desh fight owns, however.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Nah, the weirdest TMNT toys were the ones that were transformers knock-offs. Like, you'd have Raphael and he'd turn into a jet or some poo poo. I don't think I'm making this up. There was one where they transformed from their anthropomorphic form back into the form of a baby turtle. I had the Donatello of that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:From the brief bits we have, I'm digging the poo poo out of Margot Robbie and Will Smith. Everything else looks great, but they both stand out. It's funny how the things that people often start off the most skeptical about end up being the raddest. RDJ, Ledger, Batfleck and now those two. I'd be surprised if Leto doesn't knock it out of the park too.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Who the gently caress was reticent about RDJ, everyone agreed that was slam dunk casting since it was announced. As someone who was alive in 2007 and on the internet, you are wrong. It was a mixture of him not looking like a comic book character, being a comic actor rather than a serious one, having a history of alcoholism and not knowing who he was (remember that this was his first high profile gig in years) Then the trailer hit, we realised the direction they were going in and that RDJ was perfect for it. Now, of course, it's difficult to imagine anyone else in the role without them doing something completely different with it. For whatever reason, there was a contingent who were super keen for Jim Cavaziel to get the role. Actually, I remember the reason. There was a red carpet photo of Cavaziel where he bore a striking resemblance to a particular cover of Iron Man, but I cant find either picture now.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 01:15 |
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Yeah, I'm sure there's dipshits who were against his getting the part, but I recall seeing it discussed as being inspired casting at the time. This was definitely true after the first trailer. But considering what a miserable prick Stark was in the comics at the time, it seemed an odd choice until it was clear what they were doing with it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 04:08
|
|