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.
 
  • Locked thread
BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Aww, there was kind of a real trailer, kind of, sort of, I guess, for Wonder Woman. You just had to endure Geoff Johns and Kevin Smith's narration to watch it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Oh man.

This film gave me the biggest headache.

But like in a good way. In a sensory overload kind of way.

And not even just in that way, but also like...a way where I was really, seriously, absolutely emotionally-invested in everything that was going on. Like, I cared too much and felt too much and the feedback was actually painful. :stare:

Possible controversial opinion alert! I thought the threeway fight between Cap, Tony, and Bucky at the end was better-done and more captivating than the airport fight. The latter was a spectacle and well worth the price of admission. The former though...holy poo poo. I felt more for Tony Stark in ten minutes than I have in five whole other tolerable-to-great films. To see that rage coming, to know exactly where the plot was leading and how everything came full circle to that exact reaction between those three characters...I think that is easily one of the top five favorite Marvel film moments for me.

More thoughts to come. After I gorge on some Advils.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Oh yeah and how 'bout that young Tony Stark. Witchcraft is what it is.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
The thing I liked was that Steve was obviously being driven by his personal feelings instead of his brains and not thinking about the situation that clearly throughout the story, but as soon Tony's own personal history with his parents got tossed in the situation, he absolutely became the one who wasn't thinking straight while Steve had to try to rein him in.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Something else I liked is that it seems that they're leaning movie Hawkeye more towards comic Hawkeye at least in personality. Much more of the brash loudmouth semi-fuckup Hawkguy.

ImpAtom posted:

Captain America took an untrained Scarlet Witch on missions and it killed a dozen people because she wasn't prepared for it
This is a bit slanted. She did cause deaths, but it's arguable how any training or lack thereof would have changed the outcome of that situation, unless the training is "You gotta make your already-overpowered powers even more powerful somehow." Like...she already does control it pretty darn well, but she was trying to stop a suicide bomb. I actually liked that her instinct was to draw it towards the sky, like she did with the gas earlier, but what worked with the gas didn't work with the bomb.

Like Cap said to her, things are going to go wrong in combat situations, and some of it is going to be directly your own faults (keeping in mind that, yeah, some of it in this situation was directly Cap's fault), but the alternative is just that no one gets saved and everyone gets hurt. And it's dubious how the Accords would actually change that. If the U.N. are now the ones sending superhumans like Wanda into combat situations, does that mean she's just automatically gonna do all the right things in all the right situations 100% of the time?

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Boogaleeboo posted:

.......morality was never an issue raised, sanity was. The Accords are a bunch of politicians telling a group, whose defining moment was ignoring the orders of a bunch of politicians in order to save New York by the way, that it'd be a good idea if they listen to politicians. This is not a viable solution to anything.
On the other hand...if they don't answer to politicians then who do they answer to? What comprises their oversight? Are there any oversights for the Avengers? Do they seriously have no oversight at all? That's insane as well.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

X-O posted:

I thought going in that the line from the trailer "He's my friend" "So was I" was going to be the big emotional punch in the final fight, but they actually used a different take where Tony doesn't sound sad about it but more pissed about it when he says it. The line "I don't care. He killed my Mom." was the real emotional punch during that fight. That was a rough one.
The situation puts it in a different context too. The line in the trailer gets some well-deserved mockery 'cuz it sounded like Tony being emo that Cap likes his lifelong literal war comrade Bucky more than he likes Tony, the guy who mostly makes fun of him for swearing. "I'm your friend too! Don't I matter?"

The actual context is more like Cap saying "Please don't kill my friend" while Tony is saying "I don't give a poo poo." Tony isn't sad that Cap is choosing Bucky over him, he's simply so pissed that he no longer considers himself to be Cap's friend.
It's kind of amazing.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
There might be that, but I think Zemo was reasonably confident that even the best non-Avengers, non-superhuman squads wouldn't be able to kill Bucky. Remember his "more powerful men than me have tried to kill the Avengers" spiel, and I think he would think of Bucky as the same fundamental class of being as Cap and the rest. And he knew Cap would be there to protect Bucky, anyway.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

twistedmentat posted:

I liked how Tony says "I wish we had a Hulk right now" and Rhodey says "You think he'd be on our side?".
Actually Widow's the one who says the latter line. And it's a little dubious. The Hulk might not be that easy to control. But Banner would 900%, absolutely, no questions be on the side of the Accords.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
That's true. v:v:v

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
":colbert: That is dangerously arrogant thinking." -WARMACHINEROX

I mean something something socialism something but still, it's a pretty far stretch from "literal mind control" to "you can't just do anything you want without consequence."

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Hey how come they're able to make a Black Panther suit that looks totally functional and flexible while we still can't get a Batman suit that can turn its head

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
That would be Florence Kasumba. She's more prolific in Germany, apparently (because she is German :downs:).

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Phylodox posted:

I thought Peggy only had one brother, who died childless.
We don't know if he died childless or not. Being older than Peggy, it's actually quite possible he was married by the time of the war.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I'm really hoping against hope that they're gonna use the Captain Marvel movie to suddenly frontload a bunch of iconic-ish female characters all at once, like Jennifer, Jessica, Monica, Abigail Brand...and, hell, throw Hope Van Dyne in there too. It's the perfect opportunity and context to highlight a women-heavy heroic cast, and Marvel has shown multiple times by now that they're capable of doing ensemble stories.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

X-O posted:

Abigail Brand is a mutant and mostly has appeared in X-Books. I'd guess she's with Fox.
Give her the Wanda treatment. :v: Play up the alien hybrid thing and downplay dat mutant poo poo which is technically a big ol' retcon anyway.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Mazzagatti2Hotty posted:

So is the Supergirl Tv series as horrible as it looks? I was going to give it a shot, but then saw a TV spot for the first episode that actually took the time to have Ally Mcbeal explain to the audience that the title "SuperGIRL isn't sexist, I'm a girl and I'm a successful business woman! You're sexist for thinking it's sexist!" And I decided nope, not for me.
It has an awkward start but, starting about six episodes in, steadily grows into the best superhero show of this year and not just because 90% of the competition has turned to pure rank poo poo. I would say a large chunk of it is at least as good as Flash was last year, which a lot of people considered very good.

e: Okay, I mean on network TV, not Netflix. It's certainly no Daredevil, obvs.

BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 02:13 on May 10, 2016

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
That sounds pretty cool, honestly.

...Wait, if he already got the motherboxes back in the Communion scene then why is he still looking for them in Justice League?

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Oh.

lomzus posted:

So the Hollywood Reporter are saying that Lupita Nyong'o is in negotiations to star in Black Panther.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/black-panther-lupita-nyongo-talks-893213
The article seems pretty sure that she would be a love interest, but wouldn't it make sense for her to be Shuri?

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I mean...Shuri is T'Challa's sister and the princess of the nation so it'd be kinda weird if she wasn't around at all. She's a pretty important character anyway. I think more readers are more aware of her nowadays than they would be of any other Black Panther supporting character. I am, at least.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I agree that "Tony manipulated Peter against Captain America" is getting a bit overblown. I don't think it's that strange, given the events of the film, for Peter to side against Cap with or without Tony's rhetorics.

The part where it came across like Tony was being incredibly manipulative was when he, like, threatened to tell Aunt May about Peter being Spider-Man unless Peter comes to Germany. It's like the most rear end in a top hat thing he could do to someone, unless I'm reading the moment wrong.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I really, really, really want X-Men Apocalypse to be good. Or at least enjoyable. It's all well and good that all these MCU films are succeeding and we get to be all "these comic characters from my childhood are being done right!" but like, I was never a big fan of Cap or Iron Man or Thor or whatever growing up. The X-Men are my real faves. The X-Men are my home.

(:negative:)

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I don't think it's possible at all to integrate mutants into the MCU at this point. We've passed the event horizon of...being able to do that. It would mess up too many concepts.

Now, if the idea is for Marvel Studios to be able to make X-Men movies again, but in its own separate storyline apart from the Avengers/Thanos stuff...well, that could be cool, but I have a feeling it would stretch the studio too thin. Even now they're not able to produce that many films all that quickly. In which case, why not have two different studios producing these films? Honestly, the best scenario would just be for Fox to make good X-Men films. Which shouldn't be that out of the question!

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
There were some genuinely great, well-executed moments in DoFP. The conversation between old Xavier and young Xavier...the idea that Charles Xavier is such a powerful telepath because of his capacity for empathy and hope and not because he can control your brain or whatever...is one of the best-written Xavier anythings I've ever seen.

Professor X posted:

It's not their pain you're afraid of, it's yours, Charles. And as frightening as it may be, that pain will make you stronger. If you allow yourself to feel it, embrace it, it will make you more powerful than you ever imagined. It's the greatest gift we have, to bear their pain without breaking, and it's born from the most human power: Hope.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Ignite Memories posted:

But the Nova Corps are established as regular space cops, with no mention of special powers as far as I could tell. Isn't this a significant difference from the comic book nova corps?
If Fox really had the rights to Nova then Marvel wouldn't be able to have a Nova Corps, period, with or without powers.

They just didn't have powers because that's what James Gunn wanted. It's not some contractual thing.

(Also those spaceships are loving great and I will never tire of saying so)

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
War of Kings is nothing to joke about.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

mikeraskol posted:

Sort of a ridiculous thing to say when you haven't seen the contract and we have at least one example of a situation where the contract operates in this fashion - Marvel can use Skrulls but they can't use Super Skrull.

Not saying its the other way around, but that's a pretty strong declaration when you don't know what the gently caress you're talking about.
It's a strong declaration by way of using common loving sense, you amazing dickrat :)

Super Skrull is associated with the Fantastic Four. Richard Rider and Sam Alexander are not. Why would Fox own these characters?

I'm not talking about Frankie Raye at all. Who cares about her? I was clearly talking about the Nova that is associated with the Nova Corps, in response to Toxx's claim that they might only be able to use the Corps and not the singular Novas.

BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 23:45 on May 16, 2016

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
The article does mention that the WB still wants to remain filmmaker-driven, so my guess is that Johns will mostly just be there to make broad yes-or-no suggestions about what fits or doesn't fit for these characters. "Should Batman shoot down mooks with a gun?" "No, that's a bit extreme." "Would he rip off their arms instead?" "OH HELL YEA"

Still, I dunno how qualified Johns will be at basically running a film division. And I don't know who this Berg guy is at all.

For what it's worth, I do think Johns will have a better creative vision than Snyder, whose creative vision just wasn't resonating with fans or broader moviegoing audiences or -- for some reason -- my Communist kinsmen in China.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Flash, Teen Titans, Superman, JSA.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Starsnostars posted:

Wasn't Johns involved in the Green Lantern movie? I'm surprised they would put him back near the movie department after that.
I thought I heard that too, but his name doesn't appear on the credits for that film at all (edit: or I guess Wikipedia just didn't list him for some reason) so I guess it must have been some sort of minor advisory role.

To put things in perspective, Kevin Feige also produced Blade Trinity, X3, and Fantastic Four 2.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Apparently Snyder once referenced this Youtube video of Batman's total kill counts in an effort to explain why his Batman kills people in BvS. The creator of that video, who does a podcast for comicbookmovies.com, talked about how annoyed he was at that because the whole point of the video was to show how absurd it is for Batman to kill so many people and not for people to think "Hey look Batman totally kills people so you should feel free to have him kill people." (It was pretty funny, I generally enjoy that podcast)

Snyder might "know" these characters. But the way he portrays them, whether by intent or mistake, often makes it seem like he doesn't actually get the point of the stuff that he "knows." If it's by mistake, then that speaks to ineptitude. If it's by intent, then that's just annoying.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

MacheteZombie posted:

Are you sure? The video could be rehosted, but it says it was published almost a year after BvS finished filming.
I don't think Snyder made Batman kill people because he watched that video or anything, I think he misconstrued the point of the video as a defense for his own choices, and the specific misconstruing in question shows his general mindset about the issue: "Batman totally kills, because he did it in all these films! These aren't mistakes, they're guidelines."

Or I might be wrong. I don't know (or remember) what Snyder said about the video, I just heard the video creator complaining about it.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Geoff Johns Promises To Bring "Hope And Optimism" To The DC Films Universe

Travis343 posted:

Do you have a loving red phone in your study that beeps when somebody mentions BvS in this thread and you push a button in Shakespeare's neck then slide down a pole and post feverishly on your giant atomic computer or what
Who is this addressing 'cuz this could mean practically anyone here

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Man, I keep forgetting JMS is a big part of Sense8. I wonder why I would forget that. :v:

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I think a lot of it will depend on the tone and presentation of the spoilers. If the WW trailer comes out and it evokes the same laborious over-serious feel of BvS then it's gonna get the negative buzz going again. If it can avoid that and promote a more asskicking warriors-versus-Nazis tone then I think it can build up some pretty enthusiastic hype.

e: Oh wait, not Nazis. Other bad guys, I guess.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
It's a great moment of interpersonal interaction that utilizes all four characters involved in the most entertaining, effective way.

So of course we have to dissect and deconstruct and dismantle it to see why it's actually, secretly not good instead.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
It doesn't seem like Singer has gotten the hang of balancing an ensemble cast even after, like, sixteen years.

Some folks I anecdotally trust have mentioned good things about the film though, so I'm keeping positive.

Oh god please don't suck rear end.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I can see people not liking the Steve and Sharon relationship, but I don't get the "no homo" idea at all considering that the two characters had been flirting with each other periodically up to this point, she's literally his girlfriend from the comics, and he had been with Peggy in the first film anyway.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Something else to consider is that Sharon wouldn't have just heard about Steve Rogers from her aunt; she would have heard a fair bit about Bucky Barnes as well. It makes sense for her to be as invested in helping Bucky as she is in helping Steve. Heck, she has more motivation to do so than most of Team Cap.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Okay I really liked X-Men: Apocalypse. We're now three for three on X-Men films that looked real lovely but ended up being pretty good.

I mean...okay...I can appreciate that it's kind of a mess of a movie that doesn't respect its audience nearly enough and handholds us through its mess of scenes and dialogue and...heh..."plot." But I think overall things got stronger and stronger the longer the film went and was no longer bogged down alternately ponderous and schizophrenic scenes about nothing worth saying.

The whole "Mystique leads the X-Men" thing came across much better and much more intelligently than I was expecting, building naturally off of the previous films' storylines. That was really the thing I worried about most going in and I was glad they managed to make it work. I think this film has more heart than intelligence, but it does still manage to give us an enjoyable, memorable result.

And let me just say that there are scenes in this film that I have waited literal decades in order to see depicted onscreen and what this film did with it exceeded even what I had envisioned in my head.

UNLEASH YOUR POWAAH JEEEEAAN

Oh yeah and I loved that dumb metal X thing that Magneto made when he switched sides. It was so dumb and melodramatic but I loved it a whole lot.


Also Quicksilver. Fuuuck. Look, I'm the first to say that the DOFP Quicksilver scene was a little overblown and overrated but this one is legitimately well worth the hype.

All in all I'm kinda looking forward to seeing this again.

BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 10:09 on May 29, 2016

  • Locked thread