|
I think Tony and Steve should kiss
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
You can say 'the Incredibles didn't need setup', but that's generally because the setup is very formulaic so that the viewer has the impression of having seen these same characters in a million films and tv shows already. The Incredibles themselves are basically the Fantastic Four crossed with the Spielbergian family dynamic. Syndrome is standard Bond villain. Edna Mode is Q. Evil Robot is Standard Evil Robot. And so on.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Wasn't Pepper Potts basically running Stark corp at the time of the start of this? Does Damage Control have connections with SHIELD (i.e. Hydra)?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2017 11:44
|
|
|
The Tinkerer is still out and about so I can see future films being about him.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
It's fine because it means finding his own identity is a theme going forwards with the films, and it closes a plot hole re: the Sokovia Accords.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
What's wrong with an older Batman?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Thor was fun, but convinced me that Marvel scriptwriters must have an explicit rule to try and undermine any heavy emotional moment with humour to... not alienate the masses I guess? I don't really get why they do that but then again I don't make the big bucks. I am reminded of the analysis video of that scene in Cap 2 where they said it would have been way more powerful without a voiceover. But I get the sense that the MCU doesn't want to be 'powerful'. Fangz fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
Edit: just gonna delete this, literally no interest in twitter drama
Fangz fucked around with this message at 11:32 on Oct 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I love that no one puts this much energy into explaining why the latest beige cube from Marvel is the best ever. Lindsey Ellis had a pretty good video on GotG2. Not 'the best ever', but she liked it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VulkN5OLEM Mulva posted:Nobody really puts that much effort into explaining why anything is the best ever. The only thing that gets that much effort is explaining why things sucked and are flawed. Movies with Mikey are pretty good, positive reviews. EDIT: You can't really compare Williams and Zimmer, they are products of different eras and different roles in film music. Personally I like Zimmer but all his stuff sounds pretty similar to each other so I really doubt I can place any particular song. Fangz fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Nov 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
I enjoyed the movie but I don't think it requires IMAX.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
purple death ray posted:What was that movie recently where the embargo wasn't up until after the movie actually released? The Emoji Movie? A studio adopting a short embargo doesn't mean a specific film is good or bad, but it does mean they want to limit the impact of a negative critical reception across all of their films. Obviously if you do that sort of thing, only embargoing the bad films would be a dead giveaway. Fangz fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Nov 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:Similarly, only dropping embargo for good films would do the same thing. The point though is that it's scummy behaviour that betrays a lack of confidence in your films *in general*, even if it's 'standard practice' and so doesn't say stuff about specific films.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
zoux posted:Well, RT aggregates don't seem to. I've seen that analysis and I think the analysis sucks. Basically the box office takings are hugely dominated by the 'size' of the movie, and he failed to factor that in. A movie with a hundred mil budget will (usually) be taking at least two digit millions, and a 1 mil budget movie will (usually) take one digit millions, simply due to issues like promotion and how many screens it opens in. That factor utterly swamps whatever differences there are in review scores. You cannot look at review scores without making a good faith effort to remove that factor and he didn't. Fangz fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Nov 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
Who are the people who have seen it so far?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
have zach snyder make the next mad max film
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
Cinemascore is really just a measure of whether the fans who wanted to see a movie on the opening weekend were disappointed or not. B+ is basically average for this kind of film. It's not something you can use to compare between films. For example, BvS might just have gotten a worse cinema score because the people who disliked that film stayed away from JL.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
As ant man has his hijinks, in the background a city explodes. It goes uncommented.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
Hmmm, lots of little details in that trailer, assuming it's accurate. Wonder how much of it would actually be in the final film.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
Iron man is conspicuously absent in that group battle shot. Not that that proves anything, mind.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Worth noting that the big BvS analysis video argues the extended cut of BvS is actually worse, because it undercuts the whole plot about Superman Is Dangerous with 'actually Lex had the witness make the entire thing up'. Do people like Zach Snyder or do people like Superman and Batman?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
McCloud posted:I've read and heard folks say they don't quite "get" why Batman was angry. Which to me makes no sense, considering we've seen it happen in real time with the real 9/11 (see: James Woods, Dennis Miller, GOP and conservatives in general) The problem as I see it is that the movie doesn't commit to a Big Reason why Batman was angry and wanted to kill Superman. It just keeps layering on minor tangential reasons, which messes up when the film wanted him to change his mind later at the climax.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:Eh, I don't agree with this. He was at ground zero as Metropolis was destroyed around him. That'll gently caress with a dude. It just adds more fuel throughout. There's plenty to complain about the plot, but I think that was pretty well explained. That'll gently caress with a dude, but there's a lot of space between that and the confrontation. It would have been more coherent to build directly on top of that initial scene (for example if Superman was being sketchy with the cleanup, if Superman publicly mourns Zod in a way that seems alienating, if Batman convinces himself the Metropolis thing was avoidable, etc etc), than include elements like the dream, the time traveller, the african massacre, the bombing, etc etc. It's not that it wasn't explained, it's that it doesn't feel resonant. Fangz fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Nov 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
Also, yeah, connecting Batman to neocons is a bad idea because the angle that '9/11 caused conservatives to go crazy and invade countries' is far from an universal assessment. Plenty of people think that 9/11 just gave those people the *excuse* to go do most of those things, and that they are so fixed on those things that they are more or less unshakeable. Cheney was certainly not going to change his mind if Saddam's mom was called Martha.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:I like Man of Steel more than any other Superman film, so it's definitely Snyder/Goyer. I like BvS but not as much as other Batman films or other Superman films. I do BvS suffered from lots of interference like bringing in Terrio and making it be a JL prequel. I liked Watchmen and haven't seen any other Snyder films. Alright. Like personally I like Superman (heck, I enjoyed Superman Returns), I like Batman, and I feel like I've given Snyder a bunch of chances and kinda always hated his movies. All of them. Especially Watchmen.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:There's not much to compare Watchmen to. I guess other Moore adaptations? Definitely better than LXG, V, or Swamp Thing It's significantly worse than The Dark Knight Rises, which is probably my threshold for 'bad comic book movie'.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
You could cut Doomsday out and just have Batman kill Superman at the end, then realise what a terrible mistake he made.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
mikeraskol posted:There's no way this works I think. Studio execs would be terrified, and justifiably so, that they just poisoned the Batman character with the audience. Enh, everyone knows Superman is coming back. It just sets up a natural arc for Justice League of "Batman Atones For His Crimes". Have Wayne visit Martha and get forgiven at the end or something. Big hug and cry moment.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
This looks suspiciously like DC trying to make spiderman homecoming. I don't think any of the writers/directors on this have made anything particularly good before either?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2017 12:15
|
|
|
Maybe but it seems like it's suddenly a bigger deal now, especially with the split into two movies etc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
Putting rumours online that the kid was racist using the behaviour of his mother to support that would also be believable actions from a bully.BrianWilly posted:At this point I'm just on the side of ignoring this until it goes away  EDIT: VVV The point is that if the kid is actually innocent then the internet is participating in the bullying of a bullied child. The harm is substantial and that's a pretty good reason to not partake in this nonsense going forward. I'm not going to debate this with you. Fangz fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
Could Disney maybe end the Simpsons please Thanks
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
It's actually worse than 'consumerism is cool'. The book somehow fails to understand how people can *enjoy* media. The various references are treated without any sort of emotional connection, but as a pure agglomeration of Wikipedia facts. There's like an argument between two characters where the protagonist argues a film (that he supposedly loved enough to watch many times) must be good because the director worked on another good movie.
Fangz fucked around with this message at 13:20 on Dec 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2017 13:17
|
|
|
I neglected to mention this argument happens in front of a spontaneous and admiring audience. So yeah basically CD will probably love it Fangz fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Dec 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
It's really easy to read RPO for free. Like Google Books even lets you leaf through a bunch of pages if you don't wanna pirate.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
I think Peter having an aunt that knows sets up a fun dynamic that is distinct from the rest of the MCU and other versions of Spiderman, and will probably mean they don't have to lean as hard on Tony Stark for the 'don't forget your childhood' angle. Also when they introduce Ms Marvel (I hope!) it'll be less of a retread.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2018 11:51
|
|
|
From W’kabi's POV Killmonger is the legitimate Black Panther. He fought T’challa in ritual combat and won. Yes, there is the technicality that T’challa actually survived the fall, but that's a technicality the others cling to because they really, really don't want Killmonger to be king. So the usurper shows up, illegally using the Black Panther armour, kills some of his men (those aircraft have pilots!) and demands to be made back into king, gently caress all that ritual combat business, and the legitimate king - who you agree with anyway - tells him to go stab that dude, whose orders do you follow? Don't forget that we've already established that T’challa lied about Killmonger's identity so who knows what else he's lying about. I think people are too focused on the Klaue thing. Klaue got Killmonger an audience, W'kabi is loyal for other reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:I mean, it's all technicalities. The rules say that if you challenge for the throne, it's not over until the previous king yields or dies, and that didn't happen. Note that there were not a lot of people calling for the military to ignore the results of the last American election and regard Hillary Clinton as president even though Trump only won on a technicality. I mean the rules do say that but there's gotta be a lot of times where the loser goes down the waterfall and they never find the body. Like if Killmonger went over the cliff instead and reappeared a few days later having used a stolen heart-shaped herb and donning royal armour, there would be no question that if the royal guard fights on T'Challa's behalf they'll be correctly fulfilling their duty. It's not that W'Kabi is right, it's that the rules are at least ambiguous, and arguably he follows their spirit better than the Dora Milaje.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
Stark was near the ship in person, so I assume the plan was for the Vulture to take off and then have Iron Man swoop on him. The Vulture isn't fast.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
I think Tony is just bad at the whole intimacy thing. He doesn't want Peter to break his back like Rhodey. He's not blameless but Peter *is* still in the wrong on the whole ferry thing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2018 12:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
I suspect the point of the ritual combat thing is that usually there is no challenger. The Jabari stay in their mountain hideout, while the other tribes are supportive enough. The combat is also usually not to the death. In terms of swords/spears, I suppose it makes more sense with vibranium being a thing. Guns seem useless with everyone wearing bullet proof clothing and hard light shields, and possibly vibranium bullets can't actually be a thing. (Besides you don't want to leave vibranium lying around) They do have aircraft with what seems like energy weapons. Fangz fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2018 13:07
|
|