MCU TV: WHAT IF...CIVIL WAR (OVER IP FINANCING)

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > TV IV > MCU TV: WHAT IF...CIVIL WAR (OVER IP FINANCING)

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

The_Doctor posted:

Maybe SWORD is where Nick Fury was at the end of Far From Home. Does SHIELD even exist any more?

This is such a loaded question I don't even know where to begin.

Short answer? Kinda'. And not just on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

# ¿ Jan 18, 2021 21:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 21:51

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Edmund Lava posted:

They didn�t even do a cameo during the five seasons of Fuller House, I�m guessing they�re really done with acting.

Was there an on-screen explanation for this?

# ¿ Feb 23, 2021 01:31

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Tars Tarkas posted:

Michelle was in New York running a fashion empire (aka a real life reference to the twins) and the characters would stare at the camera when they mentioned this or the Elizabeth & James clothing line. They talk directly to the camera about her in a Thanksgiving episode too. She never appeared in 5 seasons but they did call her voice mail while drunk and her voice wasn't heard. Can't remember any other references but I didn't watch the whole series just read summaries of a lot of it, so I don't know if they mention her in the triple wedding finale (some of the actors who played her friends on the original show are in that one) but by then Aunt Becky was also kicked off the show so lol. The producers/actors have some quotes that seem sort of rude in the press which was weird and probably burnt bridges beyond whatever else was going on, and even tried to get Elizabeth Olsen to play the part. Girl Meets World pulled off the superior sequel series.

Thank you.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2021 03:52

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Doctor Nutt posted:

The Musk thing indeed taints the movie and is embarrassingly out of place having recently rewatched, but Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer means it cannot possibly be the worst Marvel movie.

At least his appearance was as a tryhard dork trying to impress Tony, who completely bigtimes him.

I'd rather he weren't in the flick, but if he has to be, that's his place. Being humiliated by an actual genius.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2021 02:34

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Cage Kicker posted:

They should really take more care to film in a non-problematic area in the United States like

Not into this attitude one iota. Let's keep giving places money who are on step one of a genocide because other places are bad too?

Spare me.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2021 01:24

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Zil posted:

Who would play Clock King?

I don't have any good ideas, but I can't wait to see where this goes.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2021 00:45

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

mind the walrus posted:

The FOX X-Men movies always had this aura of "why the gently caress did you do it that way?" Like not even in an angry way it just feels like no one really thought out the decisions beyond what would get the product out the door fastest.

Considering the rights would revert to Marvel if they didn't make one every few years, I have little doubt that's exactly what was happening.

# ¿ Apr 7, 2021 01:02

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

mind the walrus posted:

Thor 2 is the one with the lots of angry grey/black swirl patterns

I swear, my ex-wife and I are the only two people I've encountered who really like Thor 2.

I have a strained relationship with a sibling I try pretty hard to love, so maybe that's why, but I enjoyed the whole thing soup to nuts.

Hiddleston is wonderful as always, making him a tweener was just what I wanted at the time, the climax was a ton of fun with the black hole bombs and portal madness, the comedy was on point throughout (Thor hanging Mjolnir up on the coat rack kills me,) and Darcy was great as always.

About the only thing I didn't like about the flick was Jane getting shafted, story-wise, so thankfully she's gonna' get some justice now that Perlmutter's gone and Taika's running the franchise.

# ¿ Apr 13, 2021 03:48

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

MiddleOne posted:

Haha what is the weird Steven Strange reference in Winter Soldier. The AI knew from his bank records and purchasing patterns that he was going to become a sorcerer? Very goofy.

This tracks fine because we're never told how long Strange trains. The timeline of that flick was left vague. He was probably an incredibly powerful sorcerer, if not the Sorcerer Supreme, by the time Winter Soldier happens.

All we know is that he wasn't during the time of the first Avengers as seen in Endgame, but nothing else has really been defined. Several years can pass in a training montage.

LividLiquid fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Apr 14, 2021

# ¿ Apr 14, 2021 01:23

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

JohnnySavs posted:

Doesn't Strange get a surgery opportunity for a "paralyzed veteran in some kind of enhanced military gear" right before his accident that implies that was after Civil War?

I thought this was Rhodey too, but evidently it was one of Hammer's test subjects from those failed tests in Iron Man 2.

# ¿ Apr 26, 2021 00:11

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Nameless Pete posted:

Other people have no doubt mentioned this, but the Walker casting was low-level inspired. By getting Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn's kid,

:aaaa:

# ¿ Apr 28, 2021 01:03

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Seems pretty clear based on what we've seen and what has been announced that the uniting theme of this phase is cosmic.

This'd be disappointing considering that's what the last phase was all about.

mind the walrus posted:

There's a reason the actual MCU properties aren't full of overt in-jokes about the actors' past projects.

Nick Fury's grave would like a word with you.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2021 06:33

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

That clip rules. I always click on it when I see it.

# ¿ Jun 11, 2021 23:03

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

shades of eternity posted:

Come for Dolly Parton

Somehow find out it's actually run by Jim Cornette. :p

Wait. What?!

# ¿ Jun 14, 2021 01:25

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

I watched the whole episode without pulling my phone out even once, but I don't remember anything involving Loki winning the world cup or whatever. When and why did that happen?

# ¿ Jun 17, 2021 06:55

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Technowolf posted:

No, because the Timekeepers had already decreed that Steve and Tony would go back to the 70s. No, they did not decree that Loki would escape to Mongolia. We will not be taking any more questions at this time.

This is a perfectly fine explanation, for my money, and I think a chunk of the thread's (not necessarily you, mind) whole "I don't understand the rules, therefore show bad" analysis is just CinemaSins-level nitpicking disguised as criticism.

The story laid out what's what. It's absolutely okay to not like the rules or the story, but it explained everything necessary for said story, and disappearing up its own ruleset like Shane Carruth isn't what this show needs until it needs it for something, which could be later, as we learn that the "rules" are pretty fascist and terrible or something similar, or it could be never. And it wouldn't be a worse story if it was never.

The Avengers were meant to travel through time, therefore time travel isn't what causes multiversal timeline branching if it's "meant" to happen. That's the important information and they gave it to us.

# ¿ Jun 17, 2021 23:13

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Robot Style posted:

To be fair, that happens in the last part of a 3-minute long shot (which admittedly has about 5 hidden cuts sprinkled throughout), so the action's going to be a bit sloppy by then, especially if they're shooting it chronologically and doing a bunch of takes.

Clearly that moment is supposed to be a "look how in sync they are" moment that I'm guessing this looked really cool in the early stunt-vis version that was filmed by the professional stunt team in a padded gymnasium full of cardboard boxes to represent the layout of the set. Unfortunately, it wasn't actually performed by a professional stunt team, and was instead built around two actors who had to learn the choreography in between all the other stuff required of them for the show.

I'm guessing the showrunners realized this beat lacked energy though, which is why they really ramped up the camera shake and meteor strikes (which are completely absent just before and after this moment).

A well-reasoned, measured, knowledgeable explanation for something contentious?!

Here?! Now?!

# ¿ Jun 24, 2021 03:47

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

live with fruit posted:

Apparently, the post credit scene for WandaVision has been slightly changed and people think it's because they refilmed it for Multiverse of Madness.

Turns out it was to remove the reflection of the crew or lights or something, and they hosed up and left the mask in place for the whole thing, so people think they added some spectral bugaboo, but it was just a new mistake replacing an old one.

mind the walrus posted:

Being real aside from the illusion projection the MCU was poo poo about establishing his powerset if they suddenly want us to go with his telekinesis.

He blew all the furniture across the room in his prison cell in The Dark World. His telekinesis was established a super long time ago.

# ¿ Jun 29, 2021 00:48

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

howe_sam posted:

I personally didn't see anyone guess ahead of time, which granted doesn't mean much, but within the context of the movie it was obvious enough that I figured it out ahead of time.

It really couldn't have been anybody but who it was within the context of the movie unless it was somebody from outside the movie not hinted at whatsoever, which would've been infinitely worse.

I really need to stop reading the internet's opinions about shows and movies I enjoy, because I gamed out at least half of the ridiculous arguments people are currently having about this flick while I would've rather been just enjoying a movie.

But I do understand the people whose complaint is "why even make it Taskmaster if you're going to change everything" here, because very few in this thread have given me the impression that they're just mad she isn't a dude.

Nazis have this whole tactic where they make everything � literally everything they can think of � into an ideological fight so they can recruit new members to their cause, and I'm very tired of all the non-nazis having to play defense against that bullshit when we just want to enjoy a distraction *from* the state of the world.

So, big ups to all y'all who stated your criticisms while acknowledging who else is on the side of "new Taskmaster bad" and going into the specifics of why; something you shouldn't have to do, but nonetheless now do. That has to suck.

Sentient Data posted:

I probably would have been surprised if there weren't an entire page of naked movie spoilers in a thread that's only supposed to be about the tv shows

It's the MCU. Nothing like this has ever even been attempted before at this scale, so our delineation between what is a movie and what is TV based on a forum precedent set over fifteen years ago and is understandably fraying at the edges because it's one continuity where you're expected to have watched everything.

It behaves like a TV show. We watch some episodes in the theater and some at home. I don't think it's unreasonable that it's assumed you're up to date on said show if you're going to discuss it on the internet, particularly when those doing so are using spoiler tags for their explicit purpose.

# ¿ Jul 11, 2021 01:48

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Open Source Idiom posted:

I mostly just watch the trailers. They're shorter, but they're just as nourishing. Cheaper too.

Yes, yes, we all think you're very smart and clever and special for not liking a thing we do.

# ¿ Jul 14, 2021 00:49

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Who the hell was the other asset or agent or whatever they called it that Renslayer and Mobius kept mentioning?

# ¿ Jul 14, 2021 08:55

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Boris Galerkin posted:

This finale was a huge disappointment for me because I don�t know who the gently caress Kang is suppose to be or why I should care.

I'm finding that this is a pretty popular opinion, and one I absolutely get, even though I ultimately disagree.

Personally, I don't know poo poo about Kang I didn't absorb through osmosis over the last six weeks.

I found the initial reveal to be underwhelming, as you'd normally want your villain to be introduced long before their reveal, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that every reveal at the end would've played a lot better if we weren't all a part of the Marvel Speculation Industrial Complex.

Take the Marvel IP out of the show, and it's a really awesome season finale as well as a great cliffhanger for next season.

We had the emotional climax of Loki and Sylvie's relationship as well as the tragedy of it falling apart over their differences.

I was super moved by the emotional stakes of the finale and I can't wait to find out what happens next. I really can't think of anything a cliffhanger finale is supposed to do beyond that.

# ¿ Jul 15, 2021 01:04

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

LionArcher posted:

So you didn't mind the mind rape by the main hero at the end of the show?

Don't tell anybody, but Wandavision was a villain's origin story. :ssh:

Still, though, to your point, that was also over my personal line and if they were going to cross said line, they really should've been clearer about what it says about who Wanda has become.

# ¿ Jul 15, 2021 01:07

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

That whole thing is asinine to begin with considering there's already a movie Superman and Flash and a TV Superman and Flash, among others.

# ¿ Jul 27, 2021 05:37

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Frankenstyle posted:

I don't know which horse to back in this race. On one side Disney is a huge greed dragon sitting on it's mountain of gold breathing fire at anyone who wants a piece of it, and the other side is Scarlet Johansson's smaller greed dragon sitting on her mountain of gold being pissed off because the 20 million she already got for Black Widow's box office just didn't quite fill that empty void.

It's like trying to pick who to root for in a fist fight between Eric Trump and Donald Jr.

The point in struggles like this is rarely just to get the money. It's to hold your employers to task for money they promised you because you have the money to do so where smaller actors who don't have Executive Producer credits, as ScarJo did on this, couldn't.

Always side with labor. Even when labor is a millionaire fighting billionaires.

# ¿ Jul 30, 2021 23:37

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Klungar posted:

This is what I�ve seen from the various legal scholars I�ve seen weigh in.

Even if they lose the copyright to some older cartoons, they have the characters trademarked and there's no end date on that ever, so anybody saying they're going to lose Mickey Mouse doesn't understand what's really happening here, I'm pretty sure.

# ¿ Aug 1, 2021 00:05

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Yikes.

# ¿ Aug 3, 2021 19:28

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Parkingtigers posted:

Taking a role written for a young black woman, and giving it to yet another generic white dude purely because an older mid-tier MCU film had him as a once and done supporting character would be the worst of looks.

Sure would.

I also want him to be involved, 'cause I love that character, but maybe he could be Ironheart's Rhodey or Happy.

# ¿ Aug 22, 2021 03:35

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Barreft posted:

Strange is Mephisto

There was a sign somebody held about the devil being in disguise, Strange looks like the Villain of the flick from the trailer, they're doing One More Day, where Mephisto was the villain, and Strange's house was all snowy which seems like a play on the whole "cold day in hell" idiom.

I didn't think Mephisto had anything to do with WandaVision at any point, but it seems pretty air tight here, whether literally or just thematically.

# ¿ Aug 25, 2021 05:15

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Holy poo poo that's gonna' be great.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2021 20:20

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

AndyElusive posted:

Whosoever hosts this rager, if it be worthy, shall possess the power of Party Thor.

Wonderful.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2021 23:09

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

In the middle of a cultural moment where there's a giant panic about supposed men insisting we're women to trick you all into sex or assault your children in bathrooms?

Yeah. Maybe don't do the man-purse joke.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2021 18:46

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

tsob posted:

It seems more like a bad fashion joke than a "no homo" joke

You should probably know that "I don't see it that way" is the response we always get. Always. No matter how blatant the queerphobia in a piece of fiction, this is how all the shittiest people in the world respond and I genuinely believe you don't want to be like them or I'd just call you an rear end in a top hat and move on.

Things like this don't need to be a referendum on whether or not you're a bad person for liking a product. I'm one of the most insufferable SJWs you'll ever meet and one of my favorite hobbies is schlock nights where my group exposes each other to some of the sleaziest poo poo imaginable for fun, and when the inevitable yikes arises, it's the opposite of a big deal.

"That was gross."

"Yup. Moving on."

That's really all this warrants.

But whenever I say something as innocuous as "that joke wasn't the best," I have to get into a loving dialectic about it because folks equate them liking a thing that did something problematic with they themselves being problematic and ironically become problematic in an effort to deflect when "yeah, that wasn't the best" is, for the most part, the sum total of expectation as to having a little empathy.

People mock men for doing anything girly to the point that a loving sack becomes gendered, and it's definitely, unambiguously, queerphobic.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2021 22:12

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

tsob posted:

I'm sure it is common, but it might be common because people's lived experiences differ and I'd hope that simply noting it while asking if other people perceive it differently doesn't make you lovely. Just because you feel it's blatant doesn't mean other people do. I certainly didn't. If this thread hadn't pointed out that it's homophobic I genuinely would never have known, and even with it pointed out I'm still unsure why. It doesn't sound like there's a clich� association (real or imagined) with gay people themselves, so much as just people associate purses with women; so any man with one is bad and that's rendered as "gay" as an easy reach for bad? Is that right? That confusion is why I questioned it. I'd also imagine that just because it's blatantly insulting doesn't mean it's intentionally insulting. That doesn't make it okay, obviously, but it does mean the person doing it might do it differently if they knew that.

Welp, you're an rear end in a top hat and I wasted my time.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2021 23:33

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

I still can't get over how people still think saying they don't think a thing is happening means it isn't happening.

We could solve so many problems that way!

Thermodynamics? gently caress you! I don't see it that way and my opinion is as good as yours.

# ¿ Oct 28, 2021 00:04

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Bust Rodd posted:

As an out queer man I genuinely feel like the thread insisting �purses are a gay guy thing!�

Well I have a very simple response:

Nobody did that.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2021 00:23

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Doctor Spaceman posted:

I think there can be value to existing characters revealing / realising that they are gay, bi, trans etc since that can reflect real-world experiences.

Yeah, only letting new characters be gay just smacks of "eew. Keep the gross gay poo poo over there in characters I don't know where I can ignore it."

Which is exactly how most of our parents treat us.

# ¿ Nov 10, 2021 22:38

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Wanda's abilities have already been retconned in the MCU. Used to be she got them from a stone, but now she just had them and the stone made them stronger.

# ¿ Nov 21, 2021 00:59

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Inkspot posted:

They're PG movies about marital problems.

They're libertarian nightmares where we are meant to defer to the uber people who are special, and anybody trying to also be special is the villain.

# ¿ Nov 22, 2021 21:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 21:51

LividLiquid: Apr 13, 2002

Gaz-L posted:

This is kinda the key. It's fair enough if people aren't enjoying the show, but a lot of the criticisms seem to be 'I'd like this way better if it was a totally different show with a different cast and story'. And whatever else this is, it's very much intended to be evoking the imagery and tone of a specific run on the comics, and introducing a specific very popular comics character in a way that has her feel consistent with the version on the page.

I've not read those comics and I'm loving this series. It's just wonderful so far. I like Kate. Can't fathom why people wouldn't aside from her being rich, which, fair, though to me it reads more like a Disney Princess flick like Little Mermaid or Brave where the privileged girl doesn't enjoy her background one bit and it's used to control her.

Really digging the Shane Black Marvel Christmas vibe being used again after it was so effective in Iron Man 3.

Here's hoping it sticks the landing. The D+ shows have been struggling with that.

# ¿ Nov 27, 2021 17:10

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > TV IV > MCU TV: WHAT IF...CIVIL WAR (OVER IP FINANCING)

«‹›7 »