Marvel Movie thread

Off Topic Babble. The really important stuff...

Moderator: Andrew

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:09 am

The trailer for Guardians of the Galaxy 2: Faster and More Furious at the Speed of Light has been released and will screen before The Force Awakens.

J/K! It's the first trailer for Star Trek Beyond. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oaas4zEUxdY
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:43 am

verslibre wrote:The trailer for Guardians of the Galaxy 2: Faster and More Furious at the Speed of Light has been released and will screen before The Force Awakens.

J/K! It's the first trailer for Star Trek Beyond. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oaas4zEUxdY



Trailer def. gives off a Guardians vibe
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
MP3
 
Posts: 12420
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:45 am

verslibre wrote:The trailer for X-Men: Apocalypse was released today. Looks like a snoozer.

I'm done with mutants until another director (I hate Singer) steps in or the rights revert to Marvel (which will never happen). I speak only for myself. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COvnHv42T-A


Singer's film are reliable but lack flair. Wish Matt Vaughn continued directing series after First Class. I'm sure Apocalypse will be fine, but that's about it.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
MP3
 
Posts: 12420
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:00 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Wish Matt Vaughn continued directing series after First Class.


Hell to the yes.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Tue Jan 05, 2016 3:32 am

Joss Whedon on confirming his exit from the MCU, and when he left.

When you can put your little fairy dust on things and just improve them slighty, and they actually listen to you... I was a script doctor for a long time, and the part where they listen to you was very rare; so it was very important for my own self to go "we can still be friends," but...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wPnqzENRToA
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue Jan 05, 2016 10:16 pm

verslibre wrote:Joss Whedon on confirming his exit from the MCU, and when he left.

When you can put your little fairy dust on things and just improve them slighty, and they actually listen to you... I was a script doctor for a long time, and the part where they listen to you was very rare; so it was very important for my own self to go "we can still be friends," but...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wPnqzENRToA


He should have passed on Avengers 2. What a mess. It really typifies bad sequels. Bigger, louder, etc. Speaking of disappointing sequels...finally got around to watching Kick-Ass 2. Entertaining enough and Jim Carey did a great job. But a letdown overall.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
MP3
 
Posts: 12420
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Wed Jan 06, 2016 2:54 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Speaking of disappointing sequels...finally got around to watching Kick-Ass 2. Entertaining enough and Jim Carey did a great job. But a letdown overall.


Yeah, it didn't live up to the first one, though it had its moments. The first movie was killer. Probably one of those things that should've been left alone and not sequelized.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Mar 11, 2016 3:58 am

Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7679
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Fri Mar 11, 2016 2:13 pm

I like the fact that Spidey is being played by an actual younger actor. Love his voice. I still think The Amazing Spider Man 2's suit was the best so far, though, I do dig the Retro look. Not surprised to see all the miserable's shitting on it.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Mar 11, 2016 4:14 pm

YoungJRNYfan wrote:I like the fact that Spidey is being played by an actual younger actor. Love his voice. I still think The Amazing Spider Man 2's suit was the best so far, though, I do dig the Retro look. Not surprised to see all the miserable's shitting on it.

Agreed. ASM2 was the best suit by far. Movie sucked though. Raimi's SM2 was by far the best Spidey movie. Sony's screwed it up ever since.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7679
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:55 am

I'll be there! These new directors blow Joss away. Ditto on Raimi's Spider-Man 2. I want to see the character treated with respect, and I think they're back on the right track.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Thu Apr 07, 2016 5:47 am

Benedict will be on Kimmel on the 12th to introduce the very first trailer for Doctor Strange!
Last edited by verslibre on Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:23 am

verslibre wrote:Benedict will be on Kimmel on the 12th to introduce the very trailer for Doctor Strange!


Ah, he needs to do Colbert...I'm sure he will eventually. When he showed up on the old show as Smaug, it was awesome.
User avatar
Monker
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9428
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Fri Apr 08, 2016 6:05 am

Captain America: Civil War Prelude trailer released:
http://serpentorslair.com/2016/04/07/ca ... -released/
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat Apr 09, 2016 3:54 am

[SPOILER ... don't look if you intend to watch CA:CW![/I]

:lol: :lol: :lol:











Image
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sat Apr 09, 2016 4:57 am

Image

BreakingNews

Kevin Feige confirms that other Marvel characters will appear in the 2017 Spider-Man movie.

Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige has confirmed that Marvel Studios characters will appear in Sony’s next Spider-Man movie.

“He is in the universe now, and the fun of the universe is that characters go back and forth,” Feige told EW.
The new Spider-Man movie will reboot the franchise as part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, with Tom Holland playing Peter Parker. The deal brokered by Sony and Marvel Studios allowed for Spider-Man to appear to Marvel Studios films and Marvel Studios characters to pop up in Sony’s Spider-Man movies. We already know that Spider-Man will be the first to cross that divide, debuting in Marvel’s Captain America: Civil War, but this is the first confirmation that Marvel Studios characters would be returning the favor so soon.

But which characters will it be visiting Peter Parker? Feige wouldn't say - though Civil War co-director Joe Russo jumped in to suggest the Great Lakes Avengers - but in November 2015, Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans let slip that they’d be returning to Atlanta for filming on another project after Civil War. Does this suggest that both team leaders of Civil War will be appearing in Sony’s new Spider-Man?
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat Apr 09, 2016 7:03 am

Spidey's first Sony/MCU reboot movie shouldn't have other characters in it. That'll take time away from telling his story, no?

:wink:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Sat Apr 09, 2016 9:58 am

verslibre wrote:Spidey's first Sony/MCU reboot movie shouldn't have other characters in it. That'll take time away from telling his story, no?

:wink:

Yeah, sounds like a dumb idea.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7679
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Mon Apr 11, 2016 9:22 pm

Captain America: Civil War MTV Movie Awards trailer:

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/10/ca ... wards-2016
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:34 am

‘Captain America: Civil War’ Was Originally Not a ‘Civil War’ Movie

http://screencrush.com/captain-america-civil-war-different-movie/

Back in 2014, Marvel held a big event in Los Angeles to announce their upcoming slate of films. Marvel President Kevin Feige took the stage and announced the new Captain America movie would be called…Captain America: The Serpent Society? After much confusion (and even a fake logo!), Feige eventually let everyone in on the joke, bringing out Robert Downey, Jr. and Chris Evans to announce Captain America: Civil War. But it turns out there was some truth to that gag. According to the writers of Civil War, Civil War wasn’t always Civil War.

Over the weekend we spoke to Captain America: Civil War star Emily VanCamp who said that after Captain America: The Winter Soldier was released, she was getting word from Marvel about the plot of third Captain America movie, a movie that never happened. We followed up with the writers of Civil War, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, to get the lowdown on this abandoned storyline and how exactly it came to be one of the biggest superhero movies of all time.

Markus clarifies that while this version was the one they were originally mapping out when they were first hired, they never actually got around to writing it. “It never got to draft. We started out working on a Captain America 3 and what would that be, picking up the thread that had been left behind by Winter Soldier. So it was Bucky, it was Steve and the ramifications of digging deeper into that relationship.”

It seems very much like more of a direct sequel to The Winter Soldier that would’ve served as a standalone tale focusing on Cap and Falcon and their search for Bucky. But, Markus says that as they working on their movie, Feige came into their office and just said two words: “Civil War”.

McFeely laughs about it now saying, “Well, that’s a problem. An expensive problem.” Added Markus, “You know that means Robert [Downey, Jr.], right?” Feige, unfazed, asked them to start adapting the current story into Civil War and, as Markus remembers, “many lawyers were called.”

Despite the 180, both agree (and so will you when you see it) that a good portion of their original story survived into what became Civil War. “A lot of that movie is still in this movie,” explains McFeely. “The central theme, even the way [Daniel Bruhl’s character] Zemo is operating, are from that iteration.”

What’s unclear is what gave Feige the motivation to suddenly shift to the Civil War storyline, from a smaller, more intimate film. Did it have anything to do with Warner Bros. starting a superhero war by scheduling Batman vs. Superman on Marvel’s planned release date for what was then just Captain America 3? Said Feige at the time:

We are doing what we’ve always done, which is sticking to our plan and sticking to our vision for the movies going forward and we have a very large vision that we’re working on for Cap 3 and for all the “threes” movies and just because another movie plops down onto one of ours doesn’t mean we are going to alter that. Maybe we should, but we’re not going to.


Warner Bros. scheduled Batman vs. Superman for release on Captain America’s May 6 date back in January of 2014 (only later moving it up to March). Markus and McFeely were officially hired and began working on Captain America 3 in late 2013. While we’re likely to never know the real story, the timeline seems to support the theory that Marvel wanted to answer DC’s challenge with their own Hero vs. Hero blockbuster that was even bigger and Feige quickly made Civil War happen.

We’ll have much more with Markus, McFeely, Emily VanCamp and directors Joe & Anthony Russo (including more on the influence Batman vs. Superman had on the film) as Captain America: Civil War draws closer.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Tue Apr 12, 2016 9:08 am

"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:15 am

verslibre wrote:Spidey's first Sony/MCU reboot movie shouldn't have other characters in it. That'll take time away from telling his story, no?

:wink:


The difference between what Marvel is doing and what DC did in BvS is we have had multiple movies to KNOW and be invested in these characters extremely well. There is no need to worry about backstory when it comes to Iron Man or Captain America. If BvS could have done the same, not put so much time on continuing getting the audience invested in Batman and Superman and Lex, then they could have spent that time telling the story instead.....that is one of the biggest reasons why BvS failed.

And, it is why Marvel's films can be far and away better than the "rush to catch up" films of DC.
User avatar
Monker
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9428
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:33 am

He's talking about Spidey. NOT Iron Man and Captain America, but felching Poni with a bendy straw would probably be most appropriate.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:41 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:He's talking about Spidey. NOT Iron Man and Captain America.


Correct...In Spiderman's reboot, Iron Man and Captain America are supposed to show up.
User avatar
Monker
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9428
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:51 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:He's talking about Spidey. NOT Iron Man and Captain America, but felching Poni with a bendy straw would probably be most appropriate.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:54 am

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:Spidey's first Sony/MCU reboot movie shouldn't have other characters in it. That'll take time away from telling his story, no?

:wink:


The difference between what Marvel is doing and what DC did in BvS is we have had multiple movies to KNOW and be invested in these characters extremely well. There is no need to worry about backstory when it comes to Iron Man or Captain America.


Dude, I'm talking about Spider-Man. They are rebooting the character. The previous five movies are irrelevant in the context of the MCU. Spectacular Spider-Man is a reboot, but not an origin movie.

In other words, ALL the same bullshit that was said regarding Batman (and to an extent, Wonder Woman) appearing in BvS is being swept under Feige's bearskin rug because, of course, it's a Marvel movie, so nobody gives a bung-flava'd Reese's cup 'bout it. :wink:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:31 pm

verslibre wrote:
Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:Spidey's first Sony/MCU reboot movie shouldn't have other characters in it. That'll take time away from telling his story, no?

:wink:


The difference between what Marvel is doing and what DC did in BvS is we have had multiple movies to KNOW and be invested in these characters extremely well. There is no need to worry about backstory when it comes to Iron Man or Captain America.


Dude, I'm talking about Spider-Man. They are rebooting the character. The previous five movies are irrelevant in the context of the MCU. Spectacular Spider-Man is a reboot, but not an origin movie.

In other words, ALL the same bullshit that was said regarding Batman (and to an extent, Wonder Woman) appearing in BvS is being swept under Feige's bearskin rug because, of course, it's a Marvel movie, so nobody gives a bung-flava'd Reese's cup 'bout it. :wink:


Again, the difference is Marvel does not have to spend a bunch of time introducing Iron Man, Captain America AND Spiderman...that is what DC had to do, and introduce Lex, and provide more backstory, and action, etc. What it sounds like to me is Spiderman/Peter Parker gets a lot of screen time. Therefore, it's plenty of time to introduce the new character...and it won't interfere with the others because we already know them from a dozen other movies. He is also supposed to be VERY WELL DONE. So, it sounds more comparable to Wonder Woman than Batman. Marvel can afford to do these things....DC tried and proved they don't know what they hell they are doing.

And, I would get over the comparison because this is seeming more like another billion dollar movie...and I doubt you want to continue the comparisons to BvS.
User avatar
Monker
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9428
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Wed Apr 13, 2016 2:37 am

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:Dude, I'm talking about Spider-Man. They are rebooting the character. The previous five movies are irrelevant in the context of the MCU. Spectacular Spider-Man is a reboot, but not an origin movie.

In other words, ALL the same bullshit that was said regarding Batman (and to an extent, Wonder Woman) appearing in BvS is being swept under Feige's bearskin rug because, of course, it's a Marvel movie, so nobody gives a bung-flava'd Reese's cup 'bout it. :wink:


Again, the difference is Marvel does not have to spend a bunch of time introducing Iron Man, Captain America AND Spiderman...that is what DC had to do, and introduce Lex, and provide more backstory, and action, etc.


No surprise to see this double standard instantly in place. Is the foundation even dry? Spider-Man is now a part of the MCU. New actor. Disregard the events of the previous two films. He's back in high school. He's in Civil War. How does Stark find him, let alone automatically win him over to his side? (In the comic, these characters have all known each other a LONG time.) Or does Parker see a commercial, hear a radio ad or read a tweet sent out by Stark? He's already Spider-Man, and having been Spider-Man, he's thrown into the thick of it. Then his solo film is NOT an origin film. AND other Marvel characters are in it.

Yes, they have to explain a fair bit. And we always knew the focus of BvS was the titular characters' conflict (like a title bout). All they had to do was introduce Batman, which actually doesn't take that much time. Wonder Woman's time is essentially a very important cameo. A new villain is introduced in every CBM, and Civil War has Crossbones AND Baron Zemo (who will probably amount to little more than punching bags) — on top of a dozen heroes fighting each other — so you can't tell me having to introduce Lex was some huge problem they couldn't get around. :lol:

Monker wrote:What it sounds like to me is Spiderman/Peter Parker gets a lot of screen time. Therefore, it's plenty of time to introduce the new character...and it won't interfere with the others because we already know them from a dozen other movies. He is also supposed to be VERY WELL DONE. So, it sounds more comparable to Wonder Woman than Batman. Marvel can afford to do these things....DC tried and proved they don't know what they hell they are doing.


A baseless argument. You're making excuses now. Backpedaling. Superman was introduced in his own solo film. BvS introduces Bruce Wayne into the same universe, and it also reveals the existence of Wonder Woman (who will be explored in detail in her own solo film). All the hair-pulling over other JL members appearing was for naught, because we only glimpse them.

That's why I'm very interested to see how they get a bunch of heroes (who are friends) in Civil War to suddenly fight each other with the bloodthirst of Conan the Barbarian, King Kull and Solomon Kane. After seeing some clips, I'm wondering how forced it is.

Monker wrote:And, I would get over the comparison because this is seeming more like another billion dollar movie...and I doubt you want to continue the comparisons to BvS.


And there you have it, folks. The "made-or-will-make a billion dollars, so it's automatically good" stance. And whatever doesn't make a billion now simply sucks. Total BS.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:20 am

verslibre wrote:No surprise to see this double standard instantly in place.


It's NOT a double standard. Every character within BvS was new. Even Superman only had one film before it. In Civil War, every major character has multiple films so we know and are invest in them. It's a completely different situation. One allows good story telling - the other doesn't, and didn't.

Is the foundation even dry? Spider-Man is now a part of the MCU. New actor. Disregard the events of the previous two films. He's back in high school. He's in Civil War. How does Stark find him, let alone automatically win him over to his side? (In the comic, these characters have all known each other a LONG time.) Or does Parker see a commercial, hear a radio ad or read a tweet sent out by Stark? He's already Spider-Man, and having been Spider-Man, he's thrown into the thick of it. Then his solo film is NOT an origin film. AND other Marvel characters are in it.


It looks like we have at least a half hour of film time of Peter Parker and Spiderman to find out. For BvS, that half hour was split between about five different characters.

Yes, they have to explain a fair bit. And we always knew the focus of BvS was the titular characters' conflict (like a title bout). All they had to do was introduce Batman, which actually doesn't take that much time. Wonder Woman's time is essentially a very important cameo. A new villain is introduced in every CBM, and Civil War has Crossbones AND Baron Zemo (who will probably amount to little more than punching bags) — on top of a dozen heroes fighting each other — so you can't tell me having to introduce Lex was some huge problem they couldn't get around. :lol:


You are simply in denial BvS sucked because they could not tell a good story in the amount of time given. That's truly the bottom line of it.

That's why I'm very interested to see how they get a bunch of heroes (who are friends) in Civil War to suddenly fight each other with the bloodthirst of Conan the Barbarian, King Kull and Solomon Kane. After seeing some clips, I'm wondering how forced it is.


There has been tension building between Iron Man and Captain America from the start. Now introduce Bucky into the mix...he's obviously going to be framed for something he didn't do, and he has his past to account for. CA defends him. Then there is the political point of "reining them in" which Iron Man supports and CA doesn't. So, sides are drawn. Doesn't seem "forced" at all to me, unless Luck and Anikan are cameod.

And there you have it, folks. The "made-or-will-make a billion dollars, so it's automatically good" stance. And whatever doesn't make a billion now simply sucks. Total BS.


No, BvS failed because it is a bad movie. It should have easily passed one billion in sales. Even WB said they would be disappointed if it didn't reach one billion in sales. IMO, CW is going to benefit from BvS failure...because people are wanting a film to deliver what BvS didn't....Civil War can do that.
User avatar
Monker
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9428
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Wed Apr 13, 2016 5:05 am

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:No surprise to see this double standard instantly in place.


It's NOT a double standard. Every character within BvS was new. Even Superman only had one film before it. In Civil War, every major character has multiple films so we know and are invest in them. It's a completely different situation. One allows good story telling - the other doesn't, and didn't.


Nope, wrong again. Black Panther (who is getting his own movie later) and Spider-Man (ditto) are "new to the MCU." Say that aloud, it rhymes! :lol:

Enough with your "good storytelling" mumbo-jumbo!

Monker wrote:It looks like we have at least a half hour of film time of Peter Parker and Spiderman to find out. For BvS, that half hour was split between about five different characters.


More spin. More bologna. Five? Did you watch the movie?

Monker wrote:You are simply in denial BvS sucked because they could not tell a good story in the amount of time given. That's truly the bottom line of it.


There's no denial to speak of because I like the film. If it's grossed 800 million, apparently more than a handful of people like it worldwide. The story viewed just fine to me. I had no issue piecing it together. People talk like it's Lynch's Dune or something. My #1 complaint has to do with Doomsday's look and my #2 complaint is their leaving a Clark Kent scene out of the theatrical cut.

I don't think you watched the movie. Rather, I think you followed the other kids into the RT hate-wagon. I wonder why the scores on Fandango, IMDb and Metacritic reflect a 7/10 average and not the 3/10 that RT reflects. (The USER rating on RT is also 70%.)

Monker wrote:There has been tension building between Iron Man and Captain America from the start.


Superficial tension due to Stark's outspokenness. Like the guy who doesn't like the class clown. Cap has no issue dealing with other moderners like Falcon and Widow.

Monker wrote:Now introduce Bucky into the mix...he's obviously going to be framed for something he didn't do, and he has his past to account for. CA defends him. Then there is the political point of "reining them in" which Iron Man supports and CA doesn't. So, sides are drawn. Doesn't seem "forced" at all to me, unless Luck and Anikan are cameod.


"Luck & Anikan Starkiller"? Hey, it's Disney, you never know. :lol:

Monker wrote:No, BvS failed because it is a bad movie. It should have easily passed one billion in sales. Even WB said they would be disappointed if it didn't reach one billion in sales. IMO, CW is going to benefit from BvS failure...because people are wanting a film to deliver what BvS didn't....Civil War can do that.


Once you bother seeing the movie, you'll notice BvS dares to go where other CBMs don't. That's the reason it's not at 1B. If people want to see Superman bringing a kitty down from a tree, they can always revisit that moment in Superman. How conveniently they forget, however, that in Superman II and Superman Returns, Supes commits acts that effectively negate, if temporarily, his position of power as Earth's chief defender, which is more out of character, IMO, than anything you can accuse Snyder's Superman of. Shit, so he killed Zod. You'd rather he'd been off on an intergalactic field trip and let Zod's Death Squad plow right over Earth and "re-sod" it? Or enslave Earthlings? :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Death By Stereo

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests