Marvel Movie thread

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat May 07, 2016 1:22 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Turan is a fucking snooze. He represents the worst in pedantic criticism. Edelstein is high-minded but at least entertaining. In five years time, all long-form criticism will be dead.


Yeah, all reviews will consist of brain food like #C1V1LWAR was fuckingawesOOOMe yo! Go see it ASAP #TEAMIRONMAN #FUCKDC
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Sat May 07, 2016 3:25 am

verslibre wrote:
Monker wrote:LOL...frankly, this review read INCREDIBLY nit-picky as if he is going out of his way to find something to whine about.


More evidence that you are completely full of shit. The review's an overall positive one. He's just not afraid to point out what others are too busy gushing over to notice.


And, you didn't read my next sentence after what you quoted where I said this review wasn't even that negative.

He is being nit-picky and saying there is a chance that if you haven't seen the earlier films you may not get this one....and then mentions BvS and Batman. He is GUESSING how other people "may" react and not presenting his own perspective. That's crap and is looking for a reason to be critical. So, it's not something 'he noticed', it is something he is inventing inside of his own head. that OTHERS may feel.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 10238
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat May 07, 2016 3:30 am

Whatever you say, buddy. Btw, don't pretend I didn't read your entire post. I'll toss you a life preserver as soon as I finish my coffee.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Sat May 07, 2016 1:14 pm

verslibre wrote:Whatever you say, buddy. Btw, don't pretend I didn't read your entire post. I'll toss you a life preserver as soon as I finish my coffee.


If you don't quote my words out of context, I won't assume you didn't read the entire post.

I think you are just jealous that Civil War is going to be as big of a hit that BvS should have been. Forbes had an article that projected Civil War as making 1.2 billion worldwide. It's already over 300 million and hasn't even had it's first weekend of US sales. Unlike BvS, Civil War has a huge positive vibe going with it while entering it's first weekend. Other than X-Men, there doesn't seem to be much to compete with it until Independence Day comes out.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 10238
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sun May 08, 2016 12:38 am

You're way off base, Monker. V has, numerous times, pimped Winter Soldier and expressed much excitement about the Russo Brothers taking over Civil War. As great as Marvel movies are, pointing out the flaws is frowned upon within the MCU fan community.

Statements like being jealous are ludicrous and fanboy talk. Strip away everything and any influence surrounding entertainment and it comes down to whether you like it or not.

I can't tell you how many movies I hated that I so desperately wanted to like where I was flat out disappointed with that the rest of the world loved. BO money or critical reaction will never change how I feel about a movie. Films like BvS are no exception, especially when we live in a cyber world where Internet fan communities are at war with one another. In the end it's all hot air and water under a bridge. Passion for characters is one thing and dislike is welcomed, but jealously? Dumb.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2680
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sun May 08, 2016 1:41 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:You're way off base, Monker. V has, numerous times, pimped Winter Soldier and expressed much excitement about the Russo Brothers taking over Civil War.


Exactly, but since acknowledging that will derail his absurd notion about "jealousy" (LOL), he conveniently leaves it out.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sun May 08, 2016 1:47 am

Monker wrote:Forbes had an article that projected Civil War as making 1.2 billion worldwide.


Nobody has said otherwise. I assume you're referring to Mark Hughes. I read all his articles.

Monker wrote:Other than X-Men, there doesn't seem to be much to compete with it until Independence Day comes out.


Days of Future Past didn't make as much money as Fox hoped it would. It's entirely up in the air with Apocalypse, but I don't sense the same buzz for it except from fans of the franchise.

ID:R doesn't come out until 6/24, by which point CW will have collected most of its earnings.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Sun May 08, 2016 11:33 am

verslibre wrote:
The_Noble_Cause wrote:Turan is a fucking snooze. He represents the worst in pedantic criticism. Edelstein is high-minded but at least entertaining. In five years time, all long-form criticism will be dead.


Yeah, all reviews will consist of brain food like #C1V1LWAR was fuckingawesOOOMe yo! Go see it ASAP #TEAMIRONMAN #FUCKDC


No. I mean more along the lines of Peter Travers in Rolling Stone. Accessible and concise. Typically, I read Travers, Kurt Loder, Edelstein, Rex Reed, and a few others. AO Scott in the NY Times is good. I always enjoyed reading Ebert, even when I disagreed.

Here's an example of a terrible review. This a recent review in the NYTimes of Jungle Book. The critic, Manohla Dargis, pretty much just rants about environmentalism and colonialism and discusses everything EXCEPT for the movie itself.
"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: 14196
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Sun May 08, 2016 9:55 pm

Saw Civil War yesterday in Imax 3d. Great movie. I did think the way Spidey was brought in was kinda DC style and weak. I guess it's understandable considering the last minute deal between Marvel and Sony though. Holland nailed Peter/ Spidey. The fight scenes also had that stop motion look. Almost like a strobe light effect, dunno if it was just my showing or what. Overall, it's a great movie, they crammed a lot into 2 and 1/2 hours. Can't decide if this was better than TWS or not. Definitely more action in Civil War, but I loved the way TWS was able to focus on Cap and Bucky.
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: 7843
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Sun May 08, 2016 10:34 pm

RedWingFan wrote:Saw Civil War yesterday in Imax 3d. Great movie. I did think the way Spidey was brought in was kinda DC style and weak. I guess it's understandable considering the last minute deal between Marvel and Sony though. Holland nailed Peter/ Spidey. The fight scenes also had that stop motion look. Almost like a strobe light effect, dunno if it was just my showing or what. Overall, it's a great movie, they crammed a lot into 2 and 1/2 hours. Can't decide if this was better than TWS or not. Definitely more action in Civil War, but I loved the way TWS was able to focus on Cap and Bucky.


How does it compare to Batman vs. Superman?
"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: 14196
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Mon May 09, 2016 1:08 am

RedWingFan wrote: I did think the way Spidey was brought in was kinda DC style and weak.


Feige scrapped Cap3 as a solo feature and pitted the hero's and cast against each other. He took a page out of DC's book there so it makes sense that Spidey played the role of Wonder Woman in CW (Marvel's equivalent strategy of course.) I read Captain Marvel will make an appearance in Infinity War, so we'll see how they bring her in for next time.

Holland nailed Peter/ Spidey.


I think the casting has been kind to Spider-Man fans over the years. Regardless of the characters portrayal in all 3 cinematic versions, it seems Maguire, Garfield and now Holland (still have yet to see CW) has done Spidey right in the ability to respect what the character was all about so that's a plus. Holland is at the right acting age for classic Spidey so even with the 3 versions, Holland's could overtake Maguire's interpretation with that single tweek to the casting.

Can't decide if this was better than TWS or not. Definitely more action in Civil War, but I loved the way TWS was able to focus on Cap and Bucky.


A lot of my buddies loved CW, but they are still claiming TWS to be Marvel's strongest film and it comes down to (like you said) just a tighter focus of attention to two characters that drives the point of the movie. They said CW has a lot of action, but it's mainly for the sake of it and to focus on each character's abilities rather than have a singular focus. They couldn't agree if the movie was meant to be a Cap3, Avengers3, IM4 or a prologue to Homecoming flick. CW is a hit, though. Marvel just knows how to give at the right places and let the flaws dissipate in the background.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2680
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Mon May 09, 2016 4:16 am

RedWingFan wrote:Saw Civil War yesterday in Imax 3d. Great movie. I did think the way Spidey was brought in was kinda DC style and weak.


"Spider-Man is amazing in Captain America: Civil War, but has no business being in it" :lol

http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/7/11612616/spider-man-captain-america-civil-war-marvel-cinematic-universe

If it can't be more obvious Marvel took everything they had and threw it into the kitchen sink for this movie, aka Avengers III, I don't know what to tell you.

RedWingFan wrote:The fight scenes also had that stop motion look. Almost like a strobe light effect, dunno if it was just my showing or what.


Thank you for confirming this. It's not just you. All the TV spots convey action that looks sped-up. Some bad editing in the fight between Bucky and Stark/13/Widow, too.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Mon May 09, 2016 4:20 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:A lot of my buddies loved CW, but they are still claiming TWS to be Marvel's strongest film and it comes down to (like you said) just a tighter focus of attention to two characters that drives the point of the movie. They said CW has a lot of action, but it's mainly for the sake of it and to focus on each character's abilities rather than have a singular focus. They couldn't agree if the movie was meant to be a Cap3, Avengers3, IM4 or a prologue to Homecoming flick. CW is a hit, though. Marvel just knows how to give at the right places and let the flaws dissipate in the background.


I read something that confirms the Hail Mary that Turan wrote about in his review. I'll just watch it for the action. I already know it won't be as good as TWS. I haven't seen it, but Spidey seems to have exactly the same amount of time as Wonder Woman, which is kind of funny (I wonder what Monker thinks about that). :lol:

That choppy strobe action, though...ugh. Looks like they didn't one-up the warehouse fight!
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Mon May 09, 2016 6:52 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:Saw Civil War yesterday in Imax 3d. Great movie. I did think the way Spidey was brought in was kinda DC style and weak. I guess it's understandable considering the last minute deal between Marvel and Sony though. Holland nailed Peter/ Spidey. The fight scenes also had that stop motion look. Almost like a strobe light effect, dunno if it was just my showing or what. Overall, it's a great movie, they crammed a lot into 2 and 1/2 hours. Can't decide if this was better than TWS or not. Definitely more action in Civil War, but I loved the way TWS was able to focus on Cap and Bucky.


How does it compare to Batman vs. Superman?

Awe geeze man, there is no comparison. This movie hits the throttle from the start. Story flowed nicely. Running time was 2 1/2 hours but felt like half of that. It probably won't have as big an opening weekend, but it won't have the 70% drop that B v S had. I'll guarantee you that. This'll have repeat viewings galore. This movie is on par with The Winter Soldier though. Great flick.
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: 7843
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Mon May 09, 2016 11:23 am

RedWingFan wrote:This movie is on par with The Winter Soldier though. Great flick.


All I needed to hear.
"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: 14196
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Tue May 10, 2016 3:08 am

RedWingFan wrote:
The_Noble_Cause wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:Saw Civil War yesterday in Imax 3d. Great movie. I did think the way Spidey was brought in was kinda DC style and weak. I guess it's understandable considering the last minute deal between Marvel and Sony though. Holland nailed Peter/ Spidey. The fight scenes also had that stop motion look. Almost like a strobe light effect, dunno if it was just my showing or what. Overall, it's a great movie, they crammed a lot into 2 and 1/2 hours. Can't decide if this was better than TWS or not. Definitely more action in Civil War, but I loved the way TWS was able to focus on Cap and Bucky.


How does it compare to Batman vs. Superman?

Awe geeze man, there is no comparison. This movie hits the throttle from the start. Story flowed nicely. Running time was 2 1/2 hours but felt like half of that. It probably won't have as big an opening weekend, but it won't have the 70% drop that B v S had. I'll guarantee you that. This'll have repeat viewings galore. This movie is on par with The Winter Soldier though. Great flick.


Civil War's opening weekend did pass BvS:

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/9/11636890/ca ... box-office

Captain America: Civil War’s box office success has made it the summer blockbuster to beat
Updated by Alex Abad-Santos on May 9, 2016, 10:00 a.m. ET @alex_abads alex@vox.com

Captain America: Civil War, Marvel's grand Avenger versus Avenger melee flick, kicked off the 2016 summer movie season by setting a pretty massive box office standard. The film brought home the fifth-largest opening weekend of all time, according to Box Office Mojo, earning an estimated $181.79 million.

That's huge.

To put that in perspective, the first two Captain America films — 2011's The First Avenger and 2014's The Winter Soldier — opened to $65 million and $95 million, respectively. Civil War's opening weekend was Marvel's biggest debut for a solo superhero movie (although technically it features a boatload of Avengers, as well as the introductions of both Spider-Man and Black Panther to the Marvel Cinematic Universe); and only Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Jurassic World, The Avengers, and Avengers: Age of Ultron have outpaced its opening weekend.

Civil War also beat the other big superhero versus superhero movie of 2016, Batman v Superman ($166 million according to Box Office Mojo), by about $15 million in domestic opening weekend ticket sales. What industry insiders will be looking at is whether Civil War can continue its momentum in the coming weeks and possibly pass the $1 billion mark (the movie reportedly had a $250 million filming budget, which doesn't include the millions spent on marketing and promotion).

For Marvel, Civil War's big weekend offers a jolt of confidence that the company can steadily grow its solo superhero franchises. The total domestic gross for The Winter Soldier, Civil War's predecessor, was $259 million — a figure that Civil War will almost certainly surpass. Furthermore, Civil War's box office success bodes well for Marvel's upcoming films centered on Spider-Man and Black Panther, two characters who were introduced in Civil War and lauded as some of the best parts of the film.

In its second weekend, Civil War will be facing off against the quasi-financial thriller Money Monster, starring Julia Roberts and George Clooney, and the horror film The Darkness, anchored by Kevin Bacon — both open on Friday.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 10238
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue May 10, 2016 3:17 am

Monker wrote:In its second weekend, Civil War will be facing off against the quasi-financial thriller Money Monster, starring Julia Roberts and George Clooney, and the horror film The Darkness, anchored by Kevin Bacon — both open on Friday.


In other words, very light competition.
"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: 14196
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Monker » Tue May 10, 2016 2:04 pm

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
Monker wrote:In its second weekend, Civil War will be facing off against the quasi-financial thriller Money Monster, starring Julia Roberts and George Clooney, and the horror film The Darkness, anchored by Kevin Bacon — both open on Friday.


In other words, very light competition.


Yep...that's what I said earlier.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 10238
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Wed May 11, 2016 2:11 am

Spoiler filled review and reasons why Civil War succeeded and B v S failed. This goes into a lot of detail into the plot of Civil War. So go see it and then read this. Curious to know what everyone thinks of it. It explained my thoughts perfectly.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/ ... c0b57a46bb
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: 7843
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Thu May 12, 2016 3:32 am

I saw Captain America/Avengers: Civil War last night. I liked it a lot. It's a cool movie full of battles. I likened it to an Avengers Annual back in the day, the same way I likened Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice to a modern graphic novel that could've appeared from 2000-on.

I was surprised by the number of similarities between the two movies. They both share a character who uses the word "shit" (though Hawkeye's is forced), they both share a scene with a woman who talks of tragedy in a foreign country, they both feature some gritty fighting (BvS emerges the clear victor), and they feature fighting heroes, one of whom develops a serious beef with another major character.

For all the shit BvS gets, the movies share a lot. Like some jumps to different scenes with jarring (nonexistent) transitions. Except in BvS, they really aren't any more jarring than those in Civil War. The changeover from Wakanda to Stark's forum in the US was a serious coin-flip that could've been smoothed out. Same for Cap suddenly finding Bucky's apartment, and the eventual introduction of Spider-Man.

That's another thing. For two years, we had to read about "too many characters" in BvS. Which is total bullshit. In Civil War, there are so many characters, you actually get the sides mixed up in the big airport throwdown. No joke, I forgot Wanda was on Cap's side for a few. Hilarious. Same with Ant-Man. Must be the tech suits. It was all nicely choreographed, but sometimes you wonder how come characters like Hawkeye and Widow aren't drop-kicked straight away like ping pong balls. It was still enjoyable, but the first half feels like more like posturing and the second half feels like an actual brawl.

And Spider-Man. Poor Spider-Man. The guy was totally wedged in with salad tongs dunked in Vaseline. There was really no reason for him to be in Berlin, going from clobbering street criminals to facing off against seasoned combatants. Stark took advantage of him wholesale. Anyone who sees it any other way is a clueless dipshit.

I'll tell you one gimmick BvS didn't indulge that Civil War relies on in great doses: shaky cam. It's like they were trying to compete with The Bourne Supremacy. It wasn't necessary, but there was a lot of it. It was shaky and choppy and the editing wasn't always on point. It simply would've been better if it were a little less shaky. I like shaky, I think it adds some grit, but they really overdid it.

Another funny thing is how quickly Widow recovers. In BvS, people harped on Batman's warehouse fight taking place soon after the titular confrontation. In Civil War, Widow escapes a truck after Crossbones (a great villain who is quickly wasted, per MCU guidelines) drops a grenade in there with her. She sustains a close-range concussive blast, but moments later is throwing kicks and punches and moving like nothing happened. :lol:

Oh, and Black Panther stole the show. Spidey should've been written out. (It would've made more sense for Daredevil to be in there.) Panther should've gotten more action (though he did get a lot).

Along with Black Panther, Scarlet Witch, Ant-Man and the Vision also provided the biggest "wow" moments with some truly gnarly and comics-faithful displays of power that I'm shocked were not (for once) spoiled by the trailers.

Altogether, an enjoyable film chock full o' action in spite of a flimsy plot. Somewhere between 7.5-8/10, and definitely better than Age of Ultron, but not on the same level as The Winter Soldier.

P.S. Maybe it's just me, but how does a film like Civil War leave out Nick Fury, who was originally supposed to be in it? I didn't mind Hulk and Thor being left out (in Thor's case, it's for the best). Not to mention that Agent Phil Coulson hasn't been in a major MCU film since The Avengers.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Thu May 12, 2016 10:42 am

RedWingFan wrote:Spoiler filled review and reasons why Civil War succeeded and B v S failed. This goes into a lot of detail into the plot of Civil War. So go see it and then read this. Curious to know what everyone thinks of it. It explained my thoughts perfectly.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/ ... c0b57a46bb


Mr. Tassi is off the mark on a number of things.

One of these conflicts has been years in the making, while the other was developed over the course of an hour, at best. We have almost a decade invested into these specific Marvel characters at this point, so when Iron Man turns against Captain America after being allies for so long, it actually means something. We feel the weight of that conflict, while in Batman V. Superman, these are characters we essentially just met, and the idea that they would be slugging it out with each other almost has to rely on some sort of stupid misunderstanding rather than years of character development that’s led to this point.


In order to make some kind of point, Derek, I mean Paul, ignores the fact that a a year-and-a-half passes between Bruce Wayne's first glimpse of Superman and Zod — and the resultant destruction of their battle — and the days that step down to their confrontation. (There is large text on the screen to let viewers know. Maybe Paul shouldn't have been looking at his phone at the time.) If it isn't painfully obvious to Tassi, he's a plum idiot. It doesn't matter that "we" (the audience) "just met them" any more than it mattered when we met Indiana Jones and Belloq at the beginning of Raiders of the Lost Ark, and yet we somehow perfectly understood how those two guys were rivals and enemies, not friends. :o

Also, what else was "developed over the course of an hour, at best" over on the MCU's court? The conflict between Daredevil and Punisher (in Season 2 of DD's show). And I've heard nothing negative with regard to that.

That’s the other great thing about Civil War. The conflict actually makes sense, and you can see both sides of the argument. While I think Captain America is on the “more right” side, as it certainly does not seem like a good idea to simply let the UN dictate precisely what the Avengers do or do not do, Tony’s side isn’t nonsensical. He feels crushing guilt from all these events, and while the Sokovia Accords themselves are flawed (watch them get thrown out the window the second Thanos shows up), it’s his way of trying to do something, anything to absolve himself of shame. And if something goes wrong the next time, maybe he can blame the UN instead of himself.


Actually, Stark comes off like a complete asshole. Stark's guilt bubbles over but he wants the other Avengers to atone for his sins. He wants to placate his sudden penchant for shoegazing by getting everyone to agree with him. When Rogers doesn't, Tony essentially becomes a bully. THEN he does something that not only doesn't fit the already-overstaffed and overstuffed roster of the film, it's outright assholish. He recruits Peter Parker to exploit him for his abilities. Peter is now his little ho-bag in return for perks to come. He takes a street-level teenager and throws him into the midst of a transcontinental conflict.

The fact is Black Panther's role was upgraded and then downsized again in order to wedge Spider-Man into the movie. They should've just kept things as they were. As it is, the movie is essentially a series of battles and there were plenty of players. By the time you get to the "threesome" (IYKWIM), you don't care because the airport battle's in your rearview.

Tony’s side of the story is particularly fascinating. It’s the guilt of the deaths combined with a recent split from Pepper, and just when you think he and Captain America get past the Sokovia spat, the film pulls a hard left to reveal that a brainwashed Bucky killed Stark’s parents years ago, and Captain America kept some of the details covered up.

Now that is an effective reason to have a superhero vs. superhero brawl. Captain America tries to explain to Tony that Bucky didn’t know what he was doing, but Stark just says “I don’t care, he killed my mom.” That kind of motivation works. That’s what creates believable conflict with actual stakes to it.


:lol: Except now it comes down to "Bucky killed my parents! And you knew!" "But it wasn't him! He was programmed by Hydra!" "I'm gonna fuck him up!" "No, WE are gonna fuck you up! He's my friend!" (And this is too-conveniently staged by one Helmut Zemo with too-convenient security cam footage that somehow was able to record the event on a desolate road that sends Tony over the edge.) They battle. Iron Man suddenly can't take down two ground-based guys. (What happened to the projectiles that fire out of his retractable shoulder launchers?) So you have this forced drama that kind of leads nowhere when it suddenly...ends, with no resolution.

Oh, but wait. There IS a Disney-fied resolution. Steve sends Tony a FedEx package with a burner phone and a "Let's be pals again" note, completely deflating the fiasco we just witnessed.

In contrast, we have the entirely incoherent struggle of Batman V. Superman. It starts out the same way, with Bruce Wayne believing Superman is dangerous due to the innocents that die in his wake, and because if he ever turned against humanity, he’d be impossible to stop. The problem is that his solution is to just straight up murder Superman, which, even if this is a new version of Batman, goes against everything we’ve ever known about the character.


Wow. This guy, this "author"...is an imbecile. It's not about "straight-up murdering Superman," it's about eliminating a threat nobody has a leash on. It's about fear of the unknown. It's about eradicating something alien you feel is a threat to those who cannot defend. It's only when Bruce recognizes the humanity in Clark/Kal/Superman that he realizes he's doing the wrong thing. If he were Tony Stark, he would've just kept going and impaled Superman through the larynx.

It’s the opposite in Batman V. Superman. This is a movie that feels overcrowded with just three heroes. While I may have had no issue with the Gal Gadot’s version of Wonder Woman as she was presented, the fact remained that the movie did not give her an actual reason to be in the film. She felt tacked-on, and her biggest moments include opening a bunch of email attachments to discover other future JLA members, and participating in the Doomsday fight in a way that negated most of the conflict they were trying to set up (If Wonder Woman can chop up Doomsday with her magic sword, why exactly do they need this Kryptonite spear?). The film was already bursting at the seams with just Clark and Bruce, but Diana Prince was extra baggage by herself. I can’t imagine how a full JLA film would feel at this point.


Well, well. Finally, this guy exposes himself. Can you say "shill"? He must have stock in Disney. Wonder Woman has no reason to be in BvS? She feels "tacked on"? She can just "chop up Doomsday" with her magic sword? Sure, the same way I guess Scarlet Witch should've been able to levitate Crossbones in the other direction in order to avoid the destruction caused by the bomb he was using to blow himself up. But then you wouldn't have a pissed-off King T'Chaka speaking at the U.N., in order to get blown up so that T'Challa can go after Bucky. It's called story, dickwad! :roll: :lol:

And Spider-Man has a reason to be in Civil War, though they wrote him OUT and then wrote him back IN? Come on. Spider-Man was there for one reason only: to sell tickets. To reboot him.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Thu May 12, 2016 11:34 am

Keep throwing spoilers out there. Something I was trying to avoid. Glad you liked the movie as you said. Nice effort in trying to rip it to shreads. Critic and audience opinion won't change though. Nice job. Happy? Lol
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: 7843
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Thu May 12, 2016 11:42 am

RedWingFan wrote:Keep throwing spoilers out there. Something I was trying to avoid. Glad you liked the movie as you said. Nice effort in trying to rip it to shreads. Critic and audience opinion won't change though. Nice job. Happy? Lol


Where did I try to "rip" Civil War to shreds?

Oh, you mean I pointed out some things that you'd rather I left alone, because you perceive it as a classic on par with All The President's Men? :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Thu May 12, 2016 7:00 pm

I like the movie, but this really does sum it up. :lol:

Image
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Abitaman » Fri May 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Saw the movie last weekend and it was pretty good, I really like it. Was going post about it then, but been busy. Actually had somethings that were bothering me about it, so I went and saw it again. Not as good the second time around, but still liked it. Actually got bored the second time. Still would recommend it to everyone. When I first saw it, it was my second favorite Marvel movie, behind the 1st Avengers. Now after second viewing It has moved down on the list, behind 1st Avengers, Winter Solider and 1st Ironman.

I will try not to go into detail about any one scene, but if you have not seen the movie, you have been warned.

What I liked.

1) the airport fight where Black Widow and Hawkeye are called out for pulling punches.

2) BW change of heart at end of airport scene

3) Antman/Hawkeye arrow shot at airport

4) The debut of Giant man (is that the right name, I can not remember)

5) Black Panther, good set up for his movie

6) SW still learning her powers

7) The surrender of CA, Bucky and BP and the end of chase.

8) The new Spiderman, too early to tell if he will be my favorite, but off to a very good start.

What I did not like

1) The chase scene between BP, CA and Bucky, they were out running the cars

2) The shaky cam, felt like they were trying to out do Zach to show it should be done, and it was worse, really took away from the scenes.

3) The new Spiderman, how did Tony find him and find out who he is. Peter Parker the whole Tony/Peter thing felt awkward and forced.
A waste of Spiderman, felt like he was thrown in to show they now have him in their universe and to even the sides out.

4) The villian, while he was set up with good motivation, felt too much like the Luthor/Bats/Supes rehash.

5) A lot of jumping around, can understand why they did it for time, but I would have like to see more detail of things. BVS suffered from the same thing.

6) Antman meeting the Avenger was goofy...and when he grew big, it seemed like he was drunk and moving in slow motion. The disorientation of the change could make him seem drunk, but they took it to far

7) IP falling from the sky and Tony could not save him. When Tony saved the people from the air plane (about 10) and could not save IP.

8) Everyone is mad and at each others throat, but can joke and cut up. This movie should have been way more serous that whatn it was. We are talking friends going against each other. It all seemed forced. Marvel said this was their Empire Strikes back, but it was more Return Of The Jedi.

9) The whole Captain America love intrest seemed out of place, it is good that he is moving forward in the modern world, but this seemed forced, as more of a way to have her helop Cap and info for him. On a side note, it is good to have a female that can take care of herself.

10) Bucky killed Stark's parents, how convenient. More reason to fight. Seemed to convenient!!! Reason to push Tony over the edge and not listen. Why kill the other Winter Soldiers? I must have missed the explanation or the reasoning in both times I saw the movie.

11) The movie, like the rest movies and getting more and more kiddy, not too much yet, but they are waling a thin line, and this one does better than most Marvel movies.]

Still liked the movie, these were little things that bothered me.
Eric, the Abitaman
Abitaman
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4675
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 8:06 pm
Location: NO LONGER in West TN, now in East TN's beautiful Smokey Mountains

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat May 14, 2016 1:51 am

Abitaman wrote:Saw the movie last weekend and it was pretty good, I really like it. Was going post about it then, but been busy. Actually had somethings that were bothering me about it, so I went and saw it again. Not as good the second time around, but still liked it. Actually got bored the second time. Still would recommend it to everyone. When I first saw it, it was my second favorite Marvel movie, behind the 1st Avengers. Now after second viewing It has moved down on the list, behind 1st Avengers, Winter Solider and 1st Ironman.


No, not as good as Iron Man and The Winter Soldier. It has a lot more action, but other elements weigh it down.

Abitaman wrote:3) Antman/Hawkeye arrow shot at airport


That was cool. I recognized it as the cover of Avengers #223: http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/hawkeyeiconic3.jpg

Abitaman wrote:5) Black Panther, good set up for his movie


Stole the show, AFAIC. Even with Spidey there.

Abitaman wrote:What I did not like

1) The chase scene between BP, CA and Bucky, they were out running the cars


Steve and Bucky are super serum-enabled. BP pumped up his sneakers. :lol:

Abitaman wrote:2) The shaky cam, felt like they were trying to out do Zach to show it should be done, and it was worse, really took away from the scenes.


It was awful. Shaky + jittery + too many cuts. Really took away from what would have been some amazing stuff. Didn't one-up Batman's warehouse fight, though.

Abitaman wrote:3) The new Spiderman, how did Tony find him and find out who he is. Peter Parker the whole Tony/Peter thing felt awkward and forced.
A waste of Spiderman, felt like he was thrown in to show they now have him in their universe and to even the sides out.


It was beyond forced. The movie would've worked perfectly fine (better) with BP's role beefed up.

Abitaman wrote:4) The villian, while he was set up with good motivation, felt too much like the Luthor/Bats/Supes rehash.


There are quite a few similarities between BvS and CW. Almost to the point I think Feige has a mole over in WB. :lol:

Abitaman wrote:5) A lot of jumping around, can understand why they did it for time, but I would have like to see more detail of things. BVS suffered from the same thing.


Ditto.

Abitaman wrote:7) IP falling from the sky and Tony could not save him. When Tony saved the people from the air plane (about 10) and could not save IP.


Good catch, dude. I forgot all about that in Iron Man 3, because I've tried to bleach it out of my brain time and time again. But yeah, THE Iron Man not being able to catch Rhodes is pretty fishy. Just like Quicksilver dying. Salmon City!

Abitaman wrote:8) Everyone is mad and at each others throat, but can joke and cut up. This movie should have been way more serous that whatn it was. We are talking friends going against each other. It all seemed forced. Marvel said this was their Empire Strikes back, but it was more Return Of The Jedi.


:lol:

Abitaman wrote:10) Bucky killed Stark's parents, how convenient. More reason to fight. Seemed to convenient!!! Reason to push Tony over the edge and not listen. Why kill the other Winter Soldiers? I must have missed the explanation or the reasoning in both times I saw the movie.


It reminded me of when we learned Dooku had once been Yoda's padawan. Everything just has to be connected somehow.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby RedWingFan » Sat May 14, 2016 3:41 am

Was the airplane flying at about 200 ft like War Machine was?
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: 7843
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Abitaman » Sat May 14, 2016 4:47 am

RedWingFan wrote:Was the airplane flying at about 200 ft like War Machine was?


No, but it looked like IP was a lot higher up than 200 feet. Looked he was up a cloud level. There was a shot were Falcon and IM where trying to save him, that was shown around 200 to 500 feet. But IP fell a long time before that.
Eric, the Abitaman
Abitaman
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4675
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 8:06 pm
Location: NO LONGER in West TN, now in East TN's beautiful Smokey Mountains

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby Abitaman » Sat May 14, 2016 4:52 am

RedWingFan wrote:.

It’s the opposite in Batman V. Superman. This is a movie that feels overcrowded with just three heroes. While I may have had no issue with the Gal Gadot’s version of Wonder Woman as she was presented, the fact remained that the movie did not give her an actual reason to be in the film. She felt tacked-on, and her biggest moments include opening a bunch of email attachments to discover other future JLA members, and participating in the Doomsday fight in a way that negated most of the conflict they were trying to set up (If Wonder Woman can chop up Doomsday with her magic sword, why exactly do they need this Kryptonite spear?). The film was already bursting at the seams with just Clark and Bruce, but Diana Prince was extra baggage by herself. I can’t imagine how a full JLA film would feel at this point.


Wonder Woman's sword had no lasting effect on Doomsday. She cut his hand off and he grew another. Only the Kryptonite would poison the big D and keep him from regenerating, thus killing him.
Eric, the Abitaman
Abitaman
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4675
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 8:06 pm
Location: NO LONGER in West TN, now in East TN's beautiful Smokey Mountains

Re: Marvel Movie thread

Postby verslibre » Sat May 14, 2016 5:17 am

Yeah, that guy's an idiot. :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
User avatar
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests