Moderator: Andrew
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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oaas4zEUxdY
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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COvnHv42T-A
The_Noble_Cause wrote:Wish Matt Vaughn continued directing series after First Class.
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...
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
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.
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
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.
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
verslibre wrote:Benedict will be on Kimmel on the 12th to introduce the very trailer for Doctor Strange!
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?
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?
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
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.
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?
YoungJRNYfan wrote:He's talking about Spidey. NOT Iron Man and Captain America.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
verslibre wrote: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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Monker wrote:There has been tension building between Iron Man and Captain America from the start.
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.
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.
Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests