Page 6 of 47 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 702
  1. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OopsIdiditagain View Post
    I didn't know people had a problem with rock songs in trailers. I thought it was just a case of directors from the same generation putting music they like in trailers.
    Apparently it's a very valid critique of...only Marvel movies.

  2. #77
    Ultimate Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    10,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    Eternals was not stand alone. they marketed the movie based on the back of Avengers and they had to spend time trying to explain how they never interfered when Thanos showed up.
    It was marketed on the back of the director, not the Avengers movies. Also, there were literally only three exchanges of a few sentences in the entire movie re. Infinity War/Endgame. Also, and this's the important thing, Eternals did not depend on having seen the other movies to make sense in and of itself. That's what a standalone movie is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    Shang Chi dropped all sort of unnecessary MCU reference and the movie looks just like this one. the same over done colourful appearance with obvious cgi.
    So?

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    No Way Home is hardly stand alone...
    Yeah, I said it wasn't a stand alone.

    [QUOTE=Castle;6015268]...Dr Strange now seem to be hyped by the leftovers from Fox.

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    I trust the rumours of Namor been in Black Panther 2 will turn out correct soon.
    Maybe, maybe not. Either way, we're getting off tack and moving the goalposts. The original question, as presented, was if Marvel Studios makes standalone MCU movies. Not only does a quick look at their filmography show that they do, but that most of their movies are stand alones. That's not up for debate. Whether we like the execution or not is something else, but that wasn't the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    When I say stand alone, I mean The Batman kind of stand alone.
    The Batman movie isn't part of a cinematic universe, so it's an apples and oranges comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    ...this is what marvel needs now both in film making and story even if they are still part of a connected universe, the comics does not feature other crossovers at a rate of 90% like their movies does. Think Logan.
    As we've established before, most of their movies are not crossovers, so, by your logic that crossovers are bad, Marvel Studios is doing just fine. (Also, Logan makes several ties and connections to the previous movies in the X-Men series. It's as much a "crossover" as most of the MCU movies are, even more so, if you factor in that it's designed to contrast its predecessors and use them to further its own themes, e.g. the arcs of Xavier and Logan and the comic book scene.)

    Also, pretty much every talking point you've used to argue against the MCU in terms of interconnections can be equally applied to the Snyderverse branch of the DCEU, yet when Snyder did it, it was somehow okay. Maybe the problem isn't that the MCU ties things together, but that you just don't like this specific series.

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    I always say the class should have graduated by now after Endgame but Disney seem to want to keep them in prep school forever, reason they cant let them stand on their own two feet without needing help. Thor does not need help from GOTG, to make him interesting or to put people in sits to make money. just even from the fact that he was an original member of Avengers. Not to mention his Norse mythology is rich. there is a lot of things to explore in his own universe. Every GOTG appearance here, feels like it is shrinking it and causing unnecessary distraction.
    You really don't understand the purpose of a cinematic universe, do you?
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  3. #78
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    19,914

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Username taken View Post
    Some of these guys need to spend time with their therapists.

    The fear of women seems rather irrational.

    Although, a lot of these guys are just doing it for clicks.
    Jeremy is the master of this, he's one of many that did like 30 vids on Brie Larson/Capt Marvel months before that movie even came out. I'm not going to go back and count them, but he's got to have something like 100 on her all together.

    And I actually believe him when he says he doesn't care. However, he knows that he can get clicks complaining about the "M-SHE-U" so he's going to continue to do vids. Notice anything of substance he said was basically the first 2 minutes then he spent the rest of the clip just repeating himself. He had to make that 10 minute mark so that he could have the monetization potential.

  4. #79
    My Face Is Up Here Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,719

    Default

    At this point in time, I'm just jealous. I wish I had muscles like Natalie Portman has built up (relative to my size, of course).

    Other than that, Thor's quest to find himself will clearly be in a comedic vein. Not the biggest fan of Waititi but am looking forward to JF Thor, one of the few modern Thor stories I've read.
    Power with Girl is better.

  5. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I feel like the 1st movie was reasonable in terms of establishing the basics of Thor, his mythos, supporting cast, etc. while not going as 100% full cosmic or Kirby before the audience was ready for it. I also though Hemsworth was solid but I think I have more affection for the 1st Thor than most people do.

    I feel like Waititi made Loki too much of a punchline. Maybe they helped make sure he didn't outshine Thor, but it knocked all his teeth out. I feel like that carried over a little into his own show, especially in terms of his capability.

    I feel like the destruction of Asgard in the third movie is a testament to how much they dropped the ball with Asgard in the MCU in general. You can even see it with how it is in the trailer now. Meetings in business suits? Come on.

    They really screwed over the supporting cast. Focusing too much on the humans in The Dark World and crazy Selvig, unceremoniously killing off the Warriors Three in Ragnarok (Waitit couldn't have mined them for comedy like in the comics?), Heimdall's quickly killed off in Infinity War. Sif is around but who knows if they're ever going to do anything meaningful with her at this point.
    Yeah I get you. I can watch Thor 1 and still enjoy it, but I think it just built the foundations that Thor 2 and Avengers 2 in particular continued to build on in the blandest ways!

    I was already getting Fox Magneto vibes from Loki by Ragnarok (meaning each appearance led to diminishing returns), so I didn’t mind that Taika embraced that and had the main point of his being in the film be that Thor finally understands how Loki will never change. Which made it all the more emotional when he joined Thor and got killed by Thanos!

    Yeah, I think that was their intention to be fair, and I think they realised it. I think it was a good idea to destroy Asgard honestly, even as a 15 year old I was so disappointed in how it just looked so generic back in the original films! And judging from this trailer, Valkyrie doesn’t look too happy with the state of Asgard (and her clothing) currently - I wouldn’t be surprised if they find a new Asgard by the end of the film!

    Again, I agree regarding the supporting cast. Thor has such great relationships in the comics that were just completely squandered in order to bring the hero down to Earth, as if the only way he can be relatable is if he’s friends with humans, Waititi certainly could have used the warrior’s three, but it seems his main thing in Ragnarok was introducing new concepts and characters to Thor that aren’t building off of the lacklustre (according to the general audience) of the previous entries. I’m upset we won’t get a fully comics accurate Thor, but as I said, I personally prefer this version to more of what they were giving us before. I think it’s an interesting adaptation of the character who still resembles the character I love, just with a lot more good to him, and I kinda like that!

  6. #81
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    4,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    You really don't understand the purpose of a cinematic universe, do you?
    Just because you exist in a shared universe doesn't mean it has to become somebody else's movie.

    Captain America: Civil War isn't a Captain America movie. It's more Iron Man 4. Even Linkara goes one better and calls it Avengers 2.5

    Some people want films that focus on the individual heroes and what their background can bring to the table, they are not paying to watch Marvel Team-Up. That's all these films are now.
    Last edited by Matt Rat; 04-20-2022 at 08:12 AM.

  7. #82
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Rat View Post

    Captain America: Civil War isn't a Captain America movie.
    He's onscreen more than any other character. The entire plot revolves around him and his choices. And it deals directly with plot threads and characters spilling out of Winter Soldier, wrapping up Bucky's arc and building on Steve's commitment to save him.

    In what way is Civil War not a Captain America movie? Yes, it also kind of serves as Avengers 2.5, but Steve and his journey, along with his relationships to the other characters, are still the driving thrust of the film and it's resolution.

  8. #83
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    114,772

    Default

    At the very least it seems like this will have less guest hero involvement compared to other MCU sequels what with the Guardians bowing out early. Other than I guess Korg and Miek since they're technically more Hulk than Thor characters.

    I really wish Waititi hadn't killed the Warriors Three off.

  9. #84
    BAMF!!!!! KurtW95's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,913

    Default

    Waititi is a great director but I am so sick of the MCU having turned into quirkiness and one-liners that feel like the characters know they're living in a fictional world.
    Good Marvel characters- Bring Them Back!!!

  10. #85
    Incredible Member LukeCagefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtW95 View Post
    Waititi is a great director but I am so sick of the MCU having turned into quirkiness and one-liners that feel like the characters know they're living in a fictional world.
    They seemed that way since Iron Man 2.

  11. #86
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    9,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    At the very least it seems like this will have less guest hero involvement compared to other MCU sequels what with the Guardians bowing out early. Other than I guess Korg and Miek since they're technically more Hulk than Thor characters.

    I really wish Waititi hadn't killed the Warriors Three off.
    The way they were killed was so offputting. No character development, not even saying their names, just whammo.

    Yet somehow Jeff Goldblum's wildly stupid character still lives at the end.

    Guess if Hela hadn't killed them, they would have been killed the same way by Thanos. This is one of the problems with the story being told in movies, there just isn't time for many characters.
    Last edited by Scott Taylor; 04-20-2022 at 11:01 AM.
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

  12. #87
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    114,772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Taylor View Post
    The way they were killed was so offputting. No character development, not even saying their names, just whammo.

    Yet somehow Jeff Goldblum's wildly stupid character still lives at the end.

    Guess if Hela hadn't killed them, they would have been killed the same way by Thanos. This is one of the problems with the story being told in movies, there just isn't time for many characters.
    It would have been so simple for them to just be helping Heimdall with the Asgardian refugees. If they didn't think the audience cared enough for them to matter, Hela killing them off unceremoniously isn't going to make her seem more credible.

    And they say "The Warriors Three will be remembered" with virtually nothing to back it up.

  13. #88
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    3,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    It was marketed on the back of the director, not the Avengers movies. Also, there were literally only three exchanges of a few sentences in the entire movie re. Infinity War/Endgame. Also, and this's the important thing, Eternals did not depend on having seen the other movies to make sense in and of itself. That's what a standalone movie is.
    ?
    um, this is isnt really accurate. I remember on this forum there were many complaints when they dropped the term Eternals Assemble and the entire second trailer had to mention thanos after the first trailer got a meh reception. although this is not the thread for that so I will not be expanding further, but it was clear Eternals from, their constant Avengers references to even one of the characters wanting to be the new avenger leader was a little bit on the nose.

    So?
    Is not really necessary, sometimes it looks desperate and empty with ideas. It also does not rest much on the comics, even for D list IPs.

    Maybe, maybe not. Either way, we're getting off tack and moving the goalposts. The original question, as presented, was if Marvel Studios makes standalone MCU movies. Not only does a quick look at their filmography show that they do, but that most of their movies are stand alones. That's not up for debate. Whether we like the execution or not is something else, but that wasn't the question.

    As many rumours for the MCU turns out been true, I think this will follow. Saying it is not up for debate does not really carry any weight when most of all their movies have had to referenced a crossover.

    As we've established before, most of their movies are not crossovers, so, by your logic that crossovers are bad, Marvel Studios is doing just fine. (Also, Logan makes several ties and connections to the previous movies in the X-Men series. It's as much a "crossover" as most of the MCU movies are, even more so, if you factor in that it's designed to contrast its predecessors and use them to further its own themes, e.g. the arcs of Xavier and Logan and the comic book scene.)

    Also, pretty much every talking point you've used to argue against the MCU in terms of interconnections can be equally applied to the Snyderverse branch of the DCEU, yet when Snyder did it, it was somehow okay. Maybe the problem isn't that the MCU ties things together, but that you just don't like this specific series.

    My thoughts on Logan here was more film making. The movie looked nothing like the other X-MEN films in directing and style, you can tell Bryan Singer or any of the other past directors had nothing to do with that film. This Thor trailer is copy and pasting from the past MCU movies than Jo Jo Rabbit and I feel this needs a true objective criticism in a post Snyder Cut era and post a Dune era, because Thor's Universe should have been more of the lord of the rings kind of universe in style. If Snyder managed to have pulled that off with his cut, I think MCU should get though love for the Thor movies for not choosing to see Asgard as a different thing, instead Asgard looks more catoonish copied of GOTG/Ms Marvel/Shang Chi. the standard for Thor should be higher and this trailer disappoints in that. It is very uninspiring. I dont even see any Jojo Rabbit film reference in the trailer and that is Waititi best film. I think he even won a screenplay oscar for that.


    You really don't understand the purpose of a cinematic universe, do you?
    does the concept of cinematic universe stops movies from evolving in the arts. it does not really or shouldn't really. I dont understand how thor been in a cinematic universe means he needs to keep copying of from the GOTG-Shang Chi concept.
    Last edited by Castle; 04-20-2022 at 11:25 AM.

  14. #89
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    3,052

    Default

    Okay can I just say there is no real backlash to a female thor or Natalie Portman being Thor. There is no big deal here and I for one am not even worried about a female Thor. we have female green lanterns, so no big deal in a female thor.

    the big issue here is if, Natalie Portman can pull it off. I think she will need to bring in her Padme Amidala Senator/Queen character traits, to pull this off. Say what you want about the Phantom Menace and Attack of the clones but I liked Natalie in the fight scenes of those movies.

    I hope she can bring some of that here, especially now that she is much older and more experienced as an actress. she can do okay here, as long as they don't also make Thor look like some buffoon next to her, who cant even fight anymore and needs saving by her.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Rat View Post
    Just because you exist in a shared universe doesn't mean it has to become somebody else's movie.

    Captain America: Civil War isn't a Captain America movie. It's more Iron Man 4. Even Linkara goes one better and calls it Avengers 2.5

    Some people want films that focus on the individual heroes and what their background can bring to the table, they are not paying to watch Marvel Team-Up. That's all these films are now.
    Yes, yes. that is the word. it is somebody else movie, this trailer says a lot about that. I think this trailer looks like the most manufactured marvel movie yet , not to mention, star lord has always come off over the top, he sucks out the air of the other characters anytime he is in their midst.

    I also have never liked Star Lord's Jokes, unlike Paul Rudd Ant-Man that has more of a sweetness to his comic timing. Star Lord (Chris Pratt) always comes off as annoying and way too cocky and not even the likeable cockiness that Tony Stark Had. Why they keep pushing Star Lord and Thor bromance is Marvel getting way too desperate IMO.
    Last edited by Castle; 04-20-2022 at 11:48 AM.

  15. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    um, this is isnt really accurate. I remember on this forum there were many complaints when they dropped the term Eternals Assemble and the entire second trailer had to mention thanos after the first trailer got a meh reception. although this is not the thread for that so I will not be expanding further, but it was clear Eternals from, their constant Avengers references to even one of the characters wanting to be the new avenger leader was a little bit on the nose.
    "If you only watch the trailer and not the actual movie you'll see it's not stand-alone."

    There were no "constant Avengers references." It was two, maybe three lines at most. In a 2+hr movie.
    Last Read: Zatanna and the Ripper vol. 1

    Monthly Pull List: Alan Scott: The Green Lantern, Batman, Batman/Superman: World's Finest, Beware the Planet of the Apes, Birds of Prey, Daredevil, Green Arrow, Jay Garrick: The Flash, Justice Ducks, Justice Society of America, Negaduck, Nightwing, Phantom Road, Shazam!, Superman '78: The Metal Curtain, Thundercats, Titans

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •