|
Movies
May 5, 2019 17:17:31 GMT
Post by Iakus on May 5, 2019 17:17:31 GMT
OK, saw Avengers: Endgame I finally got out to see it last night. Wasn't bad. Could have been worse, could have been better. There were a few scenes/moments I really liked others I was pretty "meh" about. All in all a satisfying way to end the MCU. At least the end for me most likely, aside from more Deadpool I'm not terribly excited for anything else they have coming down the road. I am looking forward to the next Doctor Strange movie. And GotG3, despite Gunn being a piece of garbage in RL.
|
|
|
Movies
May 6, 2019 3:22:29 GMT
Post by decafhigh on May 6, 2019 3:22:29 GMT
I am looking forward to the next Doctor Strange movie. Ah yeah, that will probably be good. That Cumberbatch fella makes a good Dr. Strange. There are things I would be interested in. If they do another FF reboot, or really anything else they do that looks good I'll still go see. It just feels like they are itching to go down the "get woke go broke" path in future movies which is why I am feeling like this is the end of the MCU for me.
|
|
|
Post by novatrex on May 6, 2019 3:35:19 GMT
Iakus , decafhigh , Onecrazymonkey1 , slimgrin ,@dustyelf , Sundance , Onishiro , Laughing Man , Faceman , dmc1001 What older movies would you say have aged well? I'll list one that's right off the top of my head because I happen to use it for a profile pic. I'll probably think of some more later. The Thing (1982) - The reason I think it has aged well is because all of the special effects were real. They used real materials. There were no camera tricks used for the special effects. It also had good acting as well as a plot with suspense that still hold up to this day imo. Special effects doesn't have to be the deciding factor though. Some movies are just obviously stuck in the time frame they were made and the audience sophistication has long passed it up while others have held up rather well. An example would be Invaders From Mars (1953). I tried watching it for the first time recently on Amazon and couldn't make it past the first 15 minutes. I don't know about the special effects, but the interaction and dialog between the family members was like Leave it To Beaver. It's not even close to a reflection of how family members actually interact with each other. While I think movies like that can have a special nostalgia charm with some people, I had no interest in it.
|
|
|
Movies
May 6, 2019 3:50:25 GMT
Post by dmc1001 on May 6, 2019 3:50:25 GMT
OK, saw Avengers: Endgame I finally got out to see it last night. Wasn't bad. Could have been worse, could have been better. There were a few scenes/moments I really liked others I was pretty "meh" about. All in all a satisfying way to end the MCU. At least the end for me most likely, aside from more Deadpool I'm not terribly excited for anything else they have coming down the road. Captain Marvel got more screen time then I thought she deserved. She was a total c**t. I can't imagine her as the next wave of MCU.
Yes, could have been better but I thought it was an overall nice wrap up to the original team.
|
|
|
Post by Faceman on May 6, 2019 9:49:16 GMT
Iakus , decafhigh , Onecrazymonkey1 , slimgrin ,@dustyelf , Sundance , Onishiro , Laughing Man , Faceman , dmc1001 What older movies would you say have aged well? I'll list one that's right off the top of my head because I happen to use it for a profile pic. I'll probably think of some more later. The Thing (1982) - The reason I think it has aged well is because all of the special effects were real. They used real materials. There were no camera tricks used for the special effects. It also had good acting as well as a plot with suspense that still hold up to this day imo. Special effects doesn't have to be the deciding factor though. Some movies are just obviously stuck in the time frame they were made and the audience sophistication has long passed it up while others have held up rather well. An example would be Invaders From Mars (1953). I tried watching it for the first time recently on Amazon and couldn't make it past the first 15 minutes. I don't know about the special effects, but the interaction and dialog between the family members was like Leave it To Beaver. It's not even close to a reflection of how family members actually interact with each other. While I think movies like that can have a special nostalgia charm with some people, I had no interest in it. The first one that comes to mind is Alien/Aliens. Terminator 2 Judgment Day. Star Wars. Raiders of the Lost Ark.
|
|
|
Post by Sundance on May 6, 2019 12:58:48 GMT
What older movies would you say have aged well? Off the top of my head... Blazing Saddles (1974) The Elephant Man (1980) Citizen Kane (1941) Ed Wood (1994) Twelve O'clock High (1949) I Remember Mama (1948) The Right Stuff (1983) Galaxy Quest (1999) Princess Bride (1987) 5th Element (1997) Ace in the Hole (1951) The Duellists (1977) Apollo 13 (1995) Psycho (1960) Saving Private Ryan (1998) Blade Runner (1982) Ghostbusters (1984) The Poseidon Adventure (1972) Dragonslayer (1981) Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970) Independence Day (1996) Highlander (1986) The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (1988) Dune (1984)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0 Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2019 14:04:04 GMT
What older movies would you say have aged well? Fahrenheit 451: with Julie Christie 1966 Soylent Green: with Charlton Heston 1973 Stargate: with Kurt Russell 1994 Sense and Sensibility: with Emma Thompson 1995
|
|
|
Post by Iakus on May 6, 2019 15:24:09 GMT
In no particular order:
The Maltese Falcon (1941) The Great Escape (1963) Tremors (1990) To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) Robocop (1987) Demolition Man (1993) Jurassic Park (1993)
|
|
|
Post by Iakus on May 6, 2019 15:24:29 GMT
Far From Home trailer. Endgame spoilers within:
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Man on May 7, 2019 13:40:43 GMT
What older movies would you say have aged well? I'll list one that's right off the top of my head because I happen to use it for a profile pic. I'll probably think of some more later. The Thing (1982) - The reason I think it has aged well is because all of the special effects were real. They used real materials. There were no camera tricks used for the special effects. It also had good acting as well as a plot with suspense that still hold up to this day imo. Special effects doesn't have to be the deciding factor though. Some movies are just obviously stuck in the time frame they were made and the audience sophistication has long passed it up while others have held up rather well. An example would be Invaders From Mars (1953). I tried watching it for the first time recently on Amazon and couldn't make it past the first 15 minutes. I don't know about the special effects, but the interaction and dialog between the family members was like Leave it To Beaver. It's not even close to a reflection of how family members actually interact with each other. While I think movies like that can have a special nostalgia charm with some people, I had no interest in it. I tend to feel somewhat similarly, I think that the movies that aged the best are those that only used minimal special effects. Like say, gangster movies. I really like Sci-Fi but watching older movies is fairly hard for me given the rather abysmal and obvious special effects they tended to use in the past. I suppose I have been spoiled rotten by newer Sci-Fi creations like The Expanse.
|
|
|
Post by Iakus on May 7, 2019 14:19:52 GMT
Oh, and how could I forget My Cousin Vinny (1992)!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0 Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2019 22:00:24 GMT
Counterpart, spy story, parallel worlds with a nice twist. And it has the lovely Sara Serraiocco:
|
|
|
Post by Onishiro on May 23, 2019 3:22:01 GMT
Iakus , decafhigh , Onecrazymonkey1 , slimgrin ,@dustyelf , Sundance , Onishiro , Laughing Man , Faceman , dmc1001 What older movies would you say have aged well? I'll list one that's right off the top of my head because I happen to use it for a profile pic. I'll probably think of some more later. The Thing (1982) - The reason I think it has aged well is because all of the special effects were real. They used real materials. There were no camera tricks used for the special effects. It also had good acting as well as a plot with suspense that still hold up to this day imo. Special effects doesn't have to be the deciding factor though. Some movies are just obviously stuck in the time frame they were made and the audience sophistication has long passed it up while others have held up rather well. An example would be Invaders From Mars (1953). I tried watching it for the first time recently on Amazon and couldn't make it past the first 15 minutes. I don't know about the special effects, but the interaction and dialog between the family members was like Leave it To Beaver. It's not even close to a reflection of how family members actually interact with each other. While I think movies like that can have a special nostalgia charm with some people, I had no interest in it. The Thing Lost Boys (if you disregard the hair and clothing styles) Terminator 2 History of The World Part II From Russia With Love The Godfather Part 1 & 2 Bullit (still one of the greatest chase scenes on film with its use of sound and facial expressions) Drunken Master 2 (IMO Jackie's best choreography) The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly some sound effects aside, the storytelling and violent content was far more ahead of its time and raw than what I saw in other westerns from that era. The Princess Bride There's others that just haven't been jogged but those are some of my favorites that stand out. I finally got out to see it last night. Wasn't bad. Could have been worse, could have been better. There were a few scenes/moments I really liked others I was pretty "meh" about. All in all a satisfying way to end the MCU. At least the end for me most likely, aside from more Deadpool I'm not terribly excited for anything else they have coming down the road. Captain Marvel got more screen time then I thought she deserved. She was a total c**t. I can't imagine her as the next wave of MCU.
Yes, could have been better but I thought it was an overall nice wrap up to the original team.
Just like the comics. Marvel had the opportunity to make her likeable or at least an asshole with a heart of gold like Jessica Jones from season 1 and Defenders. Instead they politicized it with identity politics and chose a jackass to portray her while also shitting on the original Captain Marvels (Mar-Vell and Rambaeu) and "subverting expectations" with the Skrulls. Way to fuck that up. Still not approaching Little Bitch, this so-called "Peter Parker" of the MCU. He's Spider-Man in name only. You can't take away all the things that define a character and still try to portray that character. It doesn't work. It's like Black Panther being a reformed felon from The Bronx or Batman's parents never dying and him just deciding to be a vigilante for kicks. Even the Ultimates didn't mess that up. The very same teen who broke into the Baxter building to impress the Fantastic 4, got rejected from joining them and then embarrassing them and swearing to work alone while also keeping his identity hidden from nearly all other heroes for decades and designed his own equipment to be responsible with his powers would never be Tony Stark's underling/ward and tell half the world who he is, putting his friends and loved ones in danger. Don't even get me started on anti Ned Leeds, pencil neck geek latino Flash Thompson and tokenized "MJ." Utter trash. I HATE this incarnation of Spider-Man.
|
|
|
Post by Onishiro on May 23, 2019 3:28:33 GMT
Far From Home trailer. Endgame spoilers within:
|
|
|
Movies
May 23, 2019 15:55:44 GMT
Post by Faceman on May 23, 2019 15:55:44 GMT
Counterpart, spy story, parallel worlds with a nice twist. And it has the lovely Sara Serraiocco: I'll have to torrent this check this out.
|
|
|
Post by Faceman on May 23, 2019 16:03:33 GMT
Far From Home trailer. Endgame spoilers within: Several things: I'm sick of Jon Favreau. His giant ego leads him to insert himself unnecessarily in movies he adds nothing to - and he made himself as prominent as possible in the ending funeral scene of Endgame. Spider Man has been rebooted so many times I still haven't seen Homecoming. I'm probably going to see it in a couple of days because I'm doing an MCU run-through (skipping Iron Man 2&3, Black Panther, Cpt Marvel... maybe Ragnarok). I think the MCU ties Spiderman too closely to Tony Stark, kinda makes him an Iron Spider. That idea is growing stale. I hate Multiverses. Those kind of stories dilute consequences in a genre that already brings characters back to life too much.
|
|
|
Post by dmc1001 on May 24, 2019 2:39:03 GMT
Just like the comics. Marvel had the opportunity to make her likeable or at least an asshole with a heart of gold like Jessica Jones from season 1 and Defenders. Instead they politicized it with identity politics and chose a jackass to portray her while also shitting on the original Captain Marvels (Mar-Vell and Rambaeu) and "subverting expectations" with the Skrulls. Way to fuck that up. Carol Danvers was a decent character for most of her career. That seems to have ended when she became CM. I say "seems" only because I never read the book. Jessica Jones on-screen had almost zero in common with JJ in the comics. The "Alias" comic was downright amazing. Yes, I liked the JJ Netflix series she was at her best in the book that introduced her. When the Chitauri originally appeared in comics, which was in the pages of "The Ultimates", they were there in place of the Skrulls. It was an alternate universe from the regular MU. Then the regular MU decided to incorporate them as a separate entity from the Skrulls. The Chitauri and Skrulls shouldn't both have been introduced into the MCU. They fill the same role. Basically, the Skrulls were brought in just for Carol Danvers. As far as characters being true to their comic origins, I have no expectations there. They're entirely separate to me and ought to remain that way. Whether or not you like Spider-Man is something you should determine on the merits of that particular version rather than be colored by the comic version. Besides, they eradicated Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane in a deal he made to save Aunt May. Never mind that it also took away his child. Anyway, that's off-track. I find MCU Spider-Man to be fun. Yeah, it's got progressiveness. Liz is black, Ned is Asian (though never his best friend in comics) and Flash is Latino. Doesn't bother me too much because it isn't talked about. They're just characters now agendas (or at least not written that way). You know what bothers me? Batwoman. She was a really decent character in comics, even being an out lesbian and all. Thing is, in the comics, that was merely an aspect of her rather than the central focus. The new CW series has her as a stereotypical, man-hating lesbian. The focus is one her being female and homosexual. She's not a worthwhile character. If they written a great story about a superhero who happened to be a lesbian, that would likely have led to a great character. Meanwhile, the focus on Buffy the Vampire Slayer is that she killed vampires and demons. We learned she liked guys because she talked about guys she liked. Imagine is Batwoman took that route?
|
|
|
Movies
May 24, 2019 15:56:34 GMT
Post by Iakus on May 24, 2019 15:56:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Faceman on May 25, 2019 0:23:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Onishiro on May 26, 2019 14:25:29 GMT
Just like the comics. Marvel had the opportunity to make her likeable or at least an asshole with a heart of gold like Jessica Jones from season 1 and Defenders. Instead they politicized it with identity politics and chose a jackass to portray her while also shitting on the original Captain Marvels (Mar-Vell and Rambaeu) and "subverting expectations" with the Skrulls. Way to fuck that up. Carol Danvers was a decent character for most of her career. That seems to have ended when she became CM. I say "seems" only because I never read the book. Jessica Jones on-screen had almost zero in common with JJ in the comics. The "Alias" comic was downright amazing. Yes, I liked the JJ Netflix series she was at her best in the book that introduced her. When the Chitauri originally appeared in comics, which was in the pages of "The Ultimates", they were there in place of the Skrulls. It was an alternate universe from the regular MU. Then the regular MU decided to incorporate them as a separate entity from the Skrulls. The Chitauri and Skrulls shouldn't both have been introduced into the MCU. They fill the same role. Basically, the Skrulls were brought in just for Carol Danvers. As far as characters being true to their comic origins, I have no expectations there. They're entirely separate to me and ought to remain that way. Whether or not you like Spider-Man is something you should determine on the merits of that particular version rather than be colored by the comic version. Besides, they eradicated Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane in a deal he made to save Aunt May. Never mind that it also took away his child. Anyway, that's off-track. I find MCU Spider-Man to be fun. Yeah, it's got progressiveness. Liz is black, Ned is Asian (though never his best friend in comics) and Flash is Latino. Doesn't bother me too much because it isn't talked about. They're just characters now agendas (or at least not written that way). You know what bothers me? Batwoman. She was a really decent character in comics, even being an out lesbian and all. Thing is, in the comics, that was merely an aspect of her rather than the central focus. The new CW series has her as a stereotypical, man-hating lesbian. The focus is one her being female and homosexual. She's not a worthwhile character. If they written a great story about a superhero who happened to be a lesbian, that would likely have led to a great character. Meanwhile, the focus on Buffy the Vampire Slayer is that she killed vampires and demons. We learned she liked guys because she talked about guys she liked. Imagine is Batwoman took that route? Never read JJ's comics outside of the appearances with Luke Cage during and post Civil War. But my point with Danvers is that she's incredibly unpopular. Sure she wasn't so bad before she took the mantle of Captain Marvel but she was typically met with indifference nonetheless. In recent years, which seems to be the version they're aiming for, she's downright unlikeable and has seen so many #1's you'd think she was working a strip joint. And when it comes to the opinion that people in general have of "it's a different universe" I don't subscribe to that notion. It's based on the comics so of course their movie counterparts should have that in mind and echo the paper personas rather than tokenizing characters and flipping their race/gender/sexuality just to appease people who were never fans to begin with. That ain't Spider-Man, that ain't Flash Thompson, that ain't MJ, that ain't Ned. Now I'm hearing rumors that they're giving JJJ that shit treatment. Delete this franchise and start from scratch.
|
|