|
Also note that you people looking for villain exposition...the real villain had a whole scene of exposition/explanation. Again, the gem.
Ass Catchcum fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Aug 3, 2014 |
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:54 |
|
|
 The orb is not the villain of this movie, and if it was, it was an even worse villain than Ronan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:
Hah, it is though. Ronan is just a dude trying to harness it. ANYONE using it would have been "the villain."
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Please make note. When Thanos has all the gems the gems are the villain. When Cap has all the gems they will be the hero. This is an interesting piece of buttsex where the tool and object are the protagonist and antagonist and the characters are just sort of there. Like the mac guff ins in like Indy Jones. Also if anyone could have been...then the villain is not memorable. That is bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:Hah, it is though. Ronan is just a dude trying to harness it. ANYONE using it would have been "the villain." I think that's the complaint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
When they talked about a group of people trying to utilize the gems, is that a reference to something?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:The Death Star is not the villain of Star Wars. You're right...it's almost like...these are two different movies! And use things in functionally different ways!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Please make note. When Thanos has all the gems the gems are the villain. When Cap has all the gems they will be the hero. Eh. Not really. I don't buy the whole "The Hero is only as good as his villain!" nonsense people use. Sometimes the hero just drat good and awesome and the villain is just an rear end in a top hat. And that's OK. Ronan was 100% dick. And the heroes were not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:1) Ronan and his followers do dress in black. Ronan dresses almost the same as a Sith, and his followers are necro. loving undead. Pretty universal sign of evil. quote:3) His ship is bigger, too. Remember when a whole army had to band together to blockade it then he loving murdered all of them by breaking through it and incinerating them? Yeah, remember when all those soldiers died and a cities attempt to stop a single ship was wiped away while the city below fled in terror? Probably something their grandkids will talk about for a long time. Either way, you don't set up stakes in act 3. You pay them off. quote:5) Wether you can be self aware enough to admit it or not, you have decades of Star Wars backstory and 2+ other movies +EU stuff to kind of flesh out your knowledge. It's impossible to separate. quote:6) Feel free to ask any 8 year old who has seen the movie. I'm pretty sure they'll be able to tell you who the bad guy is. quote:Ronan does not have the reach that the Empire has. He doesn't have to, he's a different kind of danger and evil. He's not a government/systematic force, he's a chaotic zealot. quote:Thanos doesn't need to be more fleshed out. See the Emperor in A New Hope/OT. He's a loving mean dude who sits in a chair. Seems pretty similar to Thanos, actually. The problem I'm having is that Thanos only really exists in this film to tease his appearances in other films. This easily could have been a movie about Ronan stealing the gem and any references to Thanos could be limited to Gamora's backstory. He seems superfluous. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:You're right...it's almost like...these are two different movies! And use things in functionally different ways! The GotG final confrontation is much more directly against Ronan (they actually kill him and his defeat is the moment of triumph) than the Star Wars finale is against Vader or the Emperor. So, yes, they're different movies in that it's even more ridiculous to call the gem the villain of GotG than the Death Star the villain of Star Wars. It's transparently a dodge to avoid addressing Ronan being a bit dull.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Ronan was awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Please make note. When Thanos has all the gems the gems are the villain. When Cap has all the gems they will be the hero. The gem is the villain and it is very memorable. Ronan is not some iconic villain and he didn't HAVE to be. It's not what the movie was trying to show. The movie wasn't like "Hey check out this villain Ronan we want him to haunt your dreams and be some iconic Vadery dude!" What it said, and very successfully, if you could see the forest through the trees, was "Hey, check out this gem. It's loving powerful and if anyone uses it they'll loving kill poo poo, especially if they have bad intentions."
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Eh. Not really. I don't buy the whole "The Hero is only as good as his villain!" nonsense people use. Sometimes the hero just drat good and awesome and the villain is just an rear end in a top hat. And that's OK. Ronan was 100% dick. And the heroes were not. The point is to have great and strong characters and a memorable experience. The hero being more complex and interesting and explored can make sense but let's make effort all the way around. poo poo look at how nerds spooge all over Batman and his retarded rear end rogues gallery.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:The problem I'm having is that Thanos only really exists in this film to tease his appearances in other films. This easily could have been a movie about Ronan stealing the gem and any references to Thanos could be limited to Gamora's backstory. He seems superfluous. Once again, your problem is thinking of any of these films as a stand alone thing. They aren't that, and are never going to be that. You HAVE to think of the broader context of what they are doing here, and that includes the fact that setting up Thanos is important to the series as a whole, even if he isn't a critical part of this film alone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:The Death Star is not the villain of Star Wars. I'm sure there's an essay about how the Death Star is actually the capitalist system perfected, and the Empire merely exists in its framework. e: VVV 
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I'm sure there's an essay about how the Death Star is actually the capitalist system which functions as a framework for the Empire. It's a highly meaningful object, but it's just an object. It can't be a villain anymore than the Ark of the Covenant can be the hero of Raiders of the Lost Ark, despite defeating the villains at the end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
bigperm posted:Ronan was awesome. TheJoker138 posted:Once again, your problem is thinking of any of these films as a stand alone thing. They aren't that, and are never going to be that. You HAVE to think of the broader context of what they are doing here, and that includes the fact that setting up Thanos is important to the series as a whole, even if he isn't a critical part of this film alone. I think it's a safe bet that in GotG 2 or Avengers 3 or Infinity Gauntlet or whenever they pay this stuff off, they are going to reestablish that Thanos wants to do something with the infinity gems. So, what does his existence in this film accomplish?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I don't think that they accomplished this with Ronan. I don't get a sense of who he is beyond being a bad guy. And, I guess we just disagree fundamentally, because my point is, that's all you the sense you needed to get. He's a bad guy. Any more fleshing out would have been wasted because he was just a conduit for the Real Evil in the movie, the gem. Upon re-watching, I'm almost positive they flat out tell you everything about Ronan in his opening line, that's all the backstory you get and, in my opinion, all the backstory you need for the role he serves in this film. I don't remember it verbatim but it's something like, "This is a religious fanatic who has betrayed a treaty and now he's going to murder someone in cold blood." I mean, I'm sorry if you liked Ronan a lot and wished you got to found out more about this cool character you liked, but it just...wasn't needed for the movie. It wasn't necessary for his role/part in the plot. He was just used to show what would happen if the gem was put in the wrong hands (and almost ANY hands, as the slave girl shows).
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think it's a safe bet that in GotG 2 or Avengers 3 or Infinity Gauntlet or whenever they pay this stuff off, they are going to reestablish that Thanos wants to do something with the infinity gems. So, what does his existence in this film accomplish? It establishes him now. Even if they do reestablish him later putting him in this gets people talking and thinking about him. It's the same reason that any of the interconnected small things happen. It's the same reason he was at the end of Avengers or that Fury was at the end of Iron Man. It not only hints at events to come, but gets people asking "who was that guy?" and then all their nerdy friends answer, and it puts him into the public awareness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
gohmak posted:Nothing goes over your head, your reflexes must be really quick. I missed the Rocket follow up line due to laughter. If he did in fact say that then I will admit I could have misinterpreted. I like your approach, keep on it. If he did in fact say that (he did), I could have misinterpreted it (you did). Lets not mention that even without Rockets follow-up line it is so incredibly obvious that the 4 year old sitting next to me understood Rocket was making fun of Drax and being insensitive, and Groot was shocked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
I actually thought Thanos was fine. He comes across as a weirdo space power, which sure enough is what he is.rear end Catchcum posted:I mean, I'm sorry if you liked Ronan a lot and wished you got to found out more about this cool character you liked, but it just...wasn't needed for the movie. It wasn't necessary for his role/part in the plot. He was just used to show what would happen if the gem was put in the wrong hands (and almost ANY hands, as the slave girl shows). There's nothing that's "needed" in a movie, nothing that's "necessary." It's not a functional product. We're talking about a failure to reach maximum potential, not whether or not the character was baseline acceptable for the meager role that was asked of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
What purpose did seeing the Emperor serve? It's just a loving foreboding creepy dude people seem to fear. It's not a standalone movie, it gets you asking questions and wets your curiostiy for the many, many movies that are coming down the pipeline. Just like how we knew there was an episode V coming, we know we haven't seen the last of Thanos and he was just there to get us wondering.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think it's a safe bet that in GotG 2 or Avengers 3 or Infinity Gauntlet or whenever they pay this stuff off, they are going to reestablish that Thanos wants to do something with the infinity gems. So, what does his existence in this film accomplish? I think its supposed to show that there are larger forces at work in the universe, and Ronan and he gems are just part of a much bigger game. I don't think it does that particularly well, but I think it works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:It establishes him now. Even if they do reestablish him later putting him in this gets people talking and thinking about him. It's the same reason that any of the interconnected small things happen. It's the same reason he was at the end of Avengers or that Fury was at the end of Iron Man. It not only hints at events to come, but gets people asking "who was that guy?" and then all their nerdy friends answer, and it puts him into the public awareness. rear end Catchcum posted:And, I guess we just disagree fundamentally, because my point is, that's all you the sense you needed to get. He's a bad guy. Any more fleshing out would have been wasted because he was just a conduit for the Real Evil in the movie, the gem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I actually thought Thanos was fine. He comes across as a weirdo space power, which sure enough is what he is. Actually, yeah, whether you are actively aware of it or not all (good) movies follow a certain structure and anyone knowledgable can point to these points and say "This is why this works" or vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:Actually, yeah, whether you are actively aware of it or not all (good) movies follow a certain structure and anyone knowledgable can point to these points and say "This is why this works" or vice versa. There is no established structure for which there is not some great movie that doesn't feature it. Which is really beside the point: Ronan doesn't need to be more defined because the movie still turned out pretty good. It just could have been better. It's weird that this has somehow become a controversial claim.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Yes, but there was a reason those two examples you gave don't happen in the films proper and are left for the credits. They're not really a part of the story. If something isn't actively serving your story in some meaningful way then it shouldn't be in your story. In this film his presence actually does what you're complaining about with Ronan, it establishes him. In the first scene he shows up Ronan is angry and petulant, but Thanos doesn't give a single gently caress, and sends Ronan packing with his tail between his legs. This shows that Thanos is a big bad rear end and isn't intimidated at all. Then Ronan gets the gem and all of a sudden even Thanos is taken aback because of the amount of power he now has. Thanos helps build up Ronan and the gem, and the movie would be less without him and those scenes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:It's not that I like Ronan, it's just that I want to fully understand the stakes of the movie. As is, he gives a good spine for one-liners and the crew getting together. Fine, but I would have enjoyed the movie more if he was a more engaging character and I better understood him. The stakes of the movie are explained to you in the scene with the Collector when he literally shows you a tutorial video on How loving Bad This poo poo Could Be starring the main villain of the movie, the gem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Yes, but there was a reason those two examples you gave don't happen in the films proper and are left for the credits. They're not really a part of the story. If something isn't actively serving your story in some meaningful way then it shouldn't be in your story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Who's this piemaker people keep talking about? This was the first thing I ever saw Lee Pace in:
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:There is no established structure for which there is not some great movie that doesn't feature it. Which is really beside the point: Ronan doesn't need to be more defined because the movie still turned out pretty good. It just could have been better. It's weird that this has somehow become a controversial claim. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I feel that he was as defined as he needed to be for his role/service in the film. He was going to die. He was a tool. I don't need to hear the story of my screw driver and know about the factory it came from and its conditions therein. It's a loving screwdriver. And I guess that's what I wish you saw Ronan for, because that's all he was. A tool to showcase the power of the gem. I mean, I enjoy arguing/discussion, which is in the title of this sub forum.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
AlliedBiscuit posted:Who's this piemaker people keep talking about? This was the first thing I ever saw Lee Pace in: Huh, apparently that is in fact Lee Pace. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
mikeraskol posted:I like your approach, keep on it. If he did in fact say that (he did), I could have misinterpreted it (you did). Lets not mention that even without Rockets follow-up line it is so incredibly obvious that the 4 year old sitting next to me understood Rocket was making fun of Drax and being insensitive, and Groot was shocked. Yes, lets argue semantics and how if the line wasn't in the actual movie it wouldn't have altered intent. Groots reaction was funny, most people thought Groot was taking Rocket literally due to that being a reoccurring theme in the movie with all characters misunderstanding analogies and all. If the audiences laughter was misplaced then that was a failure/unintended success of the script?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Rocket was mocking Drax. He was not saying, "My wife and child died also, get over it." You can all stop talking about that, now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
gohmak posted:Yes, lets argue semantics and how if the line wasn't in the actual movie it wouldn't have altered intent. Groots reaction was funny, most people thought Groot was taking Rocket literally due to that being a reoccurring theme in the movie with all characters misunderstanding analogies and all. If the audiences laughter was misplaced then that was a failure/unintended success of the script? No they didn't. You are tone deaf. Rocket is very clearly mocking Drax, and Groot is very clearly gasping in a "I can't believe you just said that" way at Rocket. Even if you don't hear the line after it it's very obvious to everyone else, and it's still funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Democratic Pirate posted:He's also the reason Gamora and Nebula are with Ronan in the first place, which was important to the story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
The Biggest Jerk posted:When they talked about a group of people trying to utilize the gems, is that a reference to something? I figured it was just foreshadowing for the film's ending when the heroes essentially utilise it as a group. Lipset and Rock On fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
All this talk of Ronin and Thanos but I'm serious John C. Reiley's character literally literally shows you a chart on how everyone is connected and relevant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Korath should have been blue. Would have gone a long way to establish that all the Kree are shitwads and Ronan is just the uncontrollable pure strain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:54 |
|
|
I might have missed this, but was The Collector gathering the gems for himself, or is he working for Thanos? I'm so giddy about what this all means for the eventual MCU. I personally feel like all the movies in Phase 2 have really kicked it up a notch in quality (I didn't really care for Thor 2, but I thought Cap 2 and Iron Man 3 were awesome), and it just keeps getting better and better. Hopefully Avengers 2 continues the trend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:26
|
|
