|
"You want me to bet TEN dollars?! I'm not made of money y'know!" "The laws of physics might be out the window but we still have inflation." "Oh right, fine."
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:06 |
|
|
You could argue "TV!" "Movies!" back and forth, especially since the lines are either irrelevant for actors these days or simply blurred, but while Pratt is obviously well-liked as Andy I'm thinking that wouldn't have been enough and it was his turn in Zero Dark Thirty that allowed him to get the GotG role.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
StumblyWumbly posted:Don't you remember Spider-Man? Why do you hate Broadway I was going to say "Yeah, why would you want to add blades to the danger" but then I remembered the Spider-Man musical already had a Silver Samurai/Stryfe-looking villain called Swiss Miss.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Obviously this should be taken with a huge grain of salt but Kevin Smith has claimed to have seen Affleck in the new Batman costume and he's saying its in a completely different direction than previous movie versions. So there will be a small black oval symbol on an otherwise yellow suit. I'm fine with that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Less armor and more cloth/leather is my guess. A less militaristic Batman to contrast if/when he needs special souped up armor to face Superman? If at all. It should just be Superman's suit but black and with a bat. "Heyyy, no fair! Get your own!"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
It's interesting to note too when Marvel started making movies, before Disney bought them. They took out a massive loan and became a studio themselves so they had to move things along with a $500 million loan hanging over their heads. The opposite is that WB has all the time and the money in the world to do things and well, they certainly act as though they have all the time in the world.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
One thing that surprised me was that Odin had a father. I had never heard of that in the comics, I thought Odin had been around since the beginning of everything.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Odin mentions his own father and grandfather in the first Thor film. "I banish you in the name of my father and his father before!". That's as far back as it goes though. Odin's granddad is the first. Ah, I was probably equally surprised the first time and then just forgot all about it since then. You learn something new about Norse mythology everyday. Speaking of, I probably should have learned this particular fact yesterday to make it appropriate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
Magneto is inhabited by the Ghost of Holocaust Past. He doesn't age, he can fly, and he has catch-all telekinetic and influence abilities. Sounds like a spirit to me. Instead of throwing Scott, Logan, Hank, and Chuck at him you'd be better off enlisting Peter, Ray, Egon, and Winston.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Billy Idle posted:I feel like I've had this conversation on here before, but that's because it's my all-time favorite bullshit superpower explanation. Pretty sure it's been the official one for a while, too. "Hey Cyke, why don't you ever have any recoil?" "Does a LAMP have RECOIL when it shines ITS LIGHT? Didn't think so." "Yeah but the lamp's light can't punch me in the gut." *ZZRRRRAKK*
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
Explaining Rogue's Danvers powers works better without Danvers. Ms. Marvel had energy powers, so you're left explaining that Rogue absorbed someone's powers so hard that she took them permanently, but some were left out for some reason. It's not terribly complicated but it does make including Ms. Marvel unnecessary. Super-strength and flight are not exactly esoteric abilities that need to be attached to a particular character.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
Metal Loaf posted:They should use Stan Lee's original idea (an actual goblin released from an ancient Egyptian sarcophagus). Why not? Evil sarcophagi and Spider-Man do go back all the way to Amazing Fantasy #15 after all.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
Waterhaul posted:Holy poo poo is that a scene of Osborn's other "projects" being Vulture wings and Ock arms. Pretty sure that's just the front half of a car chassis and a wacky inflatable tube man. Which would still rank as more terrifying than half of Spider-Man's foes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
Dacap posted:Having all the villains be the result of Norman's mad science projects is totally the right approach to setting up the villains. Not everyone needs a tragic backstory with some king of connection to the hero's past. I've never really loved the approach because bringing everything back to one guy turns Spider-Man's iconic foes into little more than henchmen, but I see some of the value in it for the movies. In a world where people have a big problem with Spider-Man making a suit of fabric, it might make more sense to have someone bankrolling all the crazy tech we see.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Waterhaul posted:The tone of the trailer kind of gave it away but it looks as if Norman won't be the Green Goblin. Whoa, you're right. Instead the Green Goblin will be Billy Idol.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Jackal's basically just Green Goblin in his skivvies anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
One more thing is clear. That Shocker speculation from before is just a taxi being flung away! Phew! You'd think they would have given the Goblin something to do other than hover there and grimace. I guess we're supposed to remember the Goblins of the previous movies but you'd think he would be doing something at least.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Raimi wanted Vulture in the movie originally so even if Venom had not been included the movie still would have had three villains. The number of villains or characters in any movie is never the problem, it's the story. Edit: So that this isn't just effectively a double-post of Waterhaul's: I wonder what Sony's thinking beyond Amazing Spider-Man 3 if they're planning that far. You toss three villains in this movie, you do the Sinister Six in the next and then... what? That's a pretty big drop-off to go back to down to one or even two enemies. Venom would have been the trump card in that situation but after they squandered him already and rebooted the series I don't think he's that much of a draw anymore. Lobok fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Dec 3, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:This is brilliant on the part of WB. I thought you were going to say "if it succeeds they'll have done the first great superheroine role and if it fails, they'll have properly poisoned the well for Marvel's possible introduction of Carol Danvers."
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:So I take it they really are skipping right to Harry then? Maybe Norman takes a modified version at the end and hulks out Maybe the whole reason he's dying or least incredibly sick is because at some point he took an early version of the Goblin formula and it worked the way we would actually expect a highly experimental superpower drug to work. Edit: And I would expect that Richard Parker had something to do with it. Perhaps Parker stands in for the Stromm character, who developed the formula and Norman takes it and/or starts using it on himself or others and because of all that Richard learns that Oscorp is not to be trusted and that his life and work is in serious danger. Lobok fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 15:28
|
|
|
Chaos theory is just a fancy term for the ol' Parker luck.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I really disliked the idea of bringing in Peter's parents because I've never really found them to be that interesting as characters. But if the film is going in the direction that most if not all of Spider-Man's foes are mishandled utilizations of Richard's research then that would be pretty cool and really push the whole "responsibility" thing in a new direction with Parker feeling he is responsible for dealing with these guys rather than just being in opposition to them. It also partly explains why they're skipping Norman to make Harry the Goblin first because it fits with the generational battle between Parkers and Osborns.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
DeHaan is Actual Evil Peter. Tobey in Spider-Man 3 was Naive Nerd's "Cool Guy" Impersonation Peter.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Dacap posted:So.... Bryan Singer just tweeted this Sheesh. These doomsayers are always pushing the date back. Year 2000, no it's 2012! Now it's 2016!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:Gillian Anderson for Abigail Brand and David Duchovny as Sydren. I was going to say Guyrich, but yeah Anderson as Brand seemed like a natural. Maybe Duchovny as Quartermain? (They've already cast Sitwell and totally wasted him unforunately.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
If any comic book movie ever called for an ARG, it'd be the Sentry. I imagine you could have a grand old time designing a parody of sites like Superherohype and the like with their own dedicated Sentry forums, plus fake set photos, leaked trailers including footage that was ultimately cut, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
The guy just goes too far into detail. It'd be one thing if he made a much more generalized prediction like how he has it on good authority that Mandarin will play a role later on or that Mandarin and Ultron are related, but with dozens and dozens of smaller, exact predictions he turns it farcical. To believe him, you'd have to believe that he is either Kevin Feige, or that he has access to complete scripts for several movies that are years away.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
Sion posted:#nofilter Which is unfortunately really silly because what you're talking about only applies to live action. People will accept anything if it's animated but once a flesh and blood actor is onscreen, whoa, what the gently caress is this talking animals bullshit?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Maybe not though? This is the post-Gollum world after all. I guess as far as trees walkin' and talkin' goes you're right. Though obviously LOTR is 100% Fantasy World and one of the most popular of all time. It'll be interesting to see the reaction to Groot in a genre that heretofore has tried to keep things from getting too silly.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
The movies haven't dealt with Tony's alcoholism, nor will they I think, but Iron Man 3 is remarkably similar in tone and ending to the comics circa issue #200 where Tony Stark had just come back from his drinking and was grappling with getting back into the suit. He knew that he had been too reliant on the armour and that the dependency went hand-in-hand with his alcoholism. By the time issue #200 rolls around he has learned that he can and should be Iron Man again but this time without all the hang-ups about it because the armour didn't make the man. For a double whammy, Rhodes goes through a similar revelation simultaneously, learning that he wants to be an Iron Man but not the Iron Man.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
Finally a Lex Luthor who can go toe to toe with Superman. I fear for Superman.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
Is there any hope at this point that he won't say the same line over and over? That's going to get old after the third time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:Obviously Groot is the Act Three Noble Sacrifice, post credit scene is him regrowing from a sprout yelling I AM GROOT. Comedy option super-squeaky baby-voiced "I am Groot!"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Shredder did die 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Not gonna spoiler because it's speculation and is also nothing about the plot, so: I think having the Amazonians be long-lost Kryptonians on Earth is a pretty good idea, especially if you're already committed to introducing Wonder Woman in a Superman movie. The guy talking in your quote makes a pretty good case for a tidy and neat origin of god-like sorority sisters if they don't want to go the Asgardian route. I imagine fans might not like the idea of Amazonians actually being Kryptonians but if it was so long ago, does it matter? Humans all come from Africa but we don't consider everyone now to be Africans.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
The depowering is the one aspect I didn't like, true. hi liter posted:My main problem with that origin for WW is that it's sort of watering down her identity. Part of what makes the Justice League (and Avengers) so much fun is how diverse and unique all the characters are, and I'm worried that making WW a Kryptonian will hurt that. Rather than having these distinct and colorful characters, two of the big 3 will have more or less the same origin. There's an origin for powers and then there's an origin for the actual character. No one would accuse the X-Men of all having the same origin even though all of their abilities originate from the same phenomena. Why Wonder Woman chooses to do what she does is what I hope a movie would focus on, and not whether her strength comes from the sun or magic clay.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:That's some really backwards, reductive reasoning and it doesn't fly at all. Wonder Woman's origin is absolutely a huge part of her character and there's much more at play in those changes than just where her punching comes from. Homogenizing her into Superman-lite would be an utterly horrific change. So far the only change I see, the only change I'm referring to, is whether she's made out of clay or whether they get juiced from the Sun. Everything about who she is and about Themyscira could be business as usual. Except for the actual issue of her power levels, which I disagree with, she would in no way be a Superman-lite. Every Superman story always makes a big deal about him being the Last Son of a dead planet before showing a dozen other convenient survivors anyway, so this would be par for the course. The only real problem I would have with this is that it would make Supergirl a non-starter but that's not a big loss to me anyway (since she's the real Superman-lite).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:Apart from pretty much every facet of who she is and what Themysciria is, sure. Look, I'll cop to not being much of a WW fan but I'm not going to engage with someone just saying "no it isn't". What is fundamentally wrong about the Amazonians originally being alien? Is it because they then wouldn't be the actual gods?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
RyuujinBlueZ posted:Because it's sexist. It changes Wonder Woman's origin to be a side-effect of Superman's, thus making her entire character a lesser version of his in every possible way. For a character that, to many people in the mainstream, struggles to not be "girl-Superman" that's kind of a big issue. The movies should be trying to push her as far in the opposite direction as possible. If Superman's origin is science, Wonder Woman absolutely needs to be magic as hell. Do people think the same about Ultimate Marvel, where Hulk is a derivative of Captain America?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:06 |
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:Are you being deliberately obtuse? You're making it out to be some kind of "aha, gotcha!" post when it's not. I'm just asking. Forget we were ever talking about Wonder Woman if it helps. Hulk was his own thing, a product of a nuclear bomb, the pursuit of ever more destructive weaponry, but since Ultimate Marvel and the Marvel movies Hulk is instead a failed Captain America attempt. Less like Godzilla and more like `roid rage. You'd think there were/are Hulk fans that didn't love the change.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 15:20
|
|