|
TheJoker138 posted:Loeb took over the TV division and one of his first acts was cancelling EMH. The reason given was that they wanted more synergy with the movies, but EMH was already based off of the movies right down to having a RDJ impersonator doing the voice of Iron Man. It was Loeb. Ultimate Spider-man is basically a running commercial for the movies, down to running episodes about heroes appearing in movies a week or so later, to hype people up. Which is blatant and breaks production flow, but it'd be fine if the tie-in stuff was any good. Which it never is since the show is garbage compared to Spectacular Spider-man and well, any Spidey show I've seen. Even the one where he went to an alternate Earth. The Ant-man episode was particularly boring, which is weird considering they turned small enough to enter Nick Fury's body in a sub-like thing to fight Doc Ock who'd made some sort of nanobots to take over his brain. . If that plot sounds "wacky" and full of lame references then yes, that's how it felt.
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Batman Brave and the Bold did that story much better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:Loeb took over the TV division and one of his first acts was cancelling EMH. The reason given was that they wanted more synergy with the movies, but EMH was already based off of the movies right down to having a RDJ impersonator doing the voice of Iron Man. It was Loeb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
Red posted:I don't know what show or book this is from, but it looks like it sucks. Man if they're doing everyone is hulk episodes does that mean they have the Gamma Corp? There's a character there whose origin is literally "Hulk yelled at my mom when she was pregnant with me and now I have autism."
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
I saw this movie last night, and I think I missed a lot of plot. My main question is about Darren Cross's motivations. He already had the Yellowjacket suit working I thought; I mean we specifically see the shrunked version of the suit, does that imply it's working anyways? So why was he still conducting experiments? Why did he care about what Dr. Pym was hiding at that point?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I saw this movie last night, and I think I missed a lot of plot. My main question is about Darren Cross's motivations. He already had the Yellowjacket suit working I thought; I mean we specifically see the shrunked version of the suit, does that imply it's working anyways? So why was he still conducting experiments? Why did he care about what Dr. Pym was hiding at that point? They can shrink the suit but shrinking organic material makes it turn into a bloody splotch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I saw this movie last night, and I think I missed a lot of plot. My main question is about Darren Cross's motivations. He already had the Yellowjacket suit working I thought; I mean we specifically see the shrunked version of the suit, does that imply it's working anyways? So why was he still conducting experiments? Why did he care about what Dr. Pym was hiding at that point? That suit was just a suit. He wanted to get a human in it. He had daddy issues and was pissed that Pym hid stuff from him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:They can shrink the suit but shrinking organic material makes it turn into a bloody splotch. Okay, I didn't make that connection, but that is very obvious now in hindsight. It seemed like if the suit worked, the person inside the suit would shrink with it, cause that's how Dr. Pym's suit did it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Okay, I didn't make that connection, but that is very obvious now in hindsight. It seemed like if the suit worked, the person inside the suit would shrink with it, cause that's how Dr. Pym's suit did it. It would be a bloody splotch inside a suit, presumably.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
I know I'm in the minority here, but Ant-Man was WAY better than Avengers and so much more fun than so many comic films. I really loved it and between Ant-Man and Guardians, I don't think the MCU is a total bust for me personally. I know I have different tastes, so I'm glad Marvel throws me a bone every now and again
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Anal Surgery posted:I know I'm in the minority here, but Ant-Man was WAY better than Avengers and so much more fun than so many comic films. I really loved it and between Ant-Man and Guardians, I don't think the MCU is a total bust for me personally. I know I have different tastes, so I'm glad Marvel throws me a bone every now and again Phase 2 and Phase 3 seem to really be starting to diversify the types of movies that fit in. With your space operas like Guardians, heist movies like Ant-Man, the weird trippy poo poo that Dr. Strange will be, etc. And then you add the Netflix and TV stuff into that and it's very clear that they're at least trying to bust out of the formula that they set with Phase 1 for some of the non-Avengers stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
I really enjoyed Ant-Man as well. I really liked Age of Ultron too. I did go into Ant-Man with low expectations though, the premise seemed really weird, but it worked very well. The humor was perfect too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Anal Surgery posted:I know I'm in the minority here, but Ant-Man was WAY better than Avengers and so much more fun than so many comic films. I think Ant-Man was better than Age of Ultron easily. I think basically it's harder to tell a good story in a limited time when there are too many "main" characters. My favorite of the X-Men movies was the first one where they kept it focused mainly on Wolverine (if I recall correctly).
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
nelson posted:My favorite of the X-Men movies was the first one where they kept it focused mainly on Wolverine (if I recall correctly). So...which one?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Drifter posted:So...which one? Yeah, that's basically "all of them except for First Class." And First Class was the best one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
Drifter posted:So...which one? X2 was also focused mostly on Wolverine
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:Yeah, that's basically "all of them except for First Class." I only saw the last 1/4 of first class but it sucked. Maybe it's better if you see the rest of it first?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
effectual posted:I only saw the last 1/4 of first class but it sucked. Maybe it's better if you see the rest of it first? I think this is probably the case for every single movie ever made, yes. Also the ending is easily the weakest part of the film.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
nelson posted:I think basically it's harder to tell a good story in a limited time when there are too many "main" characters. Its not harder, just different. Avengers 2 was a bad movie and the fault lies entirely at Whedon's feet and not some nebulous force such as the difficultly of writing for seven characters instead of four.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
RE: Earth's Mightiest Heroes was canned for a few reasons. "Synergy" with movies was one. Loeb also hated multi part episodes so he wanted everything to be done in one. S1 was and still is great. Season 2 drops in quality about 7 or so episodes in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Why did Age of Ultron need to flesh out every single Avenger even more? I don't get what purpose that would have served the film because there's nothing I can think of that could be said that wasn't already said in the movies before it. Age of Ultron was just a setup for Civil War, much of the conflict is between Tony Stark and Steve Rogers. Ultron was just there to give these two characters something to argue over because they have very different ideas about how best to protect the earth. Both of their movies make this the main point, and now all of that is going to spill over in Civil War. Like maybe more could be said about Scarlet Witch, but she is going to be in future movies, and Age of Ultron is apart of a much larger story, not a self contained filmed. So not focusing on all characters is pretty understandable. Age of Ultron was a pretty good movie, the people that didn't like it just had super weird expectations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Why did Age of Ultron need to flesh out every single Avenger even more? I don't get what purpose that would have served the film because there's nothing I can think of that could be said that wasn't already said in the movies before it. Age of Ultron was just a setup for Civil War, much of the conflict is between Tony Stark and Steve Rogers. Ultron was just there to give these two characters something to argue over because they have very different ideas about how best to protect the earth. Both of their movies make this the main point, and now all of that is going to spill over in Civil War. Like maybe more could be said about Scarlet Witch, but she is going to be in future movies, and Age of Ultron is apart of a much larger story, not a self contained filmed. So not focusing on all characters is pretty understandable. This is obviously a tangent, but I disagree. It was okay. Expectations or no, it was lacking. IMO, a movie should have three things minimum: - Good pacing - Logical actions, including those enacted by emotion - Consequences and continuity I think AoU failed in most of those. A bunch of things in AoU were good by themselves (like Steve's flashback and the Hulkbuster) but altogether, every Vision scene included, really brought it down. If AoU was supposed to be a conflict between Tony and Steve, maybe that should have been more expressed. I'm not saying overt, I'm saying emotional.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Age of Ultron was a pretty good movie, the people that didn't like it just had super weird expectations. Like a coherent plot, a compelling story and exciting set pieces.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Irish Joe posted:Like a coherent plot, a compelling story and exciting set pieces. What? Thats super weird
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Irish Joe posted:Like a coherent plot, a compelling story and exciting set pieces. Well, it seems like this has been no ones complaint about the movie. Every time Age of Ultron is brought up, it's always "why didn't the movie give equal screen time to every single character in the Marvel universe????" What about the plot wasn't coherent? I thought it was perfectly understandable. This is the same forum where a poster got gigantic sections of Avenger 1's plot completely mixed up one time, so excuse me if I don't take complaints around here with a huge grain of salt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Well, it seems like this has been no ones complaint about the movie. Every time Age of Ultron is brought up, it's always "why didn't the movie give equal screen time to every single character in the Marvel universe????" What about the plot wasn't coherent? I thought it was perfectly understandable. Cool can you explain thors vision, i couldnt quit follow that part
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Oli posted:Cool can you explain thors vision, i couldnt quit follow that part His first vision or the one in the pool? The first one is just his fear of what would happen if he failed to protect Asgard. That was the same for Tony Stark but his was about failing the Avengers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:His first vision or the one in the pool? The first one is just his fear of what would happen if he failed to protect Asgard. That was the same for Tony Stark but his was about failing the Avengers. The pool part..I think he talked to some friends in his home or something? Next time we see him a smashes the Vision into life
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Oli posted:The pool part..I think he talked to some friends in his home or something? Next time we see him a smashes the Vision into life I actually have to get back to you on that one because I don't remember it very well anymore. I was more mesmerized by naked Thor throwing his wet hair around and... be right back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I actually have to get back to you on that one because I don't remember it very well anymore. I was more mesmerized by naked Thor throwing his wet hair around and... be right back. Dammit guess i'll have to wait for a extended edition
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Oli posted:Dammit guess i'll have to wait for a extended edition drat right there better be an extended edition of that scene.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
I know you're joking but yes, that's definitely going to have an extended edition, since the version of that scene in the trailer had character(s) cut from the movie. I feel like everyone should hate Tony more, and also Bruce Banner for going along with Tony twice. Also why did Thor come back? Also why does the staff have the ability to hypnotize people, AND contain source code for Ultron, AND control a gem to make the Vision (who can't hypnotize people)? Blah blah overloaded movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Skychrono posted:I know you're joking but yes, that's definitely going to have an extended edition, since the version of that scene in the trailer had character(s) cut from the movie. Because..movie. Check out redlettermedia.com 's review, it contains pretty much what you said and more
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:41
|
|
Skychrono posted:I know you're joking but yes, that's definitely going to have an extended edition, since the version of that scene in the trailer had character(s) cut from the movie. The last one is fairly obvious. It's the Mind Gem, so presumably it has something to do with minds, such as controlling them, generating them, granting phony enlightenment, etc.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Skychrono posted:I know you're joking but yes, that's definitely going to have an extended edition, since the version of that scene in the trailer had character(s) cut from the movie. Joss said he had to cut that vision for time and he'd put it on the home video release.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
I thought they said there wasn't going to be a 'director's cut' of the movie?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Drifter posted:I thought they said there wasn't going to be a 'director's cut' of the movie? Cutting out one of your standard releases seems like leaving a lot of nerd money on the table. They're already buying the deluxe double edition bundling with Avengers 1 and the Super exclusive edition that includes a slightly different cover and perhaps a booklet. Not putting out a Directors Cut and an Unedited Version would just be criminal negligence to Disney shareholders.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Cutting out one of your standard releases seems like leaving a lot of nerd money on the table. They're already buying the deluxe double edition bundling with Avengers 1 and the Super exclusive edition that includes a slightly different cover and perhaps a booklet. Not putting out a Directors Cut and an Unedited Version would just be criminal negligence to Disney shareholders. I honestly thought - and I know that Joss might not have a say in this - but he instagrammed or something that they wouldn't let him, or he didn't want to, put out the version that had like 20-40 extra minutes of story, because the version you see in theaters is the final version you should see. Or some bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
He said no Director's Cut, but all the deleted scenes are on the blu-ray.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Drifter posted:I honestly thought - and I know that Joss might not have a say in this - but he instagrammed or something that they wouldn't let him, or he didn't want to, put out the version that had like 20-40 extra minutes of story, because the version you see in theaters is the final version you should see. Ah,typical Whedon BS. Good to know he hasn't changed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 01:39
|
|
