|
The worst thing about this movie is that Chris Evans wasn't shirtless for that helicopter scene.
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 14, 2024 09:05 |
|
|
I do think it was funny that the audience I saw this with who was hollerin and clapping for the whole movie responded with "no poo poo" to the "Spider-Man will return" after-credits title.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
"Spider-Man will return... as will Black Panther... and obviously Iron Man, Captain America, Black Widow, Vision, Scarlet Witch, Hawkeye, Ant-Man, War Machine, Falcon, Sharon Carter, Aunt May, General "Thunderbolt" Ross, etc. You guys get how sequels work, right?"
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:The worst thing about this movie is that Chris Evans wasn't shirtless for that helicopter scene. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
It's sort of like seeing "to be continued..." in an old TV show. Like, yeah, guys, I know how TV works.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
I don't get the appeal of Vision, maybe it's cuz I skipped Age of Ultron but like, is he just a super powerful zany British robot Tony made? I did not like his jokes...
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:It's sort of like seeing "to be continued..." in an old TV show. Like, yeah, guys, I know how TV works. Eh, I wrote it off as a nod to the old "James Bond will return in ..." in the old Bond movies. But yeah, it was pretty clunky either way.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Eh, I wrote it off as a nod to the old "James Bond will return in ..." in the old Bond movies. Obviously I was just joking about it, but I think it works a bit as a celebration of having Spider-Man back in the fold. A way to do a "welcome home" to the character without being antagonistic to Sony.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Vision was created by Ultron to be the next step in evolution, intended to replace both humans and Ultron himself. It was only after the Avengers messed up that plan that he decided to kill everyone. Vision has an infinity stone in his head, can lift Thor's hammer, and looks good in a cardigan. There's a few points of appeal for you.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Vision was created by Ultron to be the next step in evolution, intended to replace both humans and Ultron himself. It was only after the Avengers messed up that plan that he decided to kill everyone. Ya I got the infinity stone thing from the convo in the movie but I mean like, less plot stuff & more why do you like the character? What makes him interesting, to u at least?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Paul Bettany is a charmer and a mauve robot in slacks and a sweater is an amusing image. He's a total loser as a superhero, though. In terms of interesting superheroics, he reached his peak as Jarvis in Iron Man 3 controlling the Iron Legion.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
He hasn't really done a lot so far, well except kill Ultron, but I guess it's the question of what he might do. What would an overpowered android jesus whose personality is based on a AI butler do, and why?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:The worst thing about this movie is that Chris Evans wasn't shirtless for that helicopter scene. Most women and tons of men were already swooning at that scene. If he was shirtless I can't imagine how messy the reaction would be.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:I do think it was funny that the audience I saw this with who was hollerin and clapping for the whole movie responded with "no poo poo" to the "Spider-Man will return" after-credits title. I'd wager every detail of that stinger especially the final on screen text was meticulously negotiated with a room full of Sony Executives.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
doverhog posted:He hasn't really done a lot so far, well except kill Ultron, but I guess it's the question of what he might do. What would an overpowered android jesus whose personality is based on a AI butler do, and why? That definition of him is cool, wish that came thru more, for me at least
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:That definition of him is cool, wish that came thru more, for me at least Yeah, I'd watch Zack Snyder's Man of Vibranium.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Dr Tran posted:Do I need to go to the full size IMAX or would a regular one do? Regular would be fine. And it goes without saying at this point but seeing the 3D version is just flushing your money down the toilet. Hat Thoughts posted:What makes him interesting, to u at least? Look, I appreciate a Prince tribute as much as the next man, but you've gotta stop with this, man. To answer your question though, personally I think Vision is boring as hell. raditts fucked around with this message at 21:26 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
doverhog posted:He hasn't really done a lot so far, well except kill Ultron, but I guess it's the question of what he might do. What would an overpowered android jesus whose personality is based on a AI butler do, and why? Avengers 2 already provided the answer: he serves Stark unquestioningly, with a sort of go-with-the-flow zen detachment that prevents him from 'acting out' as Ultron did. The point of the character, in this film, is in how the 'neutral', balanced system that he stands for is disrupted by the introduction of a particular attachment: e.g. his love for Red Witch. And of course this corresponds to Steve's defense of Bucky, and generates the film's overall message that 'love is evil'. "Love, for me, is an extremely violent act. Love is not 'I love you all.' Love means I pick out something, and it’s, again, this structure of imbalance. Even if this something is just a small detail… a fragile individual person… I say 'I love you more than anything else.' In this quite formal sense, love is evil." -Zizek In a very straightforward way, the emergence of love is the violence that disrupts the nonviolent play-fight shenanigans. It's the same basic conflict between the universal and the particular as in 1978's Superman The Movie ('do I save California or Lois?'), but without the radical violation of spacetime. Civil War marks a regression for superhero films.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
raditts posted:Regular would be fine. And it goes without saying at this point but seeing the 3D version is just flushing your money down the toilet. I disagree. The 3D version has every character pop out from the background layer. This creates a real comic book panel effect to a lot of the shots. I saw it this morning 3D and it felt like a genuine improvement styliatically.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:I do think it was funny that the audience I saw this with who was hollerin and clapping for the whole movie responded with "no poo poo" to the "Spider-Man will return" after-credits title. My audience was pretty quiet, but yeah I heard at least one guy give this response. Also during the after-film chat someone was saying what his one complaint was (which I couldn't hear), but his friend replied "Dat Spider-man though." and basically shut him down immediately. I literally got tingling quills and started shifting around in my seat with excitement when Queens popped up and I realized it was Spider-man time, until that point I was so engrossed that I somehow forgot Spider-man was in the movie. I don't think I responded to a moment that heavily in even the Force Awakens, man it got to me. Spidey's always been one of my favorite characters, so I guess I shouldn't have been surprised that was my reaction, but I wasn't expecting a physical sensation at all. They did a drat good job of having basically everyone realize that they've been running around cowboying it up and not dealing with the aftermath or consequences of their fighting, it's still pretty ridiculous to expect them to prevent all civilian deaths or injuries when someone rolls up hell bent on destruction, but it seemed to really hammer home that none of them had really considered it until it was laid right at their feet. Some plot/ending stuff, probably don't need to spoiler anything since the movie's out but I'll be nice and do ti anyway. I immediately assumed Bucky had killed Tony's parents as soon as I saw he caused a car crash, and when it was then followed by Tony's VR demo of his past I was fully certain, but the reveal was still amazing and led to a really wild climax. All the fighting was really well done too, I'd heard complaints about how rapid it was cutting but it seemed fine to me, and I don't think we've ever seen Spider-man fight better than he did here, he really seemed way more realistic/physically there than I've ever seen him, even when he was doing crazy web swings and holding up super heavy stuff. I also liked that Clint has the secret superpower of being able to talk Wanda into doing anything. I really dug that Zemo is literally the most successful primary villain an MCU film has had so far, he's caught in the end but one normal special-ops guy was able to bring the Avengers to their knees, make them hate one another and more hated around the world. I wasn't expecting Winter Soldier to take himself out of play, but I wouldn't be surprised if he pops up in Black Panther, and no matter what he's coming out of hibernation during some point in Infinity War with a rad new Vibranium arm. I'm still in a gleeful haze from just seeing it, but I think it's the best MCU movie they've done so far. The only ones even in the same league are Avengers 1 and Guardians of the Galaxy, maybe with Cap 2 nipping at their heels, but really all those movies are drat good and I can't argue with anyone over what one should be top dog, it's a drat close race. I'm worried about how the hell they'll pull off Infinity War when it's acting as a climax to about 10 years of movies, and with at least a dozen major characters at least on the heroes side alone, but now I'm much less worried than I was before. It's cool that it's making all the money too, it deserves to be right up there with Avengers 1 and 2 in total box office. I'm so looking forward to the week 2 numbers too, where it only drops off by like 20% at most after Bats vs Supes dropped by a crazy 63% or so.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Cool. Thanks TFRazorsaw. Ross is trying to guilt them into signing and Cap caught it, Ross is offering them the chance to not be responsible for the casualties, to pass the buck, and Tony is in a place where he wants that. One key part of the disagreement comes down to the characters, Steve would feel compelled to follow the rules if he signed and Tony doesn't follow rules. When Ross calls him with something he doesn't want to do Tony puts him on hold, he would have pulled the "You're breaking up, you said go to Latvaria? Stop? Yes sir we will defiantly stop whats happening love you kiss-kiss bye." as soon as they wanted to go somewhere.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
I missed 90 seconds before the apartment fight/chase, what was in there?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
The one with Steve, Bucky, and the German army guys? I think we just see Bucky in the city, and he notices that someone recognized him from a newspaper.Sir Kodiak posted:Well, yeah, that's exactly my point. If General Ross had simply said, "Nice job, guys, but the UN is taking control of future responses to superhuman threats. Cap, you need to either sign up under our control or stand down," that would make perfect sense. Instead, he laid out an argument, and I'm trying to figure out why he gave the argument he did to better understand the movie. Even with that said, I don't think Ross' personal primary point is that the Avengers are irresponsible, but that they're inherently dangerous whether they wanna be responsible or not...and he wants to be the one who's directing that power, that danger. Again, this follows from his characterization in the Hulk film. BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 22:15 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
I really liked the movie, but, man, Marvel just can not come up with a reasonable registration act based argument. No one points out that the few hundred deaths that did happen were the result of saving millions and billions of lives. Or that the UN has a history of ignoring or not acting on things because one of the big 5 nations refuse to allow it to. Cap hints toward this with his lines about people dying doesn't mean you stop trying and about being sent where they shouldn't or being prevented from going where they should. Also maybe don't be surprised that Captain America goes out of his way to foil your plans when you decide to send in commandos with shoot to kill orders because someone saw Bucky on a camera somewhere. Furthermore, sure as poo poo don't put Thunderbolt Ross in charge of the loving missions. Why is it so hard to argue against vigilantism? Surely you can come up with something better than my boy died while you were stopping an explosion in a crowded market/evil god/alien invasion/snake cult's world domination plot/extinction level event? The Avengers as a stand in for US Adventurism doesn't work very well when they're actually saving the world from actual existential threats. Punching Hitler isn't what makes people pissed off, it's all the other people we punch with far less robust reasons.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
SirDan3k posted:Ross is trying to guilt them into signing and Cap caught it, Ross is offering them the chance to not be responsible for the casualties, to pass the buck, and Tony is in a place where he wants that. Well, he's doing the opposite of offering them the chance to pass the buck if we use your reasoning. Prior to their talk, there's no implication, in either The Avengers or the many sequels, that any of the Avengers are responsible or feel responsible for the casualties. By making his argument be that the Accords are to prevent the collateral damage we saw in those incidents, he's implicitly equating them signing the Accords with accepting personal responsibility for the casualties, because otherwise the Accords would be no improvement over what happened before. It makes sense Tony could be fooled by this: he's the fucker that made Ultron and really does have room to feel guilty for that, if not the other incidents. What's missing is any push back from Steve as to holding responsibility, though maybe he's too modest for that. But then that would be an ideal place for his wingman Falcon to step in and call bullshit. BrianWilly posted:I agree that the idea of lambasting the Avengers for the New York casualties is kinda silly, but I think Ross is more just guilt-tripping them, and guilt doesn't need to be inherently well-reasoned to be effective. (Keeping in mind that General Ross is not shown to be a particularly well-reasoned man anyway, both in this film and in the Hulk film) My point is that these are all different things and I don't know which the movie is going for. Is Ross guilt-tripping them reasonably or unreasonably? If we recognize he's full of poo poo, does he recognize that, that he's making a bullshit argument in order to further his own power? Does anyone at the table realize he's wrong, or does Captain America feel guilty, and if so is that reasonable or unreasonable? I honestly can't tell what the movie is trying to say. It's not a matter of can we make up something that could explain it, it's whether the movie consistently communicates a perspective of heroism, vigilantism, government, etc. that interconnects all these things.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Just got back from seeing it, fun movie and man Steve Rogers is a loving rear end in a top hat when your idea of the right thing to do doesn't line up with his. He's still trapped in the WW2 supersoldier mentality, and I figured Tony and crew were signing the Accords but with an attitude that in event of another world-shattering crisis it will be easier to ask forgiveness than permission. Biggest laugh in my theater was, of all scenes, Tony Stark hitting on Aunt May.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
NowonSA posted:It's cool that it's making all the money too, it deserves to be right up there with Avengers 1 and 2 in total box office. I'm so looking forward to the week 2 numbers too, where it only drops off by like 20% at most after Bats vs Supes dropped by a crazy 63% or so. So BvS got a lot of press for record* drop-off but if you actually read about, it dropped 69% where the average drop-off for super hero movies is 59%. That being said I fully expect this to be significantly on the lower side, maybe around 40%? But in general massive opening weekends tend to mean a lot of the target audience has already seen it and subsequent weekends are stragglers and repeat viewings. You're not going to get as low as 20%. *also after a lot of fanfare it was revised to being well short of the actual record drop-off
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Just got back from seeing it, fun movie and man Steve Rogers is a loving rear end in a top hat when your idea of the right thing to do doesn't line up with his. He's still trapped in the WW2 supersoldier mentality, and I figured Tony and crew were signing the Accords but with an attitude that in event of another world-shattering crisis it will be easier to ask forgiveness than permission. Nah, Steve Rogers is cool with you having different opinions so long as you don't come at him or his people. He was just going to retire until they decided to go after Buckey with the intention of straight up murdering him with no evidence that he was guilty of this crime. Also, he was right and they were wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
There needs to be a credits tag in Doctor Strange where Everett Ross (Freeman) approaches Strange and says something like, "We've got some papers for you to sign." You can't not have those two share a scene. It shouldn't be an important scene, but, come on.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Thinking about the movie a bit more... Why does no one in the Marvel movie-world seem particularly concerned that Tony's been self-destructing out of PTSD and guilt for the last three or four movies? There's a few different scenes in Civil War where Tony is visibly on the verge of breaking down sobbing because every time he tries to help people or fix problems, people get hurt and often killed. Now in Civil War we learn that Tony's girlfriend and as we've seen one of the main stabilizing influences on his life... has broken up with him. Every time he tries to make things right, by destroying his suits or creating an AI to save the world to the Avengers won't have to risk their lives or by signing a treaty to hold himself accountable to others, things keep blowing up in his face - and he points that out in this movie. And not a single person in the movies seems terribly concerned about the effect any of this is having on Tony Stark. I'm going to be shocked if Tony doesn't die in Infinity War. I think at this point he'd consider it a relief.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:So BvS got a lot of press for record* drop-off but if you actually read about, it dropped 69% where the average drop-off for super hero movies is 59%. That being said I fully expect this to be significantly on the lower side, maybe around 40%? But in general massive opening weekends tend to mean a lot of the target audience has already seen it and subsequent weekends are stragglers and repeat viewings. You're not going to get as low as 20%. Ah, yeah I'm still wrapped up in hype and don't really know much about the standard film drop-off rates and whatnot. Riven posted:There needs to be a credits tag in Doctor Strange where Everett Ross (Freeman) approaches Strange and says something like, "We've got some papers for you to sign." You can't not have those two share a scene. It shouldn't be an important scene, but, come on. I just randomly had that thought thinking back about the movie too, haha. So, thoughts on the final stinger that plays after all the credits? It seems like a straightforward thing with Tony having slipped Peter a fancy hologram of a new suit design, or some way to get in touch with him (certainly seemed like a Stark-tech style thing), but I couldn't quite make out the significance since I only saw what it made for a split second. I just found out that they didn't show it to like, anyone before the movie came out, so I'm now curious if there's more meaning to it than I realized.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
The meaning is that RDJ will probably be in the Spiderman movie.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
It's a Spidey Signal. No, really, it's a thing! Phylodox fucked around with this message at 22:56 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
It was also a reference to how old Spidey comics would end with an image of his face spread across the background
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
In the old comics, Spider-Man had a little Spidey Signal he'd project on walls and scare criminals with and it was really hokey and campy. The stinger seems to be updating it to be some kind of communicator with an OS, so I guess he's getting full-fledged Stark support to be a superhero.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Thinking about the movie a bit more... Why does no one in the Marvel movie-world seem particularly concerned that Tony's been self-destructing out of PTSD and guilt for the last three or four movies? There's a few different scenes in Civil War where Tony is visibly on the verge of breaking down sobbing because every time he tries to help people or fix problems, people get hurt and often killed. Now in Civil War we learn that Tony's girlfriend and as we've seen one of the main stabilizing influences on his life... has broken up with him. Every time he tries to make things right, by destroying his suits or creating an AI to save the world to the Avengers won't have to risk their lives or by signing a treaty to hold himself accountable to others, things keep blowing up in his face - and he points that out in this movie. And not a single person in the movies seems terribly concerned about the effect any of this is having on Tony Stark. I'd say this is a good point. Tony's falling apart and feels weight on his shoulders. I hope Peter can be this sort of help.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
I gotta say I was definitely pleased that "If you want to get to them you'll have to go through me" was not (immediately, anyway) met with the character saying that being knocked aside as if he was no trouble. I felt like they did a good job in the big chaotic fight of making sure that even Ant-Man, who was mostly comedic, still came off as competent. He wasn't a bumbling idiot who mysteriously forgot about his powers. Everyone felt like they actually had a useful part to play.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The meaning is that RDJ will probably be in the Spiderman movie. Probably? How about a full thing that's actually happening (since, you know, he signed on). Might be missing  so bear with me.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
The bear.... is with you. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 14, 2024 09:05 |
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Well, he's doing the opposite of offering them the chance to pass the buck if we use your reasoning. Prior to their talk, there's no implication, in either The Avengers or the many sequels, that any of the Avengers are responsible or feel responsible for the casualties. By making his argument be that the Accords are to prevent the collateral damage we saw in those incidents, he's implicitly equating them signing the Accords with accepting personal responsibility for the casualties, because otherwise the Accords would be no improvement over what happened before. It makes sense Tony could be fooled by this: he's the fucker that made Ultron and really does have room to feel guilty for that, if not the other incidents. What Ross is offering is a future of passing the buck. He's saying that these deaths are already on your conscience but next time Uncle
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:25
|
|