|
1stGear posted:I've been rewatching the Marvel movies as my Disney+ sub runs down and if anything, the Whedon movies just look worse and worse with time. The GotG movies, Iron Man 3, and Ragnarok had directors and writers that actually had some creativity, skill, and vision. Whedon has QUIPS. There's a whole thread of creepy running through all his work, it just stood out less in the 1990s when the bar was so low that "let woman fight monster" was a refreshing change of pace instead of just the 100th sequel to Resident Evil or Underworld. The thing about Whedon is that he peaked in like, I dunno, 2003 or some poo poo if I'm generous, and has been actively backsliding ever since. His 2005 movie sequel to the 2002-2003 Firefly TV show is already notably worse than the TV show itself, and it just goes from there.
|
#
¿
May 27, 2020 18:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 10:02 |
|
|
Xealot posted:It's an irony you'd pick those two franchises as a counterpoint, since that's very much what they were also about (Milla Jovovich and Kate Beckinsdale in leading action roles.) Those movies first released in 2002-2003, at the tail-end of Buffy's TV run, which probably isn't coincidental...Buffy was the benchmark for genre storytelling about hot women who kill monsters at that time, and I'm sure those projects were indebted to that. I think some of Whedon's old stuff was good for it's time or even Actually Good, but he's one of those people who has the right beliefs from 30,000 feet like "bigotry bad" but no capacity for self reflection on if they actually act in accordance with those beliefs. Which sort of ties into how creatively he's been actively backsliding for ages.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2020 16:01
|
|
|
Not sure why people feel the need to shitpost here. The guy started a perfectly benign topic and people just had to be assholes about it, rather than just move on because it's about a movie series they don't care about.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2020 22:20
|
|
|
Darko posted:It seems like it branched into its own conversation like most things do. It didn't turn into shitposting until people popped in complaining about the much earlier shitposts in the thread. Literally the first reply to the OP was a zero effort shitpost my dude.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2020 12:37
|
|
|
Arist, how do you not get that SMG's entire gimmick here is to low-key needle you so you lose your temper, and then sealion you to death with WAIT DO YOU *NOT* WANT TO ENGAGE IN DISCOURSE GOON SIR? At this point you're just jumping feet-first on every rake in the yard out of spite.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2020 15:12
|
|
|
Arist posted:At this point I'm just fascinated by the implicit support he's receiving. No one is attempting to argue that SMG was making any kind of good-faith point, but they're carrying on the legacy of his stance because they find it useful, because they care more about attacking me and casting me out than addressing the reason I'm justifiably angry. Sigh. The entire point is to get someone with the wrong opinion to get big mad and say "gently caress you" at being needled. Having an emotional reaction is just going to be framed as you being anti-intellectual and validate the thing that makes you mad. Darko posted:re: The CIA, any black movie that doesn't make the CIA the villain is just weird. I mean, Black Dynamite ended up having the CIA/Nixon as the villains for a reason. My take is the movie tried to thread the needle of "CIA methods are bad" (which it all but says outright by directly linking the villain's villainous plan to the CIA's methods)... while saying the one specific CIA character acting without orders at the end of the movie who is kind of used as a punching bag by the black heroes was OK. The result is at best a muddle though. e: I can see how they fell into this. Killminger is supposed to be a case of "Those who play with the devil's toys will be brought by degrees to wield his sword." Having the clueless white POV guy who acts vaguely dickish but isn't an outright villain be CIA makes it easy to hit it on the nose by having the CIA guy say that Killminger is using the CIA's (implied to be bad) methods to do the bad thing. Where things go sideways is a) the implications of just having a CIA guy not be the villain while participating in an internal power struggle in an African coutnry, and b) they never actually set him up as good beyond taking a bullet for a Wakandan, which makes the Wakandans feel an ethical obligation to help him but doesn't really prove to us that he's not basically a generic CIA shitbird. I think they expected his general buffoonish presentation to take the edge off, but we never actually see him have a crisis of faith in the CIA itself or disobey CIA orders, which makes it harder to separate "specific person in the CIA" from just "the CIA does CIA poo poo but For The Nice People This Time." sean10mm fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jun 9, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2020 15:28
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:Wakanda itself engages in blacks ops around the world: there’s an entire sequence in the film portraying them attempting an extraordinary rendition, and Klaue mentions that they use torture. Not to mention how Wakanda uses the image of a poor African nation as a front organization. Yeah but that's less about the CIA IMO, and more about how the film low-key points out the ethical problems of the Wakanda fantasy itself at various points. The CIA has nothing to do with Wakanda doing those things because it doesn't know the real Wakanda exists at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2020 16:13
|
|
|
I think the fact that this is a place where zero effort shitposting in a new topic until the OP gives up is just accepted by the mods basically says everything you need to know about why people have a negative view of CD. It has very little to do with having an oddball take on funny pages heroes that runs several paragraphs or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:not to defend it as such but SA has always had an adversarial forum culture that tacitly encourages first-page threadshitting, amongst other things. it's by no means unique to this particular forum It's hard to square this take with the idea that well actually CD is the smart people thoughtful film discourse place.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2020 21:15
|
|
|
This place is actually great whenever it's not about mainstream pop culture nerd poo poo like Marvel vs DC comic book movies and Star Wars. Like I never noticed anyone posting like a dildo in the Z-Fest threads or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2020 16:32
|
|
|
Xealot posted:Yeah, it's not ambitiously plotted or anything, but it has cool moments. The "open your eye" scene is great, the Inception-y set pieces are fun. I kind of agree. Guardians of the Galaxy is probably the one movie that basically sets up everything you really need to know about the Galactus poo poo, and it's one of the better ones anyway. It explains the infinity stones, it shows Galactus is trying to get them, it shows what happens if someone can just get one of them (and use it without melting), it sets up Gamora and Nebula's relationship to Galactus, etc., etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2020 01:18
|
|
|
Xealot posted:I think you mean Darkseid. poo poo you got me hahaha 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2020 02:42
|
|
|
"Now that we've run off the person who started the topic, why don't you stay on topic?" is definitely A Take  e: But sure why not. 1) Show them Guardians of the Galaxy. 2) If they like that start watching the following: Iron Man Captain America: The First Avenger The Avengers Iron Man 3 Captain America: The Winter Soldier Thor: Ragnarok Black Panther 3) If they haven't bailed by the end of that list they might want to watch Infinity War/Endgame. Honestly I found them just kind of exhausting though. My hot take is that GoTG is basically what the MCU has been going for all along, it involves characters that had no real prior setup so it doesn't meaningfully rely on any previous MCU film, it explains infinity stones and Thanos and most of the other cosmic stuff that "pays off" (depending on what you think of the last two Avengers films) at the end. sean10mm fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 14:06
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:I'm really surprised you didn't go whole hog and slide Cap 3 in there as well. I think it's a really move if you slide it between Ragnarok and BP as it introduces BP and gives a better explanation/continuation for Bucky's story. I don't actually like watching Civil War amd it matters to subsequent movies even less than usual for the MCU. "So there's this UN treaty deal everyone is Big Mad about..." *Cosmic disasters* WHELP
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
Tony Stark is the guy who bragged about privatizing world peace in 2 and wants to undo it in Civil War. You can argue this is a character arc because Stark is always wrong in his movies and figures it out at the end of each one (until he doesn't again.) So that's less an "arc" and more a sine wave. But at least it's sort of something. In Winter Soldier you have Captain America vehemently opposed to runaway off the books sky murder poo poo and then he's immediately done a 180 the next movie. Like it's possible he could have made an argument that making a new UN council of vague oversight is just re-creating the Shield council of vague oversight that was actually Hydra all along, but uh he never really does that and just pouts. e: Any mistakes I made here I blame on the movie making me care less about the central conflict here than any Marvel movie I can think of, including loving Thor 2 lmao. sean10mm fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:I mean Tony also is dealing with nearly causing the death of all life on Earth because he went too far in trying to make a weapon for world peace in Age of Ultron. And his frenemy's best friend killing his parents while brainwashed, blah blah blah. It's always some kind of drama with that tiny rear end in a top hat. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
My bias is that I absolutely can't give a crap about Civil War, specifically. Like if you squint hard enough you can rationalize their behavior but I DON'T CAAAAAAARE and in the bigger picture just feels like treading water until The Big Stuff. So I guess it's to me what the entire MCU is to the CD hivemind 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
teagone posted:No. That would be absurd. Am I not allowed to be critical of the writing? Like, I understand the logic of what the writers came up with wrt Stark's death. I just think they basically used cheap tactics to hold up a facade of drama. It works though, I admit. I'm just not a fan, and have expressed why in detail in my last few posts. teagone posted:My whole argument is based on bad I feel the writing and characterization is though? I think he's just hung up on you calling the character selfish, when what the character did wasn't selfish based on the narrative the character was stuck in. This doesn't make the narrative GOOD, but it's a different problem than the character having an obvious out from killing themselves and doing it anyway to be a narcissistic glory hound. I think. It would have been hilarious if they actually played it that way though, and everyone was like "So what was that? Adam Warlock (or whoever) was RIGHT THERE, man..."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
I feel like the Snyderdome has been pretty chill for a while now? Unless there was a recent slapfight I missed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 10:02 |
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Yeah wasn't the story with Joss that in his typical mature fashion he was actively trying to undo story beats from other movies? I mean he undid his own TV show's story beats when he made Serenity, so that's been on brand forever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2020 22:19
|
|