|
Post by unkinhead on May 14, 2018 12:47:48 GMT -8
Infinity War was good, had enough genuine comedy and involving Thanos drama to keep it interesting. Just a good time all in all. Visually quite meh, but i didn't expect more. Some petty annoyances:(spoilers) Doctor Strange seeing 14 million possible futures. Eye roller, also completely unbelievable...Like really? Your best shot to stop Thanos before he murdered half the planet wasn't to just punch Nova in the face before she could reveal to Star Lord that Gamora was dead? Cuzzz seems like they were bout to get that dude's glove off. Plus its just a writers contrivance/gimmick that they can use to explain anything. "It was the only way". Thanos's philosophy: I actually like that they tried to develop a villain beyond empty motiveless evil, but again this stretches believability to annoyance...like first of all, howd you settle on exactly half the population? Thats weird...also can't you like create infinite resources with the glove? Certainly there are better solutions... I mean, lots of small contrivances throughout, but i felt those ones to be especially egregious. I definitely liked it overall though, now i just wish they came out and said that all the future films were red herrings and that Infinity War was the true conclusion to the marvel cinematic universe. Oh i also watched Ready Player One...holy crap that was terrible. My favorite part was (spoiler) when his aunt died and then in the next scene he's hittin on the female companion chick like everything was cool.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 14, 2018 14:01:15 GMT -8
(Moved that comment from the "Whatcha Watchin" thread, since that was for TV discussion.)
I think I agree with your complaints, particularly with regards to the "half the universe" theory. I'm still not entirely sure how wiping out half the population is a means of "balancing" the universe. Wouldn't "balance" involve the other half becoming twice as alive? I think?
Also, Nova isn't in this movie. But I do appreciate you referencing an Avenger from the comic books. (I mean, I assume it was an intentional reference.)
|
|
MightJustBePathBeyondTheDark
Guest
|
Post by MightJustBePathBeyondTheDark on May 14, 2018 20:56:42 GMT -8
I share everyones enthusiasm for the job done by the Russo brothers in regards to how they juggled all the characters and egos present. I'd go as far as to say it's astonishing that it worked as well as it did, for the most part, and that it's disapointing there isn't a tangible way of showing them just how incredible a feat they accomplished.
But as much as I loved most of the film, similar to Buffyholic's reaction, I despised the manipulative "deaths" towards its conclusion. I know we're in the minority, but the knowledge that most if not all of the deaths will be reversed in the end takes too much away from what the film asks the audience to do. Most are willing to chow down despite this fact, but I just can't. A fun, engaging and minimally flawed (imo) film stoops to some of Marvel's most manipulative marketing moves to date between it and the post credit scene. Yet everyone sees it as "ballsy", despite that very mindset proving just how ingenius Marvel is when it comes to selling this universe.
It's not to say the ending completely negated the great film prior. I still loved it and lost some of my anymosity as I conversed with others and sat on it in the days following. But I won't give them much credit for essentially cleverly advertising the next several films without caring whether or not there will end up being any meaning to it.
If it is used as a means to develop the remaining cast and have them grieve, with whatever time they have after introducing any new heroes helmed by Captain Marvel, then I can retroactively give it some credit. I just don't expect much to come from it other than what it already has accomplished, that being motivating most to pay for the next movie.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on May 14, 2018 21:22:44 GMT -8
A major character, like Cap, will probably be required to give their life in order to reverse all the deaths, lending them *some* degree of meaning. That said, people take this shit waaaaay too seriously...I would suggest far more seriously than the writers do. They be writing asides about favourite ice cream flavours, yo.
|
|
KindaSomewhatPathBeyondTheDark
Guest
|
Post by KindaSomewhatPathBeyondTheDark on May 15, 2018 2:05:04 GMT -8
See, I'm of the very much correct opinion (jk) that the "poof" effect equates to very cheap deaths. No one has to get their hands dirty, no bodies to stare at cold and lifeless, nothing about it felt impactful even on a surface level.
Aside from the obvious ploy by Marvel, on the subjective side of things I personally would have liked to see something more grounded in reality. Like we used to commend BtVS for doing when it came to character deaths as opposed to the "dusting" of vampires or how demons tended to melt away/ disappear upon becoming deceased, I expected we'd be able to draw our agony from something more visually morbid. I realize the big cheese, the mouse himself, has his leash on Marvel but as seen with Loki they can give you something of a more striking death.
This is a war. In the large scale battle within Wacanda towards the end of IW barely a single hero was even injured let alone randomly killed. That whole sequence felt pointless, like unnecessary padding to the run time. It could have been used as a means to kill a few of the characters before the "poof" and still have the fact that they'll return save Marvel from any long term repercussions. Yet instead we get an excuse to kill off a couple of Thanos's lackies. Oh and Thanos not getting another kill outside of the inadvertent one with Vision was a buzz kill. I was waiting for that ruthless moment where he'd snap a guy in two (not literally cause Disney) and we'd get a shocking, swift death or two but... nothing. What a bummer.
As for IW2, personally, if Cap were to go out in such a manner I'd be highly disappointed. I hate the cliche sacrifice when it comes to these sorts of scenarios. But that's likely what will happen. Eh, I guess my expectations are a bit too high but it's difficult knowing the kind of opportunity they have and the fact that they aren't capitalizing. Again, I loved the film. I think it has less flaws then most outside its ending. But said ending just rubbed me the wrong way and in addition didn't live up to what I personally was looking forward to in regards to character deaths.
|
|
OkayFineIt'sPathBeyondTheDark
Guest
|
Post by OkayFineIt'sPathBeyondTheDark on May 15, 2018 2:53:42 GMT -8
(Why no "edit" post option? Sheesh) Just to show how much detail the film actually gives you without beating you over the head with it, and how much I appreciate this fact, in addition to giving you an example of how little in the way of flaws there really are within its internal logic (and thus the film as a whole): Thanos's very specific number of lives necessary comes from the fact that he had been experimenting through his multiple conquests of planets. If you recall, he explains that Gamora's people have lived prosperous lives since he conquered them and massacred half of its population. This is where his figures come into play. As for his reasoning, it's the simple fact that there are more lives in the universe then there are resources to comfortably sustain them. He does not have knowledge of what resources each and every being needs to sustain itself (I would think), so it'd be kind of difficult to create said resources. In his mind, the answer is to simply half the population of the entire universe to create a scenario where every being can live comfortably, without competition or poverty to impede on their wellbeing. Is it morally correct? I mean... probably not... ( ) but it is logically sound considering his successes on other planets and just in general, when you think about it, with the food scarcity in our society wouldn't such a solution work despite how morbid it is? Now of course there are factors such as greed that will impact the wellbeing of individuals, but Thanos is content with providing the opportunity I suppose even if the reality may sway in another direction (or it's more god complex then actually caring, but that's the beauty of its ambiguous nature).
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 15, 2018 5:25:38 GMT -8
I understood the gist of his plan; I just wasn't sold on how it worked on a universal level. While some parts of Marvel's universe are probably overpopulated, others are likely underpopulated, to the point that halving their populations halved will only hasten their destruction. There doesn't seem to be any sort of pattern among who lives or dies; the plan just seems a little too net and simplified.
But, I guess that's part of the larger problem - it's a jarringly quick ending to such a large-scale film. Which is unfortunate, since so much of the film leading up to it was really well-done.
I'm guessing that, like J.C. says, Avengers 4 will permanently kill off at least one major character. Although I'm not sure how effective the concept of "permanent" death is in the MCU anymore.
(Also, there is an Edit feature, but you need to be logged into an account - not as a guest - in order to use it.)
|
|
PBTD
Newbie
Posts: 44
|
Post by PBTD on May 15, 2018 8:17:16 GMT -8
There's definitely a ton of factors not taken into consideration, but that just fuels the alternate possibility that Thanos is more driven by the belief that he is a god then in actually creating any real positive change. After all, does a man who cares about the wellbeing of others have his daughters spar for kicks then systematically dismember her each time she fails? He's a narcissistic control freak who is willing to strike down anyone who gets in his way. He may believe he's righteous, but in reality he's doing all this for himself.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jun 24, 2018 17:00:35 GMT -8
I belatedly finished Season Two of Jessica Jones. In some ways, it was better than the first. I was particularly happy with the way they furthered Jessica's arc - one of my big concerns post-S1 was that the Kilgrave storyline was so pivotal to her character that the show would struggle to find a new direction once it was resolved. Thankfully, that was not the case - Season Two continues to prove why Jess is one of the best Marvel characters to ever mainline her own TV series, with another personal arc and many standout emotional moments. (The flashback episode, "AKA I Want Your Cray Cray," was particularly strong.)
On the downside... there is still not nearly enough story to fill 13 episodes. Most of the material involving the supporting characters - Trish's drug addiction, the Cheng rivalry, anything involving Jeri - just felt like useless padding, designed to draw out the season as inexorably as possible. I suppose it's pointless to keep complaining about it, though - the model seem to be working for Netflix, and they have little incentive to change it.
On that note, I can't say I'm thrilled about sitting through another 13 hours of Luke Cage. Anyone try watching Season Two yet?
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jun 25, 2018 10:39:16 GMT -8
I belatedly finished Season Two of Jessica Jones. In some ways, it was better than the first. I was particularly happy with the way they furthered Jessica's arc - one of my big concerns post-S1 was that the Kilgrave storyline was so pivotal to her character that the show would struggle to find a new direction once it was resolved. Thankfully, that was not the case - Season Two continues to prove why Jess is one of the best Marvel characters to ever mainline her own TV series, with another personal arc and many standout emotional moments. (The flashback episode, "AKA I Want Your Cray Cray," was particularly strong.) On the downside... there is still not nearly enough story to fill 13 episodes. Most of the material involving the supporting characters - Trish's drug addiction, the Cheng rivalry, anything involving Jeri - just felt like useless padding, designed to draw out the season as inexorably as possible. I suppose it's pointless to keep complaining about it, though - the model seem to be working for Netflix, and they have little incentive to change it. On that note, I can't say I'm thrilled about sitting through another 13 hours of Luke Cage. Anyone try watching Season Two yet? It's definitely an improvement over the first. However,-and you knew I was going to write this-there are still major pacing issues. On the plus side, it feels like the show-runners really, really tried to fill the 13 episodes with worthwhile material.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jun 25, 2018 11:11:24 GMT -8
It definitely had a stronger second half than Season One, but I found the first half to be weaker in comparison. But that probably makes it better overall - I'd rather a show get its "slow burn" out of the way in the early going, rather than start out running and then gasp and stumble to the finish line.
Someone on Twitter recently pointed out that Netflix's 13-episode model, while it may hurt shows qualitatively, is an excellent business strategy. While shortening Jessica Jones seasons to 6-8 episodes might help improve the story, the more time people spend watching Netflix shows means the less time they spend watching Amazon or Hulu or regular TV. And in a field as competitive as current television, each extra episode can be an advantage. So unfortunately, it doesn't look like they'll be changing their model anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jul 5, 2018 15:12:45 GMT -8
Just another friendly request from your lovably humble administrator to please keep your thoughts on Ant-Man and the Wasp confined to this thread.
This is partly because it breeds more thoughtful and uninterrupted conversation. And also partly because your humble administrator won't be seeing the film for at least a couple of weeks, and really doesn't like spoilers.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jul 24, 2018 9:18:58 GMT -8
Ant-Man and the Wasp has some strengths over its predecessor - brighter tone, bigger laughs, better use of supporting cast - and it's also not hampered by the decades of development hell which plagued the first film. That said, it hasn't much of a compelling story, and gets frequently bogged down by lots of overly complicated technobabble. The ants, for their part, are underutilized, apart from a few visual gags with a large-than-life specimen.
Still, after the long and galaxy-spanning Infinity War, it's perhaps best for the MCU to take a momentary breather. Rudd and Lilly have good chemistry, and Michael Pena steals his very scene. It's just that Marvel sequels tend to work best when they build on and deepen the effects of the original; Ant-Man and the Wasp seems content to simply coast.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jul 24, 2018 16:22:56 GMT -8
Heh. I thought this film WAS the breather. I had fun with it, but I saw it for free, and really had no expectations.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jul 24, 2018 17:05:51 GMT -8
Oh yes, I was referring to the fact that AMatW was the breather. And it worked well enough, while we wait to get back to the heavier films.
Wonder if my opinion would be improved if I'd seen it for free. (Although I saw Fallen Kingdom for free and was largely unimpressed, so maybe not.)
|
|