|
0 Legionnaires (),
127
Murran Spies, and
2
Spider Guild Agents. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
 Previous Thread |
|
Next Thread 
|
|
Print Thread  |
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
|
|
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872 |
One week until Civil War: Captain America Avengers 3 comes out in theatres.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 6,692
Humanoid from the Deep
|
|
Humanoid from the Deep
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 6,692 |
Keep up with what I've been watching lately! "Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
|
|
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
|
|
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872 |
It looks like I won't be able to see the movie until the middle of next week, but feel free to post comments here. Spoilers are ok too. I'm going to modify the title of this thread to reflect that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 34,634
Bold Flavors
|
|
Bold Flavors
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 34,634 |
It was fucking awesome.
I just saw it at the noon release and all I can say is: it was just about perfect. Well, maybe not perfect, and I'm sure I'll remember things that were off, but right now, I can't find a single thing I didn't love about it.
The directors, the cast and the writers have just gotten so damn good. The story is epic yet maintains that down-to-Earth sentiment throughout.
The cast is huge but each character has several moments in the sun. All of them are used great: Wanda, Vision, Hawkeye, Agent 13, Ant-Man, General Ross and of course, the big surprise, Spider-Man (and Aunt May is awesome too--holy shit, I can't believe Aunt May is so hot).
Of course, the real chemistry of the Cap films comes down to the electrifying chemistry between Cap and Falcon, Cap and Bucky (and also Falcon and Bucky) & Cap and Black Widow. And those performances deliver in spades. The romance--played sparingly--between Sharon and Cap is fantastic. And the scenes between Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans are nothing short of phenomenal.
This is the Civil War story that I wish we somehow got in the comics. It is so well thought out: nicely complex but not a whole byzantine smorgasbord. The "villain" of the story, Zemo, is also outright fantastic, and his role anchors the movie. I don't want to start ripping apart spoilers, but basically his presence stands in perfect dichotomy to the fears that cause the "Civil War".
Although it is first and foremost a Captain America movie, in a way this is the best Avengers movie yet. Certainly the best 'big cast superhero' movie ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 34,634
Bold Flavors
|
|
Bold Flavors
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 34,634 |
Oh, and a few other thoughts. Forgive me for being vague  - this was about as serious a Marvel movie as there has been. Yet, there were a few moments of humor and they were terrific. The audience in the theater, including me, responded with outright laughs at a few of them. - The action sequences were actually really great. Great superhero choreography. Action sequences are things I can do without sometimes, but this was awesome. - There were some real nice "oh shit!" moments too. Some of them were spoiled for me, so I won't post them here. A lot are cheer worthy, a lot are just surprising and a few are heartbreaking. - Spider-Man was perfect. In fact, if this is an indication, we could be in for the best Spider-man on screen yet. - Black Panther was amazing. They couldn't have done a better job to set up the coming film. I love it. Bravo. - I also love how they ended it. No easy answers here. There's some set-up, I'm sure, for future movies, but they really don't spend much time at all foreshadowing anything except in the most subtle of ways. And I liked that a lot. EDIT - oh, and the best special effects ever! What scene, you say? When they show teenage Robert Downey Jr. and he looks EXACTLY LIKE teenage Robert Downey Jr! It was so believable that for that whole scene I almost couldn't concentrate on what was being said.
Last edited by Cobalt Kid; 05/06/16 08:32 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 57,030
strange but not a stranger
|
|
strange but not a stranger
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 57,030 |
So I went to see Captain America Civil War. I sprang the extra bucks for IMAX. Pfft. The picture was so blurry. I complained after the movie and the theater guy said "Were you wearing the special glasses?" And I was like "Special glasses?????" Seriously though, I didn't like the IMAX. The fight scenes were hard to follow at times and seemed less real. Overall I liked the movie. I thought the meeting between Peter Parker and Tony Stark went on too long. And regarding the Avengers 3 post. I agree. But then Civil War was an Avengers story. Oh and if you don't know, there is an after all the credits bit.
Last edited by Quislet, Esq; 05/08/16 06:34 AM.
Big Dog! Big Dog! Bow Wow Wow!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
|
|
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872 |
I just got back from seeing it.
I liked it better than "Avengers: Age of Ultron", but then that's not saying much.
My favorite things about it were the Black Panther (I might even see his solo movie), the Vision, and the Black Widow.
I also think Downey did a better acting job here than in AAoU, where he was verging dangerously on self-parody.
But I don't think the movie was a patch on the same directors' "Captain America: Winter Soldier." Oh, for a while, it showed potential of being at least equally good. Then they shoehorned in Hawkeye (I hate Jeremy Renner more than ever now), the most annoying version of Spider-Man ever, and Ant-Man (whose solo movie I did enjoy.) That, IMO, threw the whole movie off course and it never quite recovered.
And while the movie's not as ham-fisted or as hysterical as the comic book Civil War, I found it thematically muddled and I thought the big fight scene between the two sides came off a lot cheesier than it was supposed to. I also question the point of why the big battle had to be between the heroes, heroines, and anti-heroes and anti-heroines. Couldn't they have adapted, say, the "Under Siege" arc of the Avengers comic instead? Hell, the main villain in that one was Zemo, too!
I suppose what it comes down to is that the older I get, the more I think that when superhero stories (in both comics and in cinema) take themselves too seriously, they come off more ridiculous than when they don't take themselves seriously -- the Emperor's New Spandex, as it were. Of course, on the other extreme, there's the farcical buffoonery of "Guardians of the Galaxy," but that's a whole other discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12,863
Time Trapper
|
|
Time Trapper
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12,863 |
Saw it today with Carol and Sam. Much better theatre experience than Bvs.S because we sat up front and weren't bothered by aholes with phones.
So, the movie:
Who didn't see the big reveal coming all the way from 1991? No real surprise. Except, why was it videotaped when the "accident" happened on a rural road?
Lots of characters, spread thin on the characterization in spots, way to much in others. Like Fanny, thought that the Tony/Peter meet went on way to long.
And while it's good to see Petey in the MVU, I thought it was really shoehorned.
And is it just me or is it more than a little creepy..."I dated yer aunt, yer mom must have not even been born yet for you to be this age, lets Mack on each other real quick!"
Sorry, it's like a bad jerry springer ep.. "I'm dating my aunt's boyfriend now that she's dead."
Overall... I give it a C. Nice action though.
(The truck flipping up and breaking the barrier overhead and there not being any rubble that stopped the other two trucks...I'll chalk that up to artistic license.)
Damn you, you kids! Get off my lawn or I'm callin' tha cops!
Something pithy!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141
Not much between despair and ecstacy
|
|
Not much between despair and ecstacy
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141 |
I liked it a great deal.
It's interesting to compare this movie with Batman vs. Superman. Both explore the theme of superhero battles causing mass casualties, and both include heroes, besides the titular characters, who go to war with each other.
Yet Civil War has all the coherency and sense of purpose that BvS lacked. Every development sprang logically from the characters as they've been established in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. None of it felt forced or contrived. (I didn't see Ant-Man, so I have no idea why he joined the fight. However, Tony's appeal to Spider-Man was original and fun.)
I agree that the acting was stellar. Evans brings to life all of Cap's qualities as the moral center of the Avengers--a man who will not back down from what he believes to be right. Downey keeps getting better and better as the tortured Stark, who, despite his attempts to make the world a better place can only watch as those attempts backfire with horrific consequences.
Pet peeves:
--The action scenes did seem jarring. Perhaps it was where I was sitting in the theatre (right in the middle), but I had to shut one eye to eliminate the double vision. (I didn't notice the problem in the non-action scenes.)
--The actor who played Zemo (I can't be arsed to look up his name) looked too much like the actor who played Bucky--so much so that, in the early scenes, I thought Zemo was Bucky.
--There were so many characters and supporting characters that it was difficult to keep track of some. I'd forgotten who the guy was who taunts Zemo at the end. He has only one brief earlier appearance, as I recall, and I didn't draw the connection until later.
All things considered, those are minor complaints. This movie had a lot of expectations to live up to and, unlike certain other recent sequels (e.g., Star Wars), it exceeded them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141
Not much between despair and ecstacy
|
|
Not much between despair and ecstacy
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141 |
An additional thought or two:
One of the things that makes the Marvel movies so coherent and enjoyable is that they build off the story lines already established in the comics. The Black Panter is the ruler of Wakanda, a technologically sophisticated African nation. Spider-Man is a geeky teeanger who has become a do-it-yourself hero. These qualities were kept intact and highlighted in a few scenes. The movie makers did not have to a lot of world-building, just some world-tweaking.
(That also made it gratifying to see credit at the end for creators such as Steve Engelhart, Don Heck, and many others. It's great that their contributions to this story were acknowledged.)
The DC movies keep trying to build their universe from the ground up, and, as a result, their characters only superficially resemble the characters we know. They look like Superman and Batman but lack the heart and soul of those characters. Some versions of these characters (particularly the latest) are still good, but they lack the familiar magic. It's just too obvious that they are "reboots".
The Marvel films have somehow managed to preserve the core values of the characters, and that makes them seem authentic even when there have been superficial changes. (Hawkeye, f'r instance, looks and acts nothing like the Clint Barton of the comics. Yet role on the team and friendship with Natasha echo the best of his comic book incarnation).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
|
|
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872 |
The Marvel films have somehow managed to preserve the core values of the characters, and that makes them seem authentic even when there have been superficial changes. (Hawkeye, f'r instance, looks and acts nothing like the Clint Barton of the comics. Yet role on the team and friendship with Natasha echo the best of his comic book incarnation). In hindsight, I might have been more accepting of the movie Hawkeye from the start if he wasn't being played by an unappealing actor with a doughy, pasty, uglier-than-sin face.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256
Time Trapper
|
|
Time Trapper
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256 |
I saw it Sunday, and my initial impression was of being let down to some degree. Part of it is that the film feels more incomplete than any other installment with its obvious setting up a certain status quo to be continued by other movies. I know that all of the Marvel movies do that to varying degrees to set up later movies, but this one felt like it just isn't satisfying enough on its own. This is a problem with modern Marvel Comics "events" in that each one feels incomplete and simply leads to the next thing. That's not something I want the films to emulate.
And, hell, let's face it--the ending is kind of a bummer itself. I don't expect them all to have a happy ending, but this one doesn't feel terribly earned or as character-driven as it's supposed to seem. In a real way, this movie doesn't document the entirety of the titular Civil War but, in a way, more like the first Act or something. A division remains and will not be resolved very soon.
And then there's the plot holes. How does Zemo pull the strings for events to work out exactly as they do? I mean, for one thing, how can he predict that Tony will accompany Cap and Bucky for the climax? I dunno. Presumably, he knows from the beginning that the Winter Soldier has an explosive secret that will divide the Avengers from the beginning, but he doesn't actually know what it is until he gets a face-to-face with Bucky? Can't prove it until that point? It's very muddled. And who is Zemo in this universe beyond a victim of the events of Sokovia that he has the skill-set and wherewithal to pull of all of this? It's very messy and, if they cut out that info from the master print assuming it was ever there), I feel that was a real mistake.
At this point Batman vs. Superman feels to me like the better movie between the two. I can agree with some of the execution and tonal problems with the DC movie, but as a story, I had fewer problems with it. It's quite possible that Civil War will improve for me with further viewings (as Age of Ultron did), but for now it feels like its contrived and messy plot is masked by a cast of characters that we continue to root for because we feel we know them so well.
Still "Lardy" to my friends!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141
Not much between despair and ecstacy
|
|
Not much between despair and ecstacy
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141 |
The Marvel films have somehow managed to preserve the core values of the characters, and that makes them seem authentic even when there have been superficial changes. (Hawkeye, f'r instance, looks and acts nothing like the Clint Barton of the comics. Yet role on the team and friendship with Natasha echo the best of his comic book incarnation). In hindsight, I might have been more accepting of the movie Hawkeye from the start if he wasn't being played by an unappealing actor with a doughy, pasty, uglier-than-sin face. To each his or her own, Fanfie. I actually like Renner's portrayal of Hawkeye, and I don't care whether he is physically attractive or not. In fact, I like the "everyman" quality he brings to the role. I will say I think his eyes are very expressive and give new meaning to the name "Hawkeye."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
|
|
More Polyanna than Poison Ivy
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,872 |
I saw it Sunday, and my initial impression was of being let down to some degree. Part of it is that the film feels more incomplete than any other installment with its obvious setting up a certain status quo to be continued by other movies. I know that all of the Marvel movies do that to varying degrees to set up later movies, but this one felt like it just isn't satisfying enough on its own. This is a problem with modern Marvel Comics "events" in that each one feels incomplete and simply leads to the next thing. That's not something I want the films to emulate.
And, hell, let's face it--the ending is kind of a bummer itself. I don't expect them all to have a happy ending, but this one doesn't feel terribly earned or as character-driven as it's supposed to seem. In a real way, this movie doesn't document the entirety of the titular Civil War but, in a way, more like the first Act or something. A division remains and will not be resolved very soon.
And then there's the plot holes. How does Zemo pull the strings for events to work out exactly as they do? I mean, for one thing, how can he predict that Tony will accompany Cap and Bucky for the climax? I dunno. Presumably, he knows from the beginning that the Winter Soldier has an explosive secret that will divide the Avengers from the beginning, but he doesn't actually know what it is until he gets a face-to-face with Bucky? Can't prove it until that point? It's very muddled. And who is Zemo in this universe beyond a victim of the events of Sokovia that he has the skill-set and wherewithal to pull of all of this? It's very messy and, if they cut out that info from the master print assuming it was ever there), I feel that was a real mistake.
At this point Batman vs. Superman feels to me like the better movie between the two. I can agree with some of the execution and tonal problems with the DC movie, but as a story, I had fewer problems with it. It's quite possible that Civil War will improve for me with further viewings (as Age of Ultron did), but for now it feels like its contrived and messy plot is masked by a cast of characters that we continue to root for because we feel we know them so well. At the time I posted my review, I hadn't thought about a lot of the things you observed in your review. But I agree with pretty much all of them. Regarding your first point, I saw it with two friends, one of whom knows next to nothing about the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and I kept thinking while the film was running, "He must be so confused right now." As we were leaving the theatre, I broached the subject, and he basically shrugged and said the surface pleasures were enough to paper over the stuff he didn't understand. But, yeah, if the Marvel movies continue on this course, they're going to become way too insular and inaccessible.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141
Not much between despair and ecstacy
|
|
Not much between despair and ecstacy
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141 |
I saw it Sunday, and my initial impression was of being let down to some degree. Part of it is that the film feels more incomplete than any other installment with its obvious setting up a certain status quo to be continued by other movies. I know that all of the Marvel movies do that to varying degrees to set up later movies, but this one felt like it just isn't satisfying enough on its own. This is a problem with modern Marvel Comics "events" in that each one feels incomplete and simply leads to the next thing. That's not something I want the films to emulate. Status quo? I dunno. Cap and his team are fugitives. Cap has returned his shield to Stark. Rhodey may have permanent injuries. Vision and Wanda have started to kindle feelings for each other. Spider-Man now has an inside line to Stark technology. A lot of changes happened in this film to disrupt or at least make us wonder about the status quo. And it did all that without killing any of the main characters this time. And then there's the plot holes. How does Zemo pull the strings for events to work out exactly as they do? I mean, for one thing, how can he predict that Tony will accompany Cap and Bucky for the climax? I dunno. Presumably, he knows from the beginning that the Winter Soldier has an explosive secret that will divide the Avengers from the beginning, but he doesn't actually know what it is until he gets a face-to-face with Bucky? Can't prove it until that point? It's very muddled. Good point about the plot holes. I think it's clear that Zemo knew the "explosive secret" (that's why he was so adamant about finding out what happened on Dec. 16, 1991). But, yes, his plan did depend on Stark following Cap and Bucky to the hidden lair and on someone having videotaped what did happen on Dec. 16, 1991. And who is Zemo in this universe beyond a victim of the events of Sokovia that he has the skill-set and wherewithal to pull of all of this? It's very messy and, if they cut out that info from the master print assuming it was ever there), I feel that was a real mistake. It was established that Zemo was a colonel in some military/terrorist organization. How this reconciles with the mourning son/husband/father he turns out to be is unclear.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256
Time Trapper
|
|
Time Trapper
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256 |
Regarding your spoiler box, I'm not disputing that changes happened in the film but that the basic conflict lacks resolution and will play out in various ways for a while. It feels obvious that they will all have a "rah-rah" moment against Thanos and kiss and make up. I'm not sure seeing the schism playing out until that time is all that interesting. Good point about the plot holes. I think it's clear that Zemo knew the "explosive secret" (that's why he was so adamant about finding out what happened on Dec. 16, 1991). But, yes, his plan did depend on Stark following Cap and Bucky to the hidden lair and on someone having videotaped what did happen on Dec. 16, 1991. I understand that his real goal was a planned swerve, but I thought it was more interesting when we thought he was after a super-powered army. That actually works better considering the character he is based on and doesn't depend on supposedly unpredictable plot contrivances to make it work. If he learns this explosive secret in the process and uses it to his advantage to keep the Avengers distracted, it works better for me. But that was never his plan. It was established that Zemo was a colonel in some military/terrorist organization. How this reconciles with the mourning son/husband/father he turns out to be is unclear.
If so, that he happened to be a guy so well-placed to know some of the best-kept secrets MCU Earth's history AND was severely personally impacted by the events on Sokovia is a big plot contrivance. I could have overlooked that better if we had more background on this Zemo and was better developed.
Still "Lardy" to my friends!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256
Time Trapper
|
|
Time Trapper
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256 |
Plus, I don't know when Cap ever found out that Bucky did what he did in 1991. I was like, "when did cap know that? And if he did, why wouldn't he break it to Tony, being the honest guy Cap is?"
Still "Lardy" to my friends!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141
Not much between despair and ecstacy
|
|
Not much between despair and ecstacy
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141 |
I'm fine with Zemo not wanting to create a super-powered army. If he had done so, the movie would have gone on too long or perhaps needed a quick sequel. (Just how would Cap, Buck, and Tony fight off five big baddies in the time we had left?) I also thought it made a nice twist to play against what we were expecting Zemo to do.
I think you're right about the story lacking resolution, at least to a point. The world still fears the Avengers, the accords have been signed by some of them, and more and more "enhanced humans" (love that term) continue to appear out of the proverbial woodwork. But, to me, the story was never about these bigger issues. Those were the backdrop against the Cap/Bucky and Cap/Tony relationships.
As I think on it more, I realize you're right in one other aspect: Cap doesn't change as a character (and this was a problem I had with his first film). In fact, he remains glaringly consistent throughout. But at least the relationship between him and Tony changes, and that gives the movie a sense of closure, in my opinion.
You could be right about the "rah-rah" moment if/when the Thanos story emerges. Marvel knows its audience and it doesn't want to tamper too much with what fans expect (something it shares in common with the Star Wars franchise). Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the ride of wondering when/if we'll get there.
I agree that Zemo's history is contrived.
Cap says he knew someone had killed Tony's parents but didn't know it was Bucky. That's the moment which left me scratching my head. How did he know what became of the Starks?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256
Time Trapper
|
|
Time Trapper
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256 |
I'm fine with Zemo not wanting to create a super-powered army. If he had done so, the movie would have gone on too long or perhaps needed a quick sequel. (Just how would Cap, Buck, and Tony fight off five big baddies in the time we had left?) I also thought it made a nice twist to play against what we were expecting Zemo to do. I get that this was a swerve to counter-punch our expectations, but given how huge coincidences and contrivances were needed to make the real plan work, the non-swerve seems to work a lot better for a sensible plot. I mean, before this film, I thought the otherwise superb Dark Knight film depended an awful lot on the Joker predicting super-accurately how people would act and react, but this one makes those moves seem entirely plausible by comparison. Basically, it feels like writers are contriving too much to pit characters against each other rather than making it feel like a natural thing to happen. I mean there was already some internal conflict in the Avengers films that could have been built upon to work better, but instead, they used a snake in the mailbox and a guy hellbent for revenge who somehow knows exactly what it is and how to use it to pull the right strings. I dunno. I don't necessarily object to them deciding the Winter Soldier did what he did, but if Tony somehow found out himself, it might have worked better. Anyhow, I don't want to give the impression that I hated Civil War. These actors and their portrayals of their characters are so good that they elevate what is otherwise a head-scratcher of a plot. But I certainly didn't leave the theater feeling satisfied like I completely expected to be. Winter Soldier was one of the three best Marvel movies (imo, along with the original Avengers and GotG) for a number of reasons, so I felt a sequel helmed by the same guys would knock it out of the park. I don't feel it did.
Still "Lardy" to my friends!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256
Time Trapper
|
|
Time Trapper
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,256 |
BTW, I really liked Ant-Man in this movie. Not just because of the expected evolution of his powers but because of the zingers and lightness that Paul Rudd brings to the role. The more I see the Ant-Man movie, the more I like it--and I quite enjoyed it the first time around. I'm not crazy about him being a fugitive/convict again in this one as it undermines what he achieved in his own film.
By comparison Spidey seemed a little forced and out of place. It's not that I hated the casting or anything, but it's a little odd seeing our youngest Peter Parker yet. I though Garfield was really skewing younger in the Amazing films, but Holland feels waaaay younger than him and especially Maguire. In a way this emulates Bendis' Ultimate version more than classic Pete because Peter graduates High School fairly quickly in ASM and in some ways is already a grown-up in a young man's body with all of his responsibilities and being on the cusp of asking Betty Brant to marry him early on.
I liked Ultimate Spider-man, though, and am looking forward to seeing Marvel flesh this young Spidey out more fully in their upcoming and long-awaited chance to tackle the character.
Still "Lardy" to my friends!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141
Not much between despair and ecstacy
|
|
Not much between despair and ecstacy
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 24,141 |
I can live with the very young Spidey because he serves the needs of the story. As a young prodigy, he provided Stark with a valid excuse to visit him, tying in with Tony's grant giving at the beginning of the film. It was also believable that his initial costume was crude and that he acquired his "upgrade" from someone with the means to give it to him. A teenaged Peter is not likely to have the skills to create the costume himself. His wisecracks worked quite well in the story and seemed very teenage-like: full of energy, enthusiasm, and a lack of understanding for how "inappropriate" they were. His hero worship of Cap-- and apparently not seeing any contradiction in fighting him--also seemed appropriate for his age. This Spidey has been a hero for only six months and hasn't had time to become jaded or tortured with angst. I also loved the last scene in which he tells Aunt May he was beat up by a guy named Steve from Brooklyn. It's totally the truth but something only a kid could get away with saying.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,779
Fighting Back
|
|
Fighting Back
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,779 |
Avengers Infinity...well, the first half, anyway...opens tomorrow!
I'll be seeing it with friends, and hopefully the camaraderie and the shared positive energy will prevent me from gagging whenever Josh Brolin (as Thanos, a character I'd dislike no matter who plays him) appears, or from out-and-out vomiting whenever Jeremy Renner (as Hawkeye) appears.
Seriously, though, at this point all I expect out of it is a decent roller-coaster ride.
We shall see.
Still "Fickles" to my friends.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,779
Fighting Back
|
|
Fighting Back
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,779 |
I thought it had its moments. But a roller-coaster ride isn't supposed to be about "moments," especially when it grinds to a halt between each "moment." Call me old-fashioned, but I think that it's already bad enough that genre movies which would have been only 90 minutes are now almost twice as long, and that padding out such a thin story to almost SIX HOURS and splitting it into two separate installments is unforgivable. The filmmakers try to give Thanos depth -- now there, in my opinion, is a lost cause! Really, in the first quarter of the 21st Century, the whole "mass murder justified by the ends" trope rings an especially false note. The Avengers sequences tended to be more watchable than the Guardians sequences. I wouldn't be surprised if even some fans of the first two Guardians-centric movies might agree with me that the jokes have gotten over-familiar and stale. It bothered me that Wanda didn't have her accent from the earlier movies, and that she used colloquialisms. Weirdly enough, the good parts reminded me of Star Wars: The Force Awakens (tasty but insubstantial pastiches, sweet but insubstantial fan service bits) and the bad ones of Star Wars: The Last Jedi (telegraphing all the big shockeroos, taking the whole thing too seriously one minute and not seriously enough the next.) And as for the customary end-credits bonus scene setting up the next film: Carol Danvers better kick Thanos's purple ass all the way into the next Omniverse, the way they're building her up as Captain Marvel. Brie Larson is a good actress, but she's got a near-impossible task ahead of her. EDIT: Almost forgot -- in the "Thank the Gods For Small Favors" department, this installment is 100 PERCENT RENNER-FREE! Yay!
Still "Fickles" to my friends.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 6,692
Humanoid from the Deep
|
|
Humanoid from the Deep
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 6,692 |
I agree with a lot of what you said Ann, though I think I might have liked it a little more than you did. I didn't mind that they at least attempted to give Thanos some death. One flashback scene in particular involving him and a young Gamora was done exceptionally well. The two biggest issues for me were the tonal shifts and the pacing. I get that the MCU is known for its humor and I usually like that about their films, but even when Thanos is about to destroy the world, Starlord is still cracking jokes constantly! It kind of cuts the tension in scenes that really needed it. Also, I get that with a story of this scale and a cast of this size, pacing is going to be a problem. However, I honestly would rather have sat through one 4 hour long movie than 2 2.5 hour movies that I'm going to have wait another year to see to finish this story. That's probably the biggest thing that's going to hurt it's re-watchability. Some more quick thoughts:
Hopefully Loki stays dead. Killing him off in the first 10 minutes was a ballsy movie.
Did anyone else think that hooded character at the Soul Stone location was going to be Death? To be honest, the Red Skull twist was pretty cool and I like that they didn't dwell on it. He's just there, we get a very vague explanation, and we move on.
Ending the movie with everyone dying was pretty cool. Obviously most of them are coming back, but for a part 1 cliffhanger, it's a pretty bold move. Plus, Spider-Man's line "I don't feel so good, Mr. Stark" just killed me.
Keep up with what I've been watching lately! "Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you."
|
|
|
|
Forums14
Topics21,099
Posts1,052,589
Legionnaires1,732
| |
Most Online53,886
Jan 7th, 2024
|
|
|
Posts: 8,962
Joined: August 2003
|
|
|
|
