T
The Ultimate Movie Thread of Ultimate Destiny
- Thread starter Serge 13
- Start date
Ehh, sorta. It looks more like that costume than it does the older ones but I'd still say it's definitely closer to the things I named than it is to that.
It's really fucking cool regardless. This movie didn't blow me out of the water or anything but I'm still looking forward to a sequel, or at least seeing them do more with the character in Civil War and Infinity War.
I have to say though it's the first movie that really made the "cinematic universe" feel like it was actually a shared universe to me. I mean, the other movies would reference each other occasionally but this is the first where I really felt like those stories actually existed and were happening outside of this story's context, if that makes sense.
It's really fucking cool regardless. This movie didn't blow me out of the water or anything but I'm still looking forward to a sequel, or at least seeing them do more with the character in Civil War and Infinity War.
I have to say though it's the first movie that really made the "cinematic universe" feel like it was actually a shared universe to me. I mean, the other movies would reference each other occasionally but this is the first where I really felt like those stories actually existed and were happening outside of this story's context, if that makes sense.
Last edited:
T
TorontoReign
Guest
It just reminded me somewhat of a cross between that and the original. The Wasp costume look inspired by the originals somewhat too, but she went through so many costumes it is irrelevant. They have done pretty decent with the costumes. I hope that continues with Spidey, Black Panther, and Doctor Strange.
SnapSlav
NMA's local DotA fanatic
Isn't that exactly what most people felt about Iron Man, though? It was a movie about a superhero very few people knew much about, by a no name studio, during a period where superhero movies were just another thing people were trying. It surprised people, but it didn't changes lives. That, I think, was the sentiment that Avengers eventually brought about. Something about that film made people feel, "This is what we have been waiting for. THIS is what superhero movies were meant to be!" But all the films leading up to it, while good, didn't have such reactions.
If the average response to Ant-Man is that it was enjoyed, then it's just more of the same of what we've been getting. A few titles have spoiled us, but by and large, we're getting fairly consistent quality superhero flicks.
Iron Man did blow me out of the water if I remember correctly. At the time it was easily the best superhero movie in existence, and it's still in my top three. Ant-Man was good too, its biggest flaw was just that it felt too much like Iron Man and came across as a little too bland because of that.
I guess the main problem is just that Iron Man was a little too successful and now Marvel is scared of taking risks and straying too far from the formula it laid out.
Last edited:
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Can't say I agree. I do think when Wright left they changed the tone of Ant-Man slightly. It was a rather straight forward flick with many parallels to Stark's first movie, but I wouldn't' say that was due to less risk taking. Guardians of the Galaxy was a massive risk. No one had ever heard of that team before the trailer came out. Ant-Man was too for that matter. That may be why they rewrote parts of what Wright did, in the process making the movie a little more generic. I'm wiling to bet Wright wanted no references to Avengers, Falcon, or Spiderman. Ant-Man would have been a totally different movie.
I do have a formula that has become a little transparent. Visually the movies feel the same, most likely due to using the same visual effects teams, probably even keeping things a certain way to give all the movies that Marvel feel. The only thing that felt the same as Iron Man was the "business man taking over a company" trope. The heist theme gave it enough of a change to add it's own flavor to the mix.
People said Yellowjacket was a weak villain but that shrinking gun he had was sick! The dude totally sold me on his craziness. He did get shortchanged like most Marvel one-shot villains, so ultimately Marvel DOES have a problem with villains. IF they drop the ball on Thanos the whole wall comes crumbling down.
Doctor Strange should be interesting. If it doesn't change things enough the Inhumans might.
http://www.screendaily.com/5091304.article
Last edited by a moderator:
Ehh, they take risks sort of but even Guardians of the Galaxy still followed the same formula as all their other movies which is more what I meant. They'll do things that are a littledifferent but they're never willing to stray too far away from that formula for success that Iron Man created. Ant-Man was just even more similar to it than the rest, with the "businessman recreates superhero suit and superhero has to stop it from falling into the hands of the wrong people by battling a guy with the same ability as him". It wasn't bad, but it makes things a little predictable.
I'm excited about Doctor Strange though. The Ant-Man "quantum" scene might have given us a little taste of what that one's gonna look like, which is cool, and Bumblebee Crumplepatch is actually a pretty good actor.
I'm excited about Doctor Strange though. The Ant-Man "quantum" scene might have given us a little taste of what that one's gonna look like, which is cool, and Bumblebee Crumplepatch is actually a pretty good actor.
Hmm, what coinsidence. I don't know which person, maybe the guy who wrotte Fire and Ice? Not sure! But he had the same criticism. Up to that point I havn't even thought about it, but yeah, it seems that many of the Marvel heroes fight a villain with the same/similar ability in the movies.
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Let's take a look at that with the respective heroes and villains.
Iron Man - Iron Monger was using Tony's reactor technology. He was basically a bigger version of Stark. Jeff Bridges is one of my favorite actors. I think he did amazing in this. Then we have Whiplash/Crimson Dynamo who used Tony's tech to make a...suit that sorta looked like Iron Man's. Iron Man gets a freebie on that one since Armor Wars was a story about him recovering his stolen tech. Which is partly a theme of Iron Man 3 when Iron Patriot gets his suit taken over.
Incredible Hulk - This one is just as transparent. Abomination is basically a Hulk clone.
Captain America - Red Skull is also created using a variant of the Super Soldier Formula. They are polar opposites as far as ideals go. The Winter Soldier is basically a Russian/Hydra super soldier in the comics.
Thor - Breaks the formula a bit, but you do have two brothers - Thor and Loki - who are both Asgardian.
Ant-Man - Yellowjacket uses the same powers based on the same design with lasers added for evilness.
Many have argued that Marvel movies are more about the heroes and their journey whereas DC places a lot of focus on the villains. I argue it is too soon in the DC cinematic universe to judge them the same way. These apparent themes between the heroes and villains are across the genre though. You have Wolverine and Sabertooth in the Xmen. Super Skrull has all the powers of the Fantastic Four. Bizzaro wouldn't be the same without Superman. I think it can be a problem going forward if not handled right.
Doctor Strange may introduce Baron Mordo who - you guessed it - has similar powers as Strange. I hope they introduce Dormammu in that one to break things up a bit. The Inhumans will possibly be similar to Thor due to a few things they have in common; you have a hidden race of alien beings with the protagonist Blackbolt ruling the kingdom while his brother Maximus waits in the shadow for a moment to strike. They have different powers as did Loki and Thor, so it isn't a big similarity other than the potential plot. Marvel does have a villain problem because they are following the formula where the villains get killed at the end of the movie.
Not in every case though. Abomination is an exception, Red Skull may have be transported somewhere else with the Space Gem, Loki is still meddling in Asgardian affairs, and Winter Soldier may be playing for the Home Team soon. I hope moving forward Marvel tries a little harder to make the villains memorable. I won't even mention Ultron. Talk about a let down.
Iron Man - Iron Monger was using Tony's reactor technology. He was basically a bigger version of Stark. Jeff Bridges is one of my favorite actors. I think he did amazing in this. Then we have Whiplash/Crimson Dynamo who used Tony's tech to make a...suit that sorta looked like Iron Man's. Iron Man gets a freebie on that one since Armor Wars was a story about him recovering his stolen tech. Which is partly a theme of Iron Man 3 when Iron Patriot gets his suit taken over.
Incredible Hulk - This one is just as transparent. Abomination is basically a Hulk clone.
Captain America - Red Skull is also created using a variant of the Super Soldier Formula. They are polar opposites as far as ideals go. The Winter Soldier is basically a Russian/Hydra super soldier in the comics.
Thor - Breaks the formula a bit, but you do have two brothers - Thor and Loki - who are both Asgardian.
Ant-Man - Yellowjacket uses the same powers based on the same design with lasers added for evilness.
Many have argued that Marvel movies are more about the heroes and their journey whereas DC places a lot of focus on the villains. I argue it is too soon in the DC cinematic universe to judge them the same way. These apparent themes between the heroes and villains are across the genre though. You have Wolverine and Sabertooth in the Xmen. Super Skrull has all the powers of the Fantastic Four. Bizzaro wouldn't be the same without Superman. I think it can be a problem going forward if not handled right.
Doctor Strange may introduce Baron Mordo who - you guessed it - has similar powers as Strange. I hope they introduce Dormammu in that one to break things up a bit. The Inhumans will possibly be similar to Thor due to a few things they have in common; you have a hidden race of alien beings with the protagonist Blackbolt ruling the kingdom while his brother Maximus waits in the shadow for a moment to strike. They have different powers as did Loki and Thor, so it isn't a big similarity other than the potential plot. Marvel does have a villain problem because they are following the formula where the villains get killed at the end of the movie.
Not in every case though. Abomination is an exception, Red Skull may have be transported somewhere else with the Space Gem, Loki is still meddling in Asgardian affairs, and Winter Soldier may be playing for the Home Team soon. I hope moving forward Marvel tries a little harder to make the villains memorable. I won't even mention Ultron. Talk about a let down.
Meh, DC movies are not bad, but they really missed the mark with Zod and Bane/Thalia in the last movies. Could have done a lot more with those villains instead of just LULZ-I-GOTA-KILL-YAH-ALL!
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
Well, on the marvel side, they got Iron Man 3. Coincidentally also the closing of a trilogy. The "true" mandarin in that one of the worst villains ever.
That one was such a disapointment, I expected a bad ass Mandarine. But it was just garbage.
I liked Zod. It's a superhero movie, how complex does he have to be, before the contrast between high-philosophy begins to clash seriously with a dude in blue pyjamas flying around in the sky?
Sometimes "I will destroy all those huuumans you love so much!" is incentive enough, skyscrapers tumble as they fight it out *popcorn*
And don't get me wrong - this probably goes without saying, but after years on forums I've learned that nothing goes without saying: I'm not against complex characters. I'm just saying not every movie - or every genre - should be equally complex.
But that's the point. Which one of them really is? See the problem here ...
Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
I don't know, I much rather prefer Superhero flicks to Whitewashed adaptations of material of eastern origin made by Holywood. Now those are the truly huge pieces of shit. There might not be that many right now ut they are coming in force, All you need is Kill was pretty shitty and whitewashed to hell, then we are in for the americanized Ghost in the Shell movie, that zombie of a Project Live Action Akira and there have been news about american movie studios acquiring the rights to a bunch of anime.... It's gonna suck so much....
Hollywood has been Hollywoodizing foreign stuff for ages though, and it's just irritating. Here we are making movies nobody notices - and then finally it's noticed! Such as "Ofelas" aka "The Pathfinder", Hollywood let itself thoroughly impress by the soft-spoken story of a Saami boy who lures Chude enemies away from his tribe. Characters barely speak, they are almost completely covered in fur clothing, the location of filming was genuine (-30C and stuff), there is a beautiful subtle authenticity in it, such as the desperate hunters preparing to fight off warriors with their lame little hunting-bows, ending up not doing much damage at all, almost wasting their bravery, but in a way that one can recognize from reality - sometimes the best intentions aren't enough. I've loved this movie since I was a kid, and it was nominated for a "best foreign picture"-Oscar, so clearly - it was discovered abroad, including by Hollywood - they were SO impressed, they remade it - "Let's make it about VIKINGS instead!" "With muscles!" "Yeah, hotter climate so we can SHOW the muscles!" "And swords!" "Yeah, and what was that sissy crap about them not being able to defend themselves? Let's make a BATTLE SCENE! Man, Norwegians don't know how to make ACTION movies!"
Then they saw Insomnia, another Norwegian movie, this one too almost lacks dialogue entirely, it is silent and subtle. "What's with them mumbling everything? Man, Norwegians probably don't have microphones!" *USES SHOUTY-MAN AL PACINO IN REMAKE!!!*
Swedish movie "Let the right one in" is recognized as a delightfully subtle horror - "LET'S REMAKE IT! OKAY GUYS - LET'S MAKE A LIST OF EVERYTHING THEY CLEARLY MISUNDERSTOOD OR DID WRONG! FIRST: INDOORS VOICE WTF IS THAT SHIT!?"
IN FACT, INDOORS VOICE IS FOR EURO-SISSIES IN GENERAL. IN PROPER MOVIES PEOPLE TALK LOUDLY AND CLEARLY!!!
Then they saw Insomnia, another Norwegian movie, this one too almost lacks dialogue entirely, it is silent and subtle. "What's with them mumbling everything? Man, Norwegians probably don't have microphones!" *USES SHOUTY-MAN AL PACINO IN REMAKE!!!*
Swedish movie "Let the right one in" is recognized as a delightfully subtle horror - "LET'S REMAKE IT! OKAY GUYS - LET'S MAKE A LIST OF EVERYTHING THEY CLEARLY MISUNDERSTOOD OR DID WRONG! FIRST: INDOORS VOICE WTF IS THAT SHIT!?"
IN FACT, INDOORS VOICE IS FOR EURO-SISSIES IN GENERAL. IN PROPER MOVIES PEOPLE TALK LOUDLY AND CLEARLY!!!
SnapSlav
NMA's local DotA fanatic
Makes me all the more appreciative of films that are "ported over" instead of remaking them. Take La Orfanato for instance- we're all very familiar with Guillermo del Toro, many through Hellboy, many from Pan's Labyrinth (itself a localization, but still kept intact rather than remade) but very few acquainted with this particular piece. The movie's a masterpiece of suspense horror, it's obscure so it won't really be getting any major attention, and that's just how it ought to be.
I knew about some remakes being total crap compared to their original counterparts (The Ring vs Ringu is the only example which comes to mind) but I wasn't aware of any of the above examples.
I knew about some remakes being total crap compared to their original counterparts (The Ring vs Ringu is the only example which comes to mind) but I wasn't aware of any of the above examples.
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Shutter is a good example. The original version is much better than the English version.
Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
I just saw Fantastic Four..... Oh my god.... The leather colorless outfits, the retarded "GRRRRITY ADAPTING" of shit that didn't even need it, like Clobbering time is now a phrase Ben's brother saide before abusing him? Doom's costume is fused to his body? is this the early 2000s again? I mean weird considering that the FF movie from back then (while still pretty terrible) was actually colorful....
The characters are as uninteresting as they get, Doom's powers are very vaguely defined and more than half of the movie is very cliche and monotonous build up to them even getting any powers at all....
The director's first act was to try and wash his hands off the movie, that is just downright hilarious. This movie already has apologists saying that the director is not at fault but from the beginning this already looked like a disaster with the "gritty approach" their flip flopping about wether they wanted to cater to fans at all and even the rumors about the director just being a complete assclown on set and even showing up drunk off his ass... I don't get why people are being so defensive of the guy....
The characters are as uninteresting as they get, Doom's powers are very vaguely defined and more than half of the movie is very cliche and monotonous build up to them even getting any powers at all....
The director's first act was to try and wash his hands off the movie, that is just downright hilarious. This movie already has apologists saying that the director is not at fault but from the beginning this already looked like a disaster with the "gritty approach" their flip flopping about wether they wanted to cater to fans at all and even the rumors about the director just being a complete assclown on set and even showing up drunk off his ass... I don't get why people are being so defensive of the guy....
T
TorontoReign
Guest
This movie looked like shit the entire time it was being made. I can't believe people are surprised how shitty it is. I'll watch it once it comes out on DVD to see truly how awful it is. It might be worth a laugh.