|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 30, 2023 15:16:57 GMT -5
But as someone who grew up in the 70s and 80s and actually remembers how dire that time could be for comic book fans I'm not going to piss and moan about how much stuff is available in movies and on TV. You don't have to watch it all. The difference is that the superhero productions of the 70s and 80s were independent from each other, so it was easy to be selective about watching The Incredible Hulk, but bailing on Doctor Strange. That's a far different situation than the MCU model, where the studio aim is to make all of their junk one "universe" of interconnected, Easter Egg-battered films that audiences are all but ordered to watch to "get it" all (no matter how poor the execution). Sure, you can still pick and choose, but the stories in most MCU films are so thin that they are dependent on the aforementioned Easter Eggs & teases that they cannot stand on their own, with some very rare exceptions. Which is exactly why I got burnout. By the time I saw the last two Avengers films I felt like I had to remember everything that happened in 20 other movies. It was a drag. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Apr 2, 2023 6:23:38 GMT -5
But as someone who grew up in the 70s and 80s and actually remembers how dire that time could be for comic book fans I'm not going to piss and moan about how much stuff is available in movies and on TV. You don't have to watch it all. The difference is that the superhero productions of the 70s and 80s were independent from each other, so it was easy to be selective about watching The Incredible Hulk, but bailing on Doctor Strange. That's a far different situation than the MCU model, where the studio aim is to make all of their junk one "universe" of interconnected, Easter Egg-battered films that audiences are all but ordered to watch to "get it" all (no matter how poor the execution). Sure, you can still pick and choose, but the stories in most MCU films are so thin that they are dependent on the aforementioned Easter Eggs & teases that they cannot stand on their own, with some very rare exceptions. It's no different than it ever was in comics, you can still pick and choose at will. My wife for instance has never read a single comic in her life and has only seen a few of the films but she never once felt lost, not even jumping into Wadavision having never even seen Avengers 2 or knowing anything about who Wanda or Vision even were; she just liked Elizabeth Olson and thought the sitcom look seemed fun and she enjoyed every episode. The complaint that you have to see everything to "get" the movies just seems silly to me. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 4, 2023 21:37:07 GMT -5
But as someone who grew up in the 70s and 80s and actually remembers how dire that time could be for comic book fans I'm not going to piss and moan about how much stuff is available in movies and on TV. You don't have to watch it all. The difference is that the superhero productions of the 70s and 80s were independent from each other, so it was easy to be selective about watching The Incredible Hulk, but bailing on Doctor Strange. That's a far different situation than the MCU model, where the studio aim is to make all of their junk one "universe" of interconnected, Easter Egg-battered films that audiences are all but ordered to watch to "get it" all (no matter how poor the execution). Sure, you can still pick and choose, but the stories in most MCU films are so thin that they are dependent on the aforementioned Easter Eggs & teases that they cannot stand on their own, with some very rare exceptions.
I think back in the '70s and '80s superhero tv shows and movies felt like such a novelty (I know they weren't literally a new thing but it felt that way to me in a relative way) that I would watch pretty much any of them I had access to, even characters I didn't like much in the comics, e.g. Superman. And the first few years of the Msrvel movies were kind of the same, but on a much greater scale. But there is some burn-out now, for sure. I had close to zero expectations for Antman 3 so the special effects by themselves were enough of a bonus to allow me to enjoy the movie to that limited degree.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 23, 2023 9:18:51 GMT -5
I watched the film this weekend and... yeah, it was all right.
I'd compare it to cotton candy. Colourful, sweet, all over your face, and deeply enjoyable to the kid in you. After eating the whole thing, however, you realize that it was mostly fluff and not that satisfying.
The bright lights and very nice designs (sets, costumes, vehicles) almost made us forget instances of PIS that would be damning in other circumstances; we understand that such a spectacle shouldn't be over-analyzed if it is to be enjoyed at all.
My favourite character was, surprisingly, Hank; his peevish old nerd persona was sort of endearing. Honorable mentions to the brawny rebel leader (wasn't she Mof Gideon's spy in The Mandalorian?) and the guy with a cannon for a head. I also liked the pink blob obsessed with bodily holes. Immortus looked darn good as well. It's a little unfortunate that there wasn't more time allowed for character development; I could have done with a little more of it and fewer explosions.
MODOfK was alternatively annoying and hilarious, and he did have the most convincing arc of the film. His faced seemed wrong, however; not like an actual distorted face, but like the image of a normal face digitally stretched. More like what I'd imagine Armin Zola's features to look like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Jackson on May 23, 2023 17:32:12 GMT -5
Yeah, the movie was fine but pretty paint by numbers. Personally, I thought MODOK looked dumb as hell, but I guess that was the point. Credit scenes were cool
|
|
