Started By
Message

re: Avengers: Age of Ultron trailer

Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:40 am to
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89506 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:40 am to
quote:

Let it go


I'm tired of this sentiment, Murray.

They brand these things because they have a built-in draw. They get us into the theater and screw everything up - when you look how bad X-Men got - and that's just an example.

I enjoyed Avengers - Whedon is on my short list of trusted filmmakers, so I gave him a chance.

The trailer for this one does not look promising, although I'm sure it will hit all the action beats and not let the millenials get bored for even a single second.

Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37258 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:47 am to
quote:

Fan's have to let go of direct adaptions of the comics though. I see a lot of "How does CW work without Spiderman??", "So they must be bringing Punisher into the Marvel U", etc... Relax. It'll work.


It's called trust. Marvel has earned that.

Posted by Pectus
Internet
Member since Apr 2010
67302 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:55 am to
Already glaring plot holes:

How does a sentient robot know a piece of pop culture art form from the 40s?

And why would he think that humans communicate that way?

Are all of his communications to humans just that? Through simile and metaphor?
Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37258 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:56 am to
quote:

They brand these things because they have a built-in draw. They get us into the theater and screw everything up - when you look how bad X-Men got - and that's just an example.


But it's almost a CERTAINTY that you can't take a property from one medium and transfer it directly, word for word, beat for beat, scene for scene, into another (there are exceptions). It just doesn't work that way. There's time, resources, content, etc. to consider.

Civil War doesn't only work as a story because, word for word, scene for scene, it's constructed to work that way. Great stories can be boiled down, can be uncovered and made more lean. This is normal. So I see no problem with Civil War as a concept, Stark's ideals vs. Rogers' ideals, in a more intimate film. If anything, Marvel has earned that chance.

The only two things that become a problem are
1) Spider-Man
2) Scope

Spider-Man is a legitimate problem. One of the best moments of Civil Wars is Spider-Man choosing to reveal himself. It was a beloved hero, one who's life was different from a lot of other major heroes. He, and the people around him, were far more vulnerable (for the most part). So there was a level of meaning that can't be brought, we really don't have a Peter Parker in this world.

I assume they'll just ignore this, yes the theme will lose the connection of the home, of a family, but I think it's going to be replaced by a more direct conflict between Stark and Rogers. With Stark being responsible for Ultron, and inevitably hundreds or thousands of deaths, his side is going to be heavier, more fierce. I assume from AoU that Stark basically replaces Speedball's moment. So the story is going to be more about 2 men, than it will about a whole universe.

Film is just a different kind of medium. There's no problem with taking inspiration, or large narrative slices, of comic books and placing them into the film world, regardless of whether or not they are complete. They can get to the core of the comic book story or arc, and if they do, everybody wins.
This post was edited on 10/24/14 at 7:57 am
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89506 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:57 am to
quote:

How does a sentient robot know a piece of pop culture art form from the 40s?


They have to reduce these characters to one-note jokes - for the modern audience's "attention span" deficits.

The rare exceptions (Iron Man/Tony Stark) make it all the more glaring.
Posted by Das Jackal
Da Bayou
Member since Sep 2011
2586 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:57 am to
So I'm wondering, what is you guys opinion of the way Ultron's face looks? I was a little surprised to see that his mouth moved and that he had more human looking eyes. That being said, May cant get here fast enough.
Posted by Pectus
Internet
Member since Apr 2010
67302 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 8:00 am to
quote:


They have to reduce these characters to one-note jokes - for the modern audience's "attention span" deficits.

The rare exceptions (Iron Man/Tony Stark) make it all the more glaring.




Um, we figured out Tony Stark in the first 10 minutes of Iron Man 1. His dad was more impressive in Captain America 1, and his legacy is seen more throughout the MCU.

Why there had to be 3 movies of Tony, and 1 of his dad, when all events past, present, and future deal with his dad? I have no idea.

I think the writers have to weave all these threads between all the films in at least some extent. You would hope that some of those threads would lead to something. There's no string I see.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89506 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 8:12 am to
quote:

Um, we figured out Tony Stark in the first 10 minutes of Iron Man 1.


Maybe so - I'll admit, the excessive banter in Avengers was a little offputting. I gave it a pass on the simplification stuff (I recognize that film is different and film audiences are different), because it looked right, felt right, and their casting choices - RDJ and Ruffalo, in particular, seem to be pretty good, overall.

Good casting can overcome a certain amount of other obstacles, just a bad casting can overwhelm an otherwise good project.

Having said that,

quote:

There's no string I see.


My son says one has to watch most, if not all of these movies, to see all the pieces of of the story - and not the Spiderman, but the MCU films. Since I'm not going to do that -



- I guess I'll just have to deal with it.
Posted by Pectus
Internet
Member since Apr 2010
67302 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 8:17 am to
Remember the last time Pinocchio was this referenced in a movie? A.I.. Remember how that turned out.

'Nuff said.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89506 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 8:20 am to
quote:

A.I..


Godawful. And by a legendary director, as well.

Easily Spielberg's worst film as a director, other than a film I pretend wasn't made.
Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37258 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 9:11 am to
quote:

Already glaring plot holes:

How does a sentient robot know a piece of pop culture art form from the 40s?


The answer is quite simple: J.A.R.V.I.S

Who has been around in some form for over 10 years absorbing, analyzing, listening to everything. I'm sure JARVIS scans the internet, loves him some cat memes, and knows about Disney movies.

Not really too complicated.

quote:

And why would he think that humans communicate that way?


It's a fairly efficient metaphor saying that everyone involved in this is under some sort of control, some "strings." Hydra, Shield, just using people. We've already established that theme.

"Two sides of the same coin."
Posted by Brosef Stalin
Member since Dec 2011
39183 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 9:35 am to
If Ultron is created using Tony's neural patterns then it would think at least somewhat like a human.
Posted by BlacknGold
He Hate Me
Member since Mar 2009
12045 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 9:55 am to
quote:

Easily Spielberg's worst film as a director,


well considering it was Kubricks film up until the last 30 minutes or so, i would disagree on the movie as a whole. Spielberg did frick up the end game. mostly because he is the worst person to take over for Kubrick. completely different directing styles.
Posted by jeff5891
Member since Aug 2011
15761 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:24 am to
quote:

Already glaring plot holes:

How does a sentient robot know a piece of pop culture art form from the 40s?


you need to try harder.
This post was edited on 10/24/14 at 10:26 am
Posted by The Egg
Houston, TX
Member since Dec 2004
79129 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:39 am to
my god, people are taking this shite way too seriously.
Posted by RonBurgundy
Whale's Vagina(San Diego)
Member since Oct 2005
13302 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:39 am to
Yeah J.A.R.V.I.S is probably patterned after Jarvis-Howard Stark's butler and Tony Stark's caregiver as a young child (yes, Alfred)


and since Jarvis will be in the Agent Carter series...
Posted by RonBurgundy
Whale's Vagina(San Diego)
Member since Oct 2005
13302 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:41 am to
quote:

my god, people are taking this shite way too seriously.



we're on a website that is obsessive about sports-the king of taken too seriously entertainment.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89506 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:44 am to
quote:

well considering it was Kubricks film up until the last 30 minutes or so, i would disagree on the movie as a whole.


This is wholly unsupportable. True, Kubrick worked on the project that became A.I. from the 70s through about 1995, he was dead before they even went into production. To suggest this was a situation like Eyes Wide Shut, where he left an unfinished film is disingenuous at best.

A.I. was a Spielberg movie - he wrote the screenplay and shot/cut the entire run time, period.
Posted by RonBurgundy
Whale's Vagina(San Diego)
Member since Oct 2005
13302 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:47 am to
whoa whoa, AI is too shitty of a movie to hijack an AoU thread.
This post was edited on 10/24/14 at 10:56 am
Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37258 posts
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:50 am to
first pageprev pagePage 12 of 13Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram