- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Avengers: Age of Ultron trailer
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:40 am to Murray
Posted on 10/24/14 at 7:40 am to Murray
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 on 10/24/14 at 7:47 am to Murray
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 on 10/24/14 at 7:55 am to Freauxzen
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?
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 on 10/24/14 at 7:56 am to Ace Midnight
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 on 10/24/14 at 7:57 am to Pectus
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 on 10/24/14 at 7:57 am to Tactical1
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 on 10/24/14 at 8:00 am to Ace Midnight
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 on 10/24/14 at 8:12 am to Pectus
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 on 10/24/14 at 8:17 am to Ace Midnight
Remember the last time Pinocchio was this referenced in a movie? A.I.. Remember how that turned out.
'Nuff said.
'Nuff said.
Posted on 10/24/14 at 8:20 am to Pectus
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 on 10/24/14 at 9:11 am to Pectus
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 on 10/24/14 at 9:35 am to Freauxzen
If Ultron is created using Tony's neural patterns then it would think at least somewhat like a human.
Posted on 10/24/14 at 9:55 am to Ace Midnight
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 on 10/24/14 at 10:24 am to Pectus
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 on 10/24/14 at 10:39 am to jeff5891
my god, people are taking this shite way too seriously.
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:39 am to Freauxzen
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...
and since Jarvis will be in the Agent Carter series...
Posted on 10/24/14 at 10:41 am to The Egg
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 on 10/24/14 at 10:44 am to BlacknGold
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 on 10/24/14 at 10:47 am to Ace Midnight
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
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News