I was upset to watch Apocalypse and see no resolution to the ending OF DOFP when it's revealed Mystique was Stryker who retrieved Logan's body from the lake.
Printable View
I was upset to watch Apocalypse and see no resolution to the ending OF DOFP when it's revealed Mystique was Stryker who retrieved Logan's body from the lake.
I've heard people criticise Capt USA 3 for:
#1: Not having a resolution -- there actually is one
#2: None of the main characters dying -- there's reasons for it
#3: Thor and Hulk's unexplained absence -- again, reasons
1. I think a lot of people wanted to see either Team Cap or Team Fe win, but both sides lost. The real winner was Baron Zemo, because his primary objective was to divide the Avengers. Make them fight themselves and self destruct as a unit. He has achieved this objective. Although the two sides are no longer warring, they are now a house divided.
2. Continuity. We know that the MCU is building more movies for the next couple of years, and as a result their main players are essentially locked and placed on a "do not kill" list in order to maintain continuity for those future movies. Captain America 3 is only the first of the MCU's Phase III movies, with other Phase 3ers including Dr. Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy II, Spider-Man: Homecoming (and 'homecoming' was one of Bucky's activation words), Thor: Ragnarok, Black Panther, Ant-Man & the Wasp, Capt. Marvel, Avengers: Infinity Wars 1 & Avengers: Infinity Wars 2. Marvel most likely wanted all of the Avengers to at least survive to appear in the Infinity Wars films.
3. As above, Thor and Hulk are locked into events for the Thor: Ragnarok film, so they were excluded from Capt. America Civil War in order to prevent continuity conflicts with the Thor 3.
One thing about building a big intertwined cinematic universe is continuity maintenance, which does restrict film makers in terms of what they can and cannot do with characters. This is why Christopher Nolan refused to tie in his Batman movies with any other DCU characters like Superman, and also because he wanted his story to focus on a single protagonist (or two with Robin's inclusion in The Dark Knight Rises). This is something that I wish Michael Bay would pay closer attention to. :rolleyes:
I finally picked up Deadpool on DVD and watched it (having missed seeing it in cinemas :(). I liked it as it really captures the character well, and a lot of meta stuff was funny.
...but...
I didn't find myself physically laughing out loud at any point of the movie. It made me smile and think, "I see what you did there," a lot. Although the line that Deadpool makes about the studio not being able to afford any more X-Men in the film made me go, "Heh." That was as close as I got to actually laughing aloud while watching this movie. I think that the Honest Trailer describes this film accurately in that the humour seems to be pitched at a 17 year old level and feels like a really long and violent episode of Family Guy. And I guess that this is pretty much what the Deadpool character is - no more, no less.
This isn't meant to be a criticism against the movie per se. Deadpool isn't meant to deliver high brow levels of wit - as I understand it, he's just not that kind of character, so it's not meant to be that kind of movie. So in terms of what Deadpool is supposed to be, I think that the movie is excellent. It is a fantastic Deadpool film that is very true to its original source material. If only the live action Transformers movies could be made as well (I did like how Deadpool even took a jab at Michael Bay)... ;)
I think that I would've enjoyed this movie more if I'd seen in with a cinema audience, because other people's laughs might've prompted me to laugh along with them. But when I watched it by myself there wasn't anything in the film that made me want to laugh aloud.
Ah well... that's what Monty Python's for. :D
I probably miss about 50% of the movie because I was laughing so much :D (that was at the cinema though, re-watched it at home twice since)
I'm trying to find a copy of the 4K edition of Deadpool, for later when I eventually get a 4K TV. They don't seem to be as widespread though...
The next Star Trek movie isn't out yet but it will be in memory of the new Chekov... who died yesterday from a freak accident. It looks like his own car crushed him from being left in neutral on an incline.
The original Chekov is one of the last survivors of the original crew, so it will be strange to have him outlive his replacement.
http://www.cnet.com/news/anton-yelch...reak-accident/
I'll always remember Anton as Byrd from Huff. I strongly recommend checking it out.
2016 is proving to be a really hazardous year for celebrities. :(
Normally celebrity deaths are nothing to me, but this one has gotten to me. Maybe because I now think of him as the canonical Chekov, or maybe because he seems like a fine young man. I will miss him in Star Trek 4.
That makes two Enterprise crew they need to dedicate this movie too.
Finding Dory was a fine film.
Nothing spectacular or groundbreaking (other than Pixar showing off everything they can do with water in both the feature and short film that precedes it).
Not sure it will be as well remembered as the original (nor should it be) as everything in it is predictable (other than the final action piece, which has a predictable conclusion, but the ride is a good laugh.)
Of the new characters, they are all pretty much used as dues ex machina, more or less how Crush was in the first film.
Sigourney Weavers "cameo" was pretty funny, not sure whose idea it was, but she is obviously happy to have a laugh at her own expense!
Perfect school holiday film (which may not have as many screenings in a fortnight as it should).
http://i.imgur.com/IRg5lXr.jpg
Pretty much sums it up
*thumbs up* :(
Someone should make a Steve Urkel movie. It should be him travelling into space and other dimensions using sci-fi technology he invented like in Rick n Morty.
:( (Y)Quote:
Originally Posted by CHILENO20
I'd watch itQuote:
Originally Posted by kup
Awesome & sad at the same time :):(Quote:
Originally Posted by Mythirax
I liked the 2014 TMNT film much more than I expected to. The new one not as good, but in general I still liked it. It kind of did all the things a TMNT film should do. As a more casual TMNT fan I got what I wanted from it.
The Turtles designs still work so much better on film that they should when you look at stills. Much less creepy Michaelangelo this time too. One thing I liked a lot in the first one was Megan Fox as April, but this time she didn't get nearly enough to do. The new Casey Jones... didn't really buy his character. What worked much better than I thought they would were Bebop and Rocksteady. They were just exactly what they needed to be. Also pretty impressive was the film version of Krang. He was a bit larger than usual depictions, but it worked really well on screen although he ultimately just got to be the final level boss.
For this film they got Steve Jablonsky to do the music and you could tell because the Turtles arrived it sure sounded like there should be some Autobots driving on screen.
Saw X-Men Apocalypse on Saturday night. I liked it, it was a good movie, definately not the best X Men film, but close to the top for me.
I just found out that the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the DC one weren't the only ones out there for Hasbro to jump on the bandwagon... Universal have a shared "Monsters" universe that is still only one movie in so far, with a reboot of The Mummy being the second one next year (with Russell Crowe as Dr Jekyll).
Admittedly, Universal had characters and actors cross over in their 1930s to 1950s monster movies (probably the very first shared movie universe), but this one looks to be like the first phase MCU, with each movie specifically being in the same time era and universe and have guest appearances of characters in other movies... but unlikely to have a group monster movie like the Avengers movie (unless they plan to do something similar to The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie).
The last Mummy series was only about 15 years ago, with the third one being only 5 years before this new Monsters Universe was being proposed, which seems a bit soon. Those three Mummy movies are still very watchable, so if it weren't for this combined universe we probably wouldn't get another one (like the Hulk and Spiderman movie reboots in such short time, just to include them in the MCU).
I've not seen any of the new Star Trek movies, but I am familiar with Anton's work through Terminator Salvation.Quote:
Originally Posted by griffin
Quote:
Originally Posted by griffin
The view askewniverse beat them all to the punch. Better movies too.
Ah, the Kevin Smith movies (I had to look it up).Quote:
Originally Posted by Gutsman Heavy
I only ever watched Dogma though, as it was the only one that looked interesting from the advertisements or trailers.
I'm not sure if he actually pre-planned anything to make it a proper shared universe, as each later movie looked to refer in some way to a previous one... or just have a recurring character or two (like Jay & Silent Bob).
Looking at the recurring actors (Kevin liked to reuse people), very few would play the same character between each movie... so it might be a shared universe, but that universe has a lot of clones. :p
So i found Godzilla VS King Ghidorah on SBS. Didn't know how dumb Americans were lol.
Affleck and Jason Lee play two characters each in Jay & Silent Bob strike back :DQuote:
Originally Posted by griffin
Went to see Independence Day 2 on Friday and it's just as I expected. A more elaborate affair as the special effects will show you but definitely don't expect deep and insightful storytelling. Leave that to the Batman and Matrix trilogies.
Not a bad movie but was predictable.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateGalvatron
Never felt any danger for any of the characters and no real twists either. A good popcorn flick but nothing more.Quote:
Originally Posted by drifand
TMNT 2 was as bad as I expected, sounded like a TF movie, had a camaro in it, awful CGI and over reliance on explosions and was so poorly written I almost thought it was a TF movie.
The movies just cannot seem to make Shredder out to be a dangerous and nigh undefeatable villain.
The thing with Xmen nowadays is that given the ending of Days of Future Past showed all the Xmen alive and well, you know that certain characters will never die in any movies set before it.
That's coz Days Of Futures Past reset the timeline. Much like Flash does on a regular basis haha
Damn it! I'm actually considering buying the Xbox One S just for it's UHD Blu-ray playback. My TV can only do the 4K part of the UHD spec, but hey, at least I can then begin building a UHDBD collection and start watching them, even if they are not displayed in the full UHD format.
Warcraft: Orcs and Humans - A surprisingly accurate re-telling of what you read in the 'Warcraft II Manual' which basically explains the lore events of Warcraft: Orcs and Humans. In addition, they are also telling the beginnings of Thrall's tale which takes place in this time period (although first introduced after Warcraft II in the cancelled 'Warcraft Adventures'.)
Pros: Visually works and story is easy to follow and enjoyable if you are into the game. Extremely accurate to lore and this is probably it's best asset as well as the biggest flaw. If you are familiar with Warcraft, you will see a lot of big players in the background which are a bit low key during this period but will have a big role in later movies (assuming the next instalments will be as game lore accurate)
Cons: Stylistic presentation may be a turn off. Story wise, given that Orcs and Humans is a very early DOS RTS and that most of the lore was actually in the manual, story is a bit thin and not as 'epic' as one may expect it to be. This would turn off someone who is after a big fantasy epic.
I was hoping they were going to keep it accurate to World of Warcraft's lore.Quote:
Originally Posted by kup
Just watched Warcraft. Visually gorgeous. I've always loved Blizzard's designs. Story went nowhere. Script was plain. Actors did the best they could. One for the fans only.
Well, it is accurate to Warcraft lore more than World of Warcraft since that is a much later game. This is the story of the first ever Warcraft game from early 90s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mythirax
There is one WoW retcon that is visible though, the Dreanai look like boring Navi as per WoW retcon rather than the originally mole like people as they were introduced in Warcraft III.
Those original two Warcraft games were my favourites in the 90s, playing them several times.... it makes me want to go play them again.
Indeed. I'm just a massive fan of the World of Warcraft World. I was somewhat hoping it was going to follow it 100%. Even though I knew it wasn't based on it. Just that fanboy in me :D -- But either way, it was a 10/10 for me. I thought it was amazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by kup
Watched part of Superman v Batman last night. Don't understand all the hate this movie got. It was actually quite entertaining.
Apparently Zack Snyder hates us all and wants to watch the world burn...Quote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
I thought it was okay... certainly not disappointed with it like many others said they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
I thought it dragged out a little, but set up the DC universe well, while trying to play catchup with Marvel.
I think most were expecting something like the Marvel movies, and set the bar too high... but Marvel took a different approach, and even their first one (Hulk) is one that very few people remember or watched.
Did you watch the extended cut or theatrical?Quote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP