Marvel Cinematic Universe General Discussion 6: Just Send Me a Raven T-Bone

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Calibandar said:

The thing about your opinions, on any given subject, is that they are always wrong.

Well, everyone thinks their opinions are sound, just as everyone thinks their jokes are funny.

I'll skip the personal stuff and move on to the substantial response...

 

... oh.

[Calibandar]

Not surprised that you don't have a substantial response.

[mormont]

31 minutes ago, Calibandar said:

Not surprised that you don't have a substantial response.

To what?

Your post basically says 'I wanted this movie to be something different than it is'. That, and the requisite complaints about CGI (see my post above) and some unsupported and actually quite bizarre personal attacks.

There's no substance there to respond to.

[The Anti-Targ]

Somehow I think Hela and any scenes with her in them will be anything but funny. This is going to have plenty of humour, but it's not going to be wall to wall fart gags.

[mormont]

37 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Somehow I think Hela and any scenes with her in them will be anything but funny. This is going to have plenty of humour, but it's not going to be wall to wall fart gags.

I think you're right. 'Fun' doesn't just mean jokes, after all. It also means action and excitement. The trailer is openly calling back to Kirby and Simonson as well as 'Planet Hulk': those guys knew how to do an action-packed story.

[red snow]

I was initially worried when they said this was going to be a funny one but the director has restored my confidence because his films are genuinely funny.

I'm guessing the opening of the film might be quite serious if "ragnarok" happens and the trailer has plenty of things exploding and armies destroying stuff which I suspect isn't merely for the Lolz. But that fits with all the Marvel films - often serious themes but with plenty of jokes. The Indiana Jones formula in a way.

DC seems to be the place to look if you want superheroes to avoid jokes and fun. I don't really see Marvel breaking from the formula when it works so well for them. Part of me wishes Dr Strange hadn't tried to make Strange "funny" he was far better when he was just being an arrogant prick. Although i did enjoy the cloak elements.

[Annara Snow]

11 hours ago, Calibandar said:

 

Finally, Thor II was by no means one of the worst Marvel films, your opinion is misguided. I didn't like it as much as film 1, but I still enjoyed it.

It is, IMO: Only Iron Man 2 and The Incredible Hulk are as bad or worse.

[Bastard of Boston]

So, this is an interesting development. After every actor in Hollywood was rumored to be up for Cable...

Josh Brolin was cast as Cable.

I'm putting this in the MCU topic for obvious reasons. Thanos is Cable! I wonder if this is a sign of significant goodwill between Fox and Marvel Studios, as Brolin will be starring in two major comic book film franchises at the same time. Granted, he'll be mo-cap in one.

[red snow]

1 hour ago, Bastard of Boston said:

So, this is an interesting development. After every actor in Hollywood was rumored to be up for Cable...

Josh Brolin was cast as Cable.

I'm putting this in the MCU topic for obvious reasons. Thanos is Cable! I wonder if this is a sign of significant goodwill between Fox and Marvel Studios, as Brolin will be starring in two major comic book film franchises at the same time. Granted, he'll be mo-cap in one.

A surprise but I'm ok with that casting. Brolin can do funny/straight guy as demonstrated in MiB3. Shame the Avatar didn't get in purely on appearance similarity and i was warming to Russel Crowe. Brolin is a safe bet and probably cheaper than Crowe. He probably also doesn't mind signing a multi-contract deal as I imagine Cable will be a franchise regular as long as Deadpool 2 doesn't suck.

Not sure it means much in terms of Marvel and Fox. If anything, it means they consider themselves as separate entities but I guess they aren't in pissing contests of saying an actor can't be in either franchise at least. Although if Marvel casts actors as different characters within their universe (from film to Tv) it probably wasn't a great issue anyhow. Plus he's a CGI character in Marvel

[The BlackBear]

He's an excellent choice.

47 minutes ago, red snow said:

Not sure it means much in terms of Marvel and Fox. If anything, it means they consider themselves as separate entities but I guess they aren't in pissing contests of saying an actor can't be in either franchise at least. Although if Marvel casts actors as different characters within their universe (from film to Tv) it probably wasn't a great issue anyhow. Plus he's a CGI character in Marvel

I would think the main issue is filming clashes, what with Infinity War and Deadpool 2 being filmed at similar times. They'll have been talks just to work out when he's free to work on which project.

[RumHam]

On 4/11/2017 at 6:52 AM, mormont said:

Look, Thor 2 was deeply serious (when it wasn't mocking mental illness in a way that would have been cringeworthy even forty years ago). It was dark and dramatic, and it was terrible. By far the worst Marvel movie.

For what it's worth I remember being surprised at how funny Thor 2 was the last time I re-watched it. (and I don't mean in a "haha the guy is teaching complex concepts but forgot to wear pants!" way.) The only joke I can remember now is the "I accept your surrender" thing from early on. But I'm confident there were more.  

I still think the movie is on the lower end of the MCU spectrum. The villain is to this day is the only one in the MCU that I find literally forgettable. Ronan in Guardians isn't exactly a complex character but I feel like it's a much better example of that type of villain. which is probably the least interesting type of villain. But whatever you can make it work.

Anyway The Incredible Hulk is probably the worst MCU movie. 

[The BlackBear]

30 minutes ago, RumHam said:

For what it's worth I remember being surprised at how funny Thor 2 was the last time I re-watched it. (and I don't mean in a "haha the guy is teaching complex concepts but forgot to wear pants!" way.) The only joke I can remember now is the "I accept your surrender" thing from early on. But I'm confident there were more. 

It was very humor focused, they went big on Thor being goofy.

[The Anti-Targ]

4 hours ago, Bastard of Boston said:

So, this is an interesting development. After every actor in Hollywood was rumored to be up for Cable...

Josh Brolin was cast as Cable.

I'm putting this in the MCU topic for obvious reasons. Thanos is Cable! I wonder if this is a sign of significant goodwill between Fox and Marvel Studios, as Brolin will be starring in two major comic book film franchises at the same time. Granted, he'll be mo-cap in one.

I don't see why there needs to be any improvement in good will. Unless Brolin had a restraining clause in his MCU contract saying he is not allowed to play any Marvel character outside the MCU (which would seem pretty draconian) then there is no need for Fox and Marvel to talk about Brolin.

If John Rhys-Davis can get away with playing 2 characters in the same movie (Gimli and Treebeard), then Brolin can get away with playing two characters in the same comic universe, especially when those characters will never meet in the respective movie universes.

[Bastard of Boston]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I don't see why there needs to be any improvement in good will. Unless Brolin had a restraining clause in his MCU contract saying he is not allowed to play any Marvel character outside the MCU (which would seem pretty draconian) then there is no need for Fox and Marvel to talk about Brolin.

If John Rhys-Davis can get away with playing 2 characters in the same movie (Gimli and Treebeard), then Brolin can get away with playing two characters in the same comic universe, especially when those characters will never meet in the respective movie universes.

It's not about whether he's breaking nerd etiquette by playing two different Marvel characters. Like someone mentioned earlier, he's filming these movies concurrently. The Cable contract is a four picture deal, with the first movie releasing next year, which means it starts filming soon. Avengers 3 and 4 are filming now. Marvel doesn't sign new actors to small deals. Standard Marvel contracts are for five films.

I'm sure Marvel has stipulations in their contracts regarding this type of thing. He's entangled in two major franchises, and with no production dates for the rest of the films in his contract, who knows if there will ever be conflicts. It may seem draconian, but contracts can be as petty as a movie studio wants them to be...they're the ones dolling out the millions. Actors typically insert jobs in the midst of the bigger job, getting in where they fit in.

If anything, I'm sure he would've mentioned his negotiations with Fox to Marvel -- even if he's not entitled, it's probably the best thing to do to avoid stepping on anyone's toes. You don't think Warner would be annoyed if Henry Cavill signed a deal to play Adam Warlock for Marvel while he was still playing Superman? There's some level of etiquette involved when it comes to this stuff.

[The Anti-Targ]

7 minutes ago, Bastard of Boston said:

It's not about whether he's breaking nerd etiquette by playing two different Marvel characters. Like someone mentioned earlier, he's filming these movies concurrently. The Cable contract is a four picture deal, with the first movie releasing next year, which means it starts filming soon. Avengers 3 and 4 are filming now. Marvel doesn't sign new actors to small deals. Standard Marvel contracts are for five films.

I'm sure Marvel has stipulations in their contracts regarding this type of thing. He's entangled in two major franchises, and with no production dates for the rest of the films in his contract, who knows if there will ever be conflicts. It may seem draconian, but contracts can be as petty as a movie studio wants them to be...they're the ones dolling out the millions. Actors typically insert jobs in the midst of the bigger job, getting in where they fit in.

If anything, I'm sure he would've mentioned his negotiations with Fox to Marvel -- even if he's not entitled, it's probably the best thing to do to avoid stepping on anyone's toes. You don't think Warner would be annoyed if Henry Cavill signed a deal to play Adam Warlock for Marvel while he was still playing Superman? There's some level of etiquette involved when it comes to this stuff.

Yeah, but in that case one of the characters isn't CGI and not visually recognisable as the actor.

Marvel may place restrictions in contracts in terms of filming windows and schedule prioritisation, and perhaps for actors whose faces are un-CGI'd in their movies they may place restrictions on the types of movies they can do while under contract. But for Brolin only the scheduling/availability issue should apply.

[red snow]

7 hours ago, The BlackBear said:

He's an excellent choice.

I would think the main issue is filming clashes, what with Infinity War and Deadpool 2 being filmed at similar times. They'll have been talks just to work out when he's free to work on which project.

Makes you wonder how much Thanos will be in it (or how motion captured Brolin is). I guess they can film all his material independently if need be.

The fun part is going to be Deadpool referencing Thanos (maybe even throw in a Jonah Hex reference for good luck). With the superman parody, they are clearly more comfortable mentioning heroes from other franchises. Although they mentioned Green LAntern quite a lot in the first one as is.

[mormont]

7 hours ago, RumHam said:

For what it's worth I remember being surprised at how funny Thor 2 was the last time I re-watched it. (and I don't mean in a "haha the guy is teaching complex concepts but forgot to wear pants!" way.) The only joke I can remember now is the "I accept your surrender" thing from early on. But I'm confident there were more.  

I still think the movie is on the lower end of the MCU spectrum. The villain is to this day is the only one in the MCU that I find literally forgettable. Ronan in Guardians isn't exactly a complex character but I feel like it's a much better example of that type of villain. which is probably the least interesting type of villain. But whatever you can make it work.

Anyway The Incredible Hulk is probably the worst MCU movie. 

Yeah... 'I remember this movie was really funny but I can't remember any of the jokes' is never a great recommendation.

Reading the IMDb quotes now, none of these are particularly memorable. I'll say this: Hiddlestone and Hemsworth are good comic actors, so I'm sure their delivery was good. They're good actors period, and the acting performances are the best thing about Thor 2. But they're not able to make it a good film.

[SerPaladin]

Thor's gig in comics is that he's the "Happy Warrior". When his bones are turned to paste held together by magical armor, or he's found unworthy, he can be a bit moody, but for the most part he's the smiling guy on the front lines yelling "to battle". We've seen what a dour version of Thor looks like (Cavill's Superman) on screen recently and it didn't work, no matter how hard DC tries.

Thor 2 was grim because the MCU is built on the Star Wars trilogy model. Chapter 1, intro the premise, everyone's quite earnest after overcoming initial trepidations or roadblacks, let's have a victory. Chapter 2, up the stakes, things are down-beat, not quite what they seem, someone loses a hand. Chapter 3, multiple action set pieces, hero discovers something deep within themselves, closure. Sure there are some slight deviations, but this is a factory, not an art gallery.

[Relic]

8 hours ago, SerPaladin said:

but this is a factory, not an art gallery.

This. Would be good for people to remember that before getting into silly pissing contests about who has a more correct opinion about a garbage ass movie. 

[polishgenius]

Thor 2 was perfectly fine. Way better than the likes of Ant-Man and the first Captain America.