Jump to content

MCU: Phases? What Phases???


Rhom
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, sifth said:

I mean Tangerine has a 96% on RT and is possibly one of the worst films I've seen in my life. The entire thing was filmed on someones cellphone. So RT is not exactly standards I'd hold to the quality of a product.

 

On a different note, I didn't enjoy any of the Phase 1 MCU films, aside from Iron Man. Granted, at the moment, I think there are only 5 or 6 MCU films as a whole that I've enjoyed.

I don't know what Tangerine is and don't care, it's irrelevant.  The claim is people didn't like Shang Chi, and that's objectively false.  You can bullshit all you want that your opinion is shared by the majority, but false claims like that are never going to be anything other than obnoxious.

Edited by SpaceChampion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SpaceChampion said:

I don't know what Tangerine is and don't care, it's irrelevant.  The claim is people didn't like Shang Chi, and that's objectively false.  You can bullshit all you want that your opinion is shared by the majority, but false claims like that are never going to be anything other than obnoxious.

All I'm saying is you shouldn't base all of your opinions on RT scores. Come to think of it, Titane has a 89% on RT, which is a movie about a woman who murders people and has sex with a car and then gets impregnated by the car. I wish I was making this up, lol

 

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sifth said:

All I'm saying is you shouldn't base all of your opinions on RT scores.

 

He isn't basing his opinion on RT scores, he's suggesting that the RT scores support the idea that more people share that opinion. 

I've not seen Tangerine but the director's follow up film fucking slapped so, ya know, he knows what he's doing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

 

He isn't basing his opinion on RT scores, he's suggesting that the RT scores support the idea that more people share that opinion. 

I've not seen Tangerine but the director's follow up film fucking slapped so, ya know, he knows what he's doing.

 

Yea, but he's using RT as bases for judging the quality of a product and RT gives horrible films great reviews all the time  and sometimes really good films, get horrible RT scores. If you like something that's great all the power to you, but always put your own experience above what RT tells you is good. At least, that's how I feel on things.

I just personally hate, when people use RT has a means of judging the quality of a product at the end of the day. Fun fact, whenever me and my friends see a particularly bad film together, we always play a guessing game on what its RT score is, before looking it up.

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Werthead said:

This point, I think, has not been made enough. Unless Eternals took place after the movies that have come out since, or that guy just turned to ash or something off-screen.

 

 

To be fair, at this point I feel like enough crazy shit has happened to the Earth that the giant dude sticking out of the Earth is just a normal MCU Tuesday.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, sifth said:

Yea, but he's using RT as bases for judging the quality of a product and RT gives horrible films great reviews all the time  and sometimes really good films, get horrible RT scores.

RT's audience scores aren't a metric on the quality of the film, they are a metric on how much of the audience liked the film.  Which is exactly how @SpaceChampion was using them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

RT's audience scores aren't a metric on the quality of the film, they are a metric on how much of the audience liked the film.  Which is exactly how @SpaceChampion was using them.

Yea, and that system is also flawed. The audience score is high for Tangerine as well, a movie filmed on a persons cellphone. Sorry, but you'll never convince me that RT is a proper system to base the quality of a product. Heck The Batman has a high RT score and I honestly was not a fan of that film, in any way, shape or form. I'll always hold someone I knows opinion, over what strangers on RT think about something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree the imdb audience scores are fucked with by internet losers way too much to trust anymore.  Honestly I'm not familiar enough with RT's audience scores to have an opinion.  Either way, you still don't seem to get audience scores are not measuring the quality of the film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sifth said:

I honestly was not a fan of that film, in any way, shape or form.

 

Okay, but are you going to try to argue it wasn't well-received? Because that's what the discussion is about here re: the Marvel movies/shows and how their characters are seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sifth said:

 

On a different note, I didn't enjoy any of the Phase 1 MCU films, aside from Iron Man. Granted, at the moment, I think there are only 5 or 6 MCU films as a whole that I've enjoyed.

Seems to me, that if this is your opinion (also seemingly shared by one or two others on here), then perhaps it's simply what Marvel's done and made with their MCU just isn't for you. Not your cup of tea. Isn't your jam. Beyond their ability to satisfy whatever standards it is you (and one or two others it seems) have for their movie going experience...and that's okay! People can have opinions that don't jive with plenty of others.  But maybe it's time to just sit the Marvel threads out at this point...? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument about iconic stuff is also such entire bullshit. Black Panther is not remotely an iconic run, even the more recent stuff. Captain Marvel is a little closer, but only barely. GotG is not remotely that. 

I'd agree that Eternals ain't gonna carry anything any time soon, but that has very little to do with iconic status or the quality of the acting; it has to do with it just not being that interesting, at least right now. It took Thor 3 movies before he became interesting; maybe the intro won't be that great. In that, Black Panther is a massive exception to the rule, because most of the first movies for characters have been kinda trash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

 

Okay, but are you going to try to argue it wasn't well-received? Because that's what the discussion is about here re: the Marvel movies/shows and how their characters are seen.

If others liked it, I'm fine with it. It's impossible for me to understand why, but hey I'm probably one of the 5 people on the planet who like The Mario Brothers film and Tank Girl, so who am I to judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Seems to me, that if this is your opinion (also seemingly shared by one or two others on here), then perhaps it's simply what Marvel's done and made with their MCU just isn't for you. Not your cup of tea. Isn't your jam. Beyond their ability to satisfy whatever standards it is you (and one or two others it seems) have for their movie going experience...and that's okay! People can have opinions that don't jive with plenty of others.  But maybe it's time to just sit the Marvel threads out at this point...? 

I mean, I've loved both GotG films, though James Gunn has yet to make a film I haven't liked. The first Iron Man was really good. Same with the second Captain America. I liked the Infinity War as well, though I sort of hate End Game, or at least parts of the film, I should say. No Way Home I liked a lot as well. Pretty sure, those are the only films in the MCU that I liked. It's not a case that I hate the MCU, but more along the lines, that I think too many of the films, seem like safe bets.

Heck, I didn't even hate the Eternals all that much, though I think it should have been a tv series, since most of its character development felt rushed.

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if they'd made Eternals a TV show we would probably have just gotten a lot more "and at this critical point in human history... They were there."

It's not my favorite movie but I think it did a good job establishing who they were. The problem for me was Kro(?) they could have done something more interesting with him if he had to be in the movie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RumHam said:

I think if they'd made Eternals a TV show we would probably have just gotten a lot more "and at this critical point in human history... They were there."

It's not my favorite movie but I think it did a good job establishing who they were. The problem for me was Kro(?) they could have done something more interesting with him if he had to be in the movie. 

I think the characters were fine. But the deviants were completely uninteresting as a villain, the driving plot wasn't that special, and whoever the main character was didn't really do it for me, nor did her arc. 

You can almost perfectly plot a graph of good marvel movies to good villains. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RumHam said:

I think if they'd made Eternals a TV show we would probably have just gotten a lot more "and at this critical point in human history... They were there."

It's not my favorite movie but I think it did a good job establishing who they were. The problem for me was Kro(?) they could have done something more interesting with him if he had to be in the movie. 

It's not properly paced though. One character goes from hating all of humanity, for using his knowledge to make the atomic bomb, to starting a loving family, within seconds. That could have easily been the plot of an entire episode of a tv show.

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think a tv show would have done much for Eternals but I do think it should have been two movies. One focusing on the deviants and with the Eternals operating under their initial beliefs, with those thrown into question in a final confrontation with the big deviant, and a second movie then dealing with their internal conflict and Tiamat/Aramesh. 

Either Marvel or Chloe Zao evidently didn't wanna wait before putting forward the real big-scale Celestial stuff, but they should have done. 

They also needed to make the Celestials more mysterious than they did tbqh. I don't know if they're usually presented that way, I know not always, but Gaiman's miniseries and a couple of other times I've seen them mentioned iirc present them as really just outside of our context, their goals really being unrelatable to us, and that seems like the best way to use them. What we got was quite a mechanical-feeling raison d'etre instead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sifth said:

It's not properly paced though. One character goes from hating all of humanity, for using his knowledge to make the atomic bomb, to starting a loving family, within seconds. That could have easily have been the plot of an entire episode of a tv show.

Yeah, I just don't know that I'd want to watch it?

I mean a couple seconds for us but what maybe 75 years for him? I didn't think it was that jarring. He was obviously pretty upset about the A-bomb thing. Who hasn't declared they were done with something only to walk it back once they had some time to calm down? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, RumHam said:

Yeah, I just don't know that I'd want to watch it?

I mean a couple seconds for us but what maybe 75 years for him? I didn't think it was that jarring. He was obviously pretty upset about the A-bomb thing. Who hasn't declared they were done with something only to walk it back once they had some time to calm down? 

I guess I’m just not a fan of character development being skipped over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

I think the characters were fine. But the deviants were completely uninteresting as a villain, the driving plot wasn't that special, and whoever the main character was didn't really do it for me, nor did her arc. 

You can almost perfectly plot a graph of good marvel movies to good villains. 

The deviants weren't the villain though, that was Richard Madden. That was actually something potentially really powerful, but they didn't give us enough time to get to know the group for 1/3 of them "going bad" to really resonate, and it didn't help that Madden was quite taciturn (I don't think he was wooden, I just don't think he was given a lot to work with).

Eternals I think did benefit from not having the goofy humour that's been allowed to dominate recent MCU movies (and badly hurt Love & Thunder) but it lost it in feeling like the first and second movies of a franchise rolled into one. A more conservative first movie and a more nutzoid cosmic second one might have been the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...