Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Ireactions, sit down before you click the following link...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v … mon-922236


Deep breaths. Don't get too excited!

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Yes!

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I mean, obviously it is a sign that the studio has no faith in their original writer, and they are now panicking over what they've seen of this movie. I hear they're turning to a cartoon company to help produce the final cut.

That's what this means, right?


(I am joking of course)

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Or, alternatively, Marvel is so scared about the success of the BvS Ultimate Cut and Suicide Squad that they're going into full panic mode.  And since their movies are so cartoony, they turned to a comedic writer to make everything brighter and funnier.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I think that we can agree that this is obviously the end for their entire movie franchise. They'll probably have to start all over, if their company survives at all.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

They can probably salvage Ant-Man.  Everyone loves Ant-Man.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I think it's hilarious how so many articles highlight Dan Harmon's lack of superhero series when he was clearly writing COMMUNITY as a superhero show; the show tapped into the absurdity of a multi-genre superhero universe and treated each of the characters like superhero characters, often posing them to create iconic imagery.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

The fact that he got no street creds for Abed alone boggles the mind.

At least a good writer is getting work out of Marvel's death spiral.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

The next season of Agents of SHIELD could be interesting, but I can't believe they're still trying to convince the world that Coulson is dead.  He's been working in the open for years now.  I could see how Joe Q Public doesn't know he's alive, but people *freaked out* at the idea of Bruce Wayne appearing in one random French cafe for five minutes in Dark Knight Rises. 

Coulson was apparently the big death in the biggest attack in history.  People don't recognize him?  And everyone in the government knows he's alive but Tony and company never figured it out?  Steve doesn't know?

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Movie Coulson is dead. TV Coulson is alive. They may be played by the same actor, but they're different worlds. People just need to give up on the idea that the movie and TV worlds are the same.

Daredevil does not live in the same world as Agents of SHIELD

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I know why they did, but they shouldn't have included any movie characters in the show.  It should've been kept separate.  Ripples are fine, but there shouldn't be anyone major from the movies (except Fury) for these guys to interact with.

That way, it would be separate, which is what they want.

Instead, they're splitting hairs and it doesn't make sense.  Tony should know that Phil is alive.  So should Cap.  At the very least, those two should know.  And right now would be the perfect time to reveal that.  Cap is in the wind with half the team.  No one else on the team now even knew Coulson.  So either get RDJ to film a cameo on Skype (PHIL!  WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL ME YOU WERE ALIVE) or have Coulson say he just got off the phone with Stark and he was pissed.

Problem solved.  Saying that no one knows he's alive is stupid.  Even for the MCU.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Where was Thor during Civil War!?!?! Find out here!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPNBKT6JLSU

This is why I like the Marvel Universe. It doesn't avoid absurdity, it embraces it.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I saw that the other day.  Funny stuff.  I think the cast of these movies genuinely likes doing it.  It's going to be really interesting when all their contracts are up.  Chris Evans, after inferring that he'd stop after his contract is up (and maybe stop acting entirely) has indicated that he'd be interested in playing more Captain America.  I think RDJ will continue as long as they keep paying him.  And if those guys decide to quit, there's backups in place.

The movies may be for kids, but it's a really well-oiled machine.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I got Civil War from Redbox. I will watch it tonight. I still find the commercials strange and baffling, but hopefully the movie will actually make some sort of sense. We'll see!

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Interesting.  Well, I'm interested in seeing what you think.  I'm also looking to watch it again soon.  I saw a trailer today and it got me excited to see it again.

One thing: cracked did a photoplasty (which I can't link to right now) which points out the hypocrisy of Tony recruiting Peter to his side of "being open and honest with the public about superheroes" and then hands him this suit that shrouds his identity.

Its interesting because the Spider-Man stuff does seem to go against the rest of Tony's message.  There's clearly a difference between what Tony did at the end of Iron Man and what Peter would have to do, but I wonder if they could've alluded to the Peter Parker unmasking in the comics and done something dark with Tony in the mean time.

So Tony goes to Queens to get Peter.  Convinces him to go to Germany with him, and he convinces him that his moral argument is superior to Captain America's.  Cool.  But then Tony provides him a mask and helps him evade the curiosity of Aunt May.

Bug imagine this: Tony doesn't give him a suit.  He brings Peter along but doesn't give him a suit - maybe he upgrades his web shooters, but he's basically just in his civilian clothes (or maybe some body armor - no traditional mask).  And pretty much everyone (Team Cap and Team Iron Man alike) sees Peter and wonders why Tony would bring a kid to this battlefield, but Peter proves himself and they all sorta forget about it when the battle begins.

But then Peter gets in trouble and something happens to him (something falls on him?) and people think that he might be dead.  And Tony has this realization that he got this kid killed because of something he's not even sure he believes in.  Peter's okay, of course, but it sorta affects Tony for a minute.  And then, at the end, Tony delivers him a suit because he sorta understands that Peter can handle it but needs to be careful.

Could've been another way to handle Peter in the movie.

216 (edited by Informant 2016-09-15 21:46:46)

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

My solution: Don't have Spider-Man in the movie. He was only in it because someone thought it would be neat, but his presence presented more problems than it was worth. He is supposed to be an intelligent person, yet he goes into a battle against known heroes with absolutely no comprehension of what he is doing or why. His character could be deleted from the movie with only beneficial results.

As a whole, I'm not sure about him. Hot Aunt May is weird. Squeeky-voiced Beiber-Man... I know some people liked him, but I think he is the weakest big screen Spider-Man I've seen.


Look, we all know that when it comes to the Marvel movies, I'm not a huge fan. I think they're low quality in general, and the films are secondary to the merchandising. It's Disney. That said, I have also proven that I am capable of saying good things about them. I liked Guardians of the Galaxy. It was fun and entertaining, with a solid cast. I liked Ant-Man, because Paul Rudd is a fun guy and he carried the movie. I liked the first Iron Man. I liked the second Iron Man, but less. I didn't hate The First Avenger until they sold it out in order to build up The Avengers, rendering the movie useless. I didn't hate Winter soldier. When you get right down to it, I don't think these movies are great movies, but I only actually hated The Avengers movies, Thor 2 an Iron Man 3. And if we count TV shows, I only strongly dislike Agents of SHIELD, while thinking Jessica Jones was weak. But Daredevil is awesome.

So I am not saying this because of some weird need to hate on Marvel, but...


This movie was crap. Start to finish. Up and down.

It wasn't a story, so much as a series of high-concept scenes. Many of those scenes could be easily removed without damaging the plot. In fact, it would probably strengthen the plot. I was literally cringing from the useless stupidity during the airport battle, which was pretty much the selling point of the movie.

Character motivation was weak and inconsistent. Conflicts and character arcs were once again thrown in because they sounded cool in theory, while not helping the actual plot. The car chase after finding Bucky shouldn't have involved police. It should have been a much smaller, more personal conflict... as much of the movie should have been. Instead, we have a movie with heroes fighting heroes, all because none of them want to stop to have an actual conversation. And it's not because they're not willing to talk. They're talking plenty. They're just using those moments to make attempts at humor, rather than say "We have proof that Bucky wasn't responsible..."

I hate the trope of having entire conflicts revolve around the unwillingness of the writers to have characters speak. And yes, there was a moment in Batman v Superman that was guilty of this same thing, but it was a moment, not the entire plot of the movie.

It's impossible not to compare the movies, because the plots are very similar in many ways. In BvS, we have Superman being forced to answer for his supposed crimes. In this, we have the Avengers doing the same. Except, as they showed footage of those battles, I couldn't help but think it was a stretch to blame the Avengers in most of those cases. In the battle of NY, the Avengers stopped our own government from trying to nuke the city for some unknown reason.
In BvS, everything went into explaining why those characters were fighting and how the plot made sense. Everything was about the bigger story (especially the Ultimate Edition). There was reason and purpose and consideration and real character development. Civil War didn't bother with the little things like that.

So much motivation in this movie doesn't hold up. There were obviously scenes which the writers came up with and put on a board somewhere. Concepts for fights and ideas for cool shots. And the plot was secondary.

At the end of the movie, we have a huge fight between Iron Man, Cap and Bucky. For the life of me, I don't even know why Bucky was fighting. He supposedly carries this guilt. He is supposedly a good guy. Yet, he doesn't want to own his actions and it doesn't make sense! The scene would have been so much more dynamic and emotional if he didn't want to fight it out. Iron Man would be trying to kill him. Cap would be trying to save him. It would be this highly personal battle all around, but also a physical display of Bucky's internal struggle. Instead, we get another bland and generic fight scene. It's big and super, but mean nothing.

A lot of the movie seemed like it was yet another Tony Stark emotional meltdown, this time caused by Pepper leaving. I swear, the guy has been an emotional wrecking ball since Favreau left.

The movie suffers from a lot of the same problems as other Marvel movies. The big action scenes look like scenes from any useless action movie. The fight scenes usually don't let the choreography stand on its own, relying on silly tricks (shaky cam, while speeding up the footage, and throwing in useless CGI!) to sell a fight that honestly could have held its own with just good choreography. The CGI was pretty weak in some spots. There was no sense of weight or gravity to a bunch of the scenes, making it look like a cartoon. The lighting. The directing. But we've been through this. This is the stuff that they always cheap out on, but this is the stuff that turns a silly b-movie into a real film.

Was Chris Evans wearing a ton of makeup? He looked weird in some scenes.

The romance between Cap and Sharon Carter was awkward and kinda gross.

The bottom line is, there was a real story to tell here. There were some great character moments that were right there for the taking. There was emotion and humanity. And the people making the movie shot it in the head as they went about the business of plotting a big action sequence or bringing in as many characters as possible, whether they added to the plot or not.

This was easily the worst of the Captain America movies. It was about the same level as an Avengers movie. I'm kinda bummed. This movie felt more depressing to me than BvS, because it was all so senseless (and not the intentional way). Good guys destroying an airport and legitimately trying to kill each other (well, some of them. Some were apparently just doing it for the sake of goofing around) for no reason is so much worse than Superman causing damage while trying to save the world.


And people might tell me to lower my expectations, because this is a movie that an eight year old is going to. But with the amount of bad language, arms being blown off and good guys trying to murder their own friends, I don't see how this is a movie for kids. The PG-13 rating standards have really changed over the last several years.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant wrote:

As a whole, I'm not sure about him. Hot Aunt May is weird. Squeeky-voiced Beiber-Man... I know some people liked him, but I think he is the weakest big screen Spider-Man I've seen.

They look to be doing a full-on Ultimate Spider-man which means we're likely to get a Green Goblin who's just a Hulk that breathes fire.  I just hope they don't follow the cartoon with Nick Fury mentoring a Spider-man who likes to make chimpanzee noises.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant, I honestly don't even know where to begin.  We've had our share of discussion on Marvel and DC, and I'm starting to wonder if you're allowing bias to affect your views on these movies.  I could go point-by-point, but I'm concerned we're just going to go in circles again.  I almost feel like you're doing a satire of the reviewers that torch DC movies because they aren't like Marvel.  Especially since you're using arguments that I've seen used (or that *I've* used) against movies like BvS and Suicide Squad.

The worst of the Captain America movies?  Worse than The First Avenger?  That's the movie, as far as I recall, that got you so mad about the MCU in the first place.  You called it a feature-length trailer for the Avengers. 

Could've been fixed by having the characters talk?  They do talk.  But the movie goes to great lengths to show that neither side is particularly right.  The Avengers do save people, but they do cause collateral damage.  They do need oversight, but the oversight could easily be just as bad as the people they're supposed to fight.  And there's tons of history to look back on for both sides.  I've said it earlier in the thread, but I felt like Tony's transformation from the guy at the Senate hearing in Iron Man 2 to the guy arguing for government oversight in Civil War is totally earned in my opinion.

Batman is the world's greatest detective but does almost no investigation into who Superman is.  A throwaway scene about a drone following Superman around in Man of Steel did more investigation than Batman did.  If Bruce had done the work that Lois did in the first movie, he'd realize that Clark Kent has been a pretty good guy his whole life.  End of movie.

Listen, I get it.  Marvel gets the benefit of the doubt and DC doesn't.  DC makes bigger effort to care about building something, and they've gotten hammered for it.  BvS and Civil War can make the same amount of money, and one is a failure and the other is a success.  It sucks to have to constantly defend these movies.  But all your reviews recently have been hyperbole - Suicide Squad is great, Civil War is crap. 

And, honestly, I don't think either of those reviews is what you really think.  Did you like Suicide Squad better?  Sure, and you're free to have that opinion.  But to give all DC movies 10/10 reviews and all Marvel 0/10 reviews makes you just as bad as the crazy people who do the opposite.

Just my $0.02.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Okay, but now you're just making stuff up and saying that it's my opinion. I have always argued that the frustrating thing about The First Avenger was the fact that it could have been a really good movie, but they threw it all away in the end in order to set up The Avengers.

I finally saw Winter Soldier this weekend. It was an okay movie. Certainly better than The Avengers, the Thor movies or Agents of SHIELD.

-- me, September 21, 2014

In September 2015, I commented on how the Ant-Man trailer looked bland. Fast forward and I'm saying that the movie was actually pretty fun to watch.

I'm constantly talking about Daredevil being good. I've talked about Agent Carter being fun to watch. To say that I give all DC movies 10/10 and all Marvel stuff 0/10 is simply not true. I am judging each movie on its own merits. In some cases, I've been pleasantly surprised (as you've pointed out, I was not totally on board with Man of Steel before I saw it).

And finally, when I summed up my thoughts on Suicide Squad, I said...

The movie isn't my new favorite superhero movie of all time or anything, but it has taken its place with the other DC offerings on my list of strong comic book movies that I will go back to again.

Which part of that sounds like another 10/10? In fact, I probably wouldn't even give BvS a 10/10. We've discussed a lot of the points that we disagree on, which makes it sound like I'm always defending every aspect, but I've also made it clear that it wasn't a 10/10. A great movie, sure, but I liked Man of Steel better.

The fact that we disagree on these movies means that I could say the same thing about you. You're constantly slamming the DC movies, saying that Man of Steel didn't do this right or BvS didn't do that right. I could imply that you have a bias and that you're going out of your way to slam the movie. But I understand that sometimes, people just have different points of view. I don't think that all of you have some devious plan to hate the DC movies and love the Marvel movies. It's just your opinion. It's not *wrong*, but I do strongly disagree with it.


You say that Civil War went to great lengths to show that neither side is particularly right, but that's not true. By the end of the movie, Tony is wearing villain clothes and recruiting a kid into a war that he has no business being involved in. Batman v Superman spent the entire movie maneuvering the characters into a place where their battle toward the end would make sense. Civil War didn't. The airport scene is a complete mess of storytelling. Here we have two teams of heroes completely destroying an airport, but why? They're not enemies. Half of the time, they're joking around with each other. They're not trying to hurt each other for real, which makes the whole scene completely stupid. It's one thing to cause damage while trying to save lives and stop a bad guy who wants to hurt people, but destroying an airport when half of the characters don't even seem to know why they're fighting each other makes absolutely no sense.

And then we have the Vision (or is it just Vision? I'm not clear on that) almost kill Rhodey, while actually trying to kill Sam makes the whole thing even more nonsensical. His laser beam thing missed the guy who has next to no body armor and hit the guy with the top of the line body armor, nearly killing him... yet they tried to play it off as though he wasn't actually trying to kill Falcon.

My brother told me that he thought the movie should have been called Thanksgiving Dinner: Family Squabble. That's about right.

The movie is a disjointed mess. The whole Sokovia Accords plot goes nowhere, because by the time the airport scene happens, the teams aren't even fighting over that anymore. They don't explain what is in that book of new rules. They don't explore the repercussions. They don't go into Scarlet Witch's actions and debate over whether killing 11 people while saving a 100 people in that same explosion justifies what she did.  They breeze by the actions taken in past movies but never dig into this very reasonable debate, because that wouldn't have a big flashy airport scene where they all battle each other. Instead, they move on to the Bucky story, which actually has very little to do with the  Sokovia Accords.

And if you want to talk about me contradicting myself, let's talk about your comments on BvS. You made comments about the lines of dialogue where it was made clear that they were fighting in abandoned areas, or that people had gone home for the night. You said something along the lines of it being a childish response to criticism of MoS. Yet in Civil War, we have the same thing happening. In fact, much worse, we have lines of dialogue trying to make light of or distract from weak storytelling (again I reference the "Turn him into a glider" line before the Vision tries to kill Falcon). They keep trying to explain that these people aren't actually trying to hurt each other, and yet they're destroying an airport! At least when Batman and Superman were destroying that empty building, they were actually engaged in real combat. Batman actually wanted to kill Superman.

My criticism of the movie is based on what was on screen. They had two plots which did not come together, and neither of which were properly explored. They tried passing them off as one plot, but it didn't work. They jammed as many characters into the movie because it would look cool, but the truth is that most of them had no business being in the movie, and taking them out would have only strengthened the arcs of the characters who did belong. They wasted time and energy on high-concept battle scenes when what they should have been paying attention to was telling the legitimate character stories, which would allow real conflict to arise naturally.

That final fight with Cap, Iron Man and Bucky could have been amazing if they had focused on the characters instead of the action. If they had developed the conflict between Tony and Bucky more naturally throughout the movie... we all knew that Bucky killed Tony's parents. There was no need to put that reveal at the "shocking twist" point in the movie.

There was such a better movie to be made here. Two better movies, actually. The Sokovia Accords would have been a great plot to explore, with Scarlet Witch's actions being the centerpiece for the debate. But neither of those better movies were made. Instead we get two halves of different movies, which don't work together to tell one complete story.


Watch the scene where Steve kisses Sharon and tell me that that moment was natural and earned, and not just awkward and gross. Tell me why it's fair to criticize Batman for not discovering Clark earlier, but it's not fair to criticize Bucky for not putting his hands over his ears and humming while that dude was trying to activate him.

What I'm criticizing this movie for is having the very good chance to make a very good movie, and throwing it away in favor "wouldn' t this be cool?", which is the same mindset that took down the Avengers movies.


Imagine this movie without hot Aunt May or Tony going to get Spider-Man. How much damage does that actually do to the actual plot of the movie? Imagine the movie without Ant-Man, or Hawkeye. How much damage does that actually do? Imagine the movie without the SWAT team, helicopter and police cars as Cap, Black Panther and Falcon chase Bucky. How much damage does that do? Imagine no airport scene. How much damage does that do?

With BvS, most of the damage to the movie came from taking scenes out when they should have been kept in. That's not just my opinion, it's what most people are saying about the movie at this point. But you can take a big red marker to the Civil War script and walk away with a movie that's shorter, cheaper and stronger than what we got on screen.


As I said, these are my opinions. They're formed by my brain, watching the movie from my point of view. We obviously have different points of view and I'm cool with that. You should be too.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ3VQkK6Upo

Honest Trailers for Civil War!

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not mad at all, and I respect your opinion as much as anyone's.  I'm just concerned that you're allowing this whole DC/Marvel thing to cloud your judgment.  If you honestly think you aren't, then that's absolutely fine.  You're a lot better at analyzing plot/movies/characterization than me, and when you and I disagree, I *often* wonder if I'm wrong.

They were talking about this stuff on the Weekly Planet.  Both guys have really enjoyed Marvel as opposed to DC, and DC people get mad at them (even accusing them of getting paid by Marvel to bash DC.  They laugh at that because they don't think they're big enough for anyone on either side to care).

We're three movies into the DCCU.  There's one that most people like (Man of Steel), one most people don't like (BvS) and one that is in the middle.  When the MCU was at this stage, they had one that most people like (Iron Man), one that most people don't like (the Incredible Hulk), and one that is in the middle (Iron Man 2).  If the DCCU was 10 movies deep when the MCU started, we'd be saying "wow, Iron Man was pretty good but fairly standard, and their last two haven't been very good."  It's all about perspective, in a way.

Rotten Tomatoes

Iron Man - 94 (critics) 91 (audience)
Incredible Hulk - 67 (critics) 71 (audience)
Iron Man 2 - 72 (critics) 72 (audience)

Man of Steel - 55 (critics) 75 (audience)
Batman v Superman - 27 (critics) 64 (audience)
Suicide Squad - 26 (critics) 67 (audience)

Three movies in, there's not much difference in fan ratings.  It's lower for DC, but it's not much lower.  It's just, as you've said all along, a *HUGE* disparity between audience and critics. 

It's just a matter of the MCU doing it first and this perception that Marvel has their s*** pulled together and DC doesn't.  Now, to be fair, no Marvel movie had an audience rating lower than 71 (Incredible Hulk).  DC already has two.  So it's not just a conspiracy of critics. 

I'll take a look at your actual points later.  Just wanted to make sure I said something before you thought I was actually mad.  Didn't mean to put words in your mouth - I often resort to hyperbole in times like this, and for that I apologize smile

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

The trailer was pretty good. And it reminded me of another problem! When what's-his-name bad guy went to drown that other bad guy in the laundry room sink, the dude's mouth was totally above the sink line. He could have hung there forever and been totally fine if he wasn't sloshing around in the water.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

For the record, I do always enjoy our back and forth here as well. We obviously have different points of view and I think we've been doing this long enough to argue our points without anyone feeling like they're being attacked. It makes the movies more fun, I think.

Eventually, we will agree on a movie that we like. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I just took one of those silly online quizzes, to find out which side of the brain I use more. Am I more artistic and imaginative, or rational and analytical?

Turns out, I'm 50/50. I wonder if that's what my problem is here. I can't just sit back and let the story be fun. It also has to make sense to me, or else it isn't fun at all.

I promise, I don't do it consciously. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I watched episode 1 of Luke Cage. It was pretty slow and boring. I will give it a few more episodes to grab me. I was disappointed, because he was a high point on Jessica Jones. There was a weird disconnect between his role on her show and how he behaved on his... Then again, he wasn't even consistent through the one episode I've watched of his show.

The directing was pretty weak too. I have heard a lot of good things about the show, so I'm hoping that it picks up.

I have to say though, whoever decided to cast a well  known actress (Alfre Woodard) in two different roles within the MCU, in the same year (!) should be fired. Are they even pretending to be connected anymore?

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

226 (edited by Slider_Quinn21 2016-10-16 00:46:35)

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I haven't started it yet and probably won't for a while.  I've liked the Netflix series so far, but they need to cut back from 13 episodes.  Daredevil (both seasons) and Jessica Jones have struggled with pacing for that many episodes.  I've read Luke Cage suffers from the same issues.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I don't think that Daredevil dragged nearly as badly as Jessica Jones did, but I agree that they could probably all do with less. Maybe not set a strict number of episodes. Let the writers map it out and see how many scripts they end up with before they set a number for the season.

I don't think that there is a reason that they *couldn't* do 13 episodes. That's still not a huge number for a TV show. Maybe it's got less to do with the number than the way they're going about plotting the series. Maybe Jessica Jones could have helped a client along the line, or something. If Veronica Mars can do a full network season, Jessica Jones should be able to do 13.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Absolutely.  I don't know why Jessica Jones wasn't more procedural.  I think it was Alan Sepinwall who said that Killgrave should've developed more slowly.  She handles a handful of cases throughout the first half of the season that all point toward Killgrave.  Then the second half of the season revolves around trying to find and capture/kill him.  Then there would've been less ridiculous moments of them catching him and him constantly getting away.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Halfway through Luke Cage. Holy crap, this is boring. It's like watching cold molasses ooze down the side of a statue, while 1970's slow jazz plays in the background.

The episode count could have easily been cut... By maybe 12 episodes.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

We don't talk about it much, but I think Agents of Shield has really found its footing.  I actually look forward to watching it each week, and I think it's a lot of fun.  It's annoying that the movies don't care about it, and it's crazy that AoS takes place in the same universe as Daredevil.  But for what it is, I think it's a lot of fun.  Ghost Rider was a fun story, LMD was zany but allowed for some great character work, and I think Agents of Hydra will be pretty cool too.

Bringing back (spoiler) is upsetting, but hopefully they do it right.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I haven't watched the show in months. I started this season watching, but eventually forgot to watch and didn't care. Then I went and watched an episode and it just seemed stupid, so I never went back. I never got past the Ghost Rider story.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I mean, I don't see it as any worse or better than any of the DC/CW shows.  The characters that are still on the show are good, and I like them.  And the show is fun - the action is usually pretty good for TV, and the narrative is usually compelling.

What I've noticed is that they're sorta moving into their own territory.  They don't name-drop the Avengers as much, and when they do, it's usually just in relation to Coulson (like when he talks about getting stabbed by Loki).  They aren't just a clean-up crew for whatever the other movies are doing.  While they're doing a lot of magic this year, I'm pretty sure they haven't had a single mention of Dr. Strange or anything related to him.  At the same time, it feels like the Marvel universe, and it wouldn't be bizarre to have more cross-pollination if that's what the movie side wanted.

But since they don't, I like that the show isn't just filling the gaps of the Marvel movies.  It's its own thing.  And it's a fun show.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I finally got through Luke Cage.  60% of it was well done, engaging, but 40% of it was downright awful.  The copy Misty I think was the best character on it.  Better than Jessica Jones, which was unwatchable, but not by much.  Hopefully Iron Fist and then Defenders return to Daredevil levels.  However, I would agree with Info, the lack of storytelling is really amazing.  Stranger Things got it right, in and out in 8 episodes.  Same with The OA, another great show.  10-13 is just too much.

Saw the first couple episodes of Legion, it's all over the place, but I'm getting it and will keep watching.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Well, the Defenders is only going to be 8 episodes, but I'm pretty sure the contract with Netflix was for 60 episodes total (13 of each of the primary shows and 8 Defenders) so they might not have had a choice in the matter....even if they realized they didn't have enough material for 13.

Although I blame that on writing.  There's tons of stories these guys can tell in 13 episodes.  There are a lot of great network shows that did/do 20+ episodes, and there are a *ton* of great shows that do 13.  There's no magic number of episodes, and all these characters have decades of material to work with.

235 (edited by Grizzlor 2017-02-22 11:24:59)

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

They're way over 60.  2 Daredevil, Jessica, Cage, Fist, and Punisher would be 78, and then Defenders would be 86.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

When it comes to the Marvel shows on Netflix, I don't think that it's necessarily the number of episodes that is the problem. Daredevil hasn't bored me at all. I think Jessica Jones could have been a better series with four or five episodes that were just her doing her job and showing us that she is a detective. Veronica Mars had this format right. They had major, heavy arcs, but each episode usually had its own smaller mystery as well.

Jessica Jones would probably be better off having mostly arc episodes, but with a few detective stories mixed in so that they didn't just repeat themselves (over and over and over), and so they could establish the abilities of the character (as a detective).


Luke Cage, nothing could help. It was like watching paint dry on cold molasses that had grass growing through it. Horrible storytelling. The slow jazz feel did nothing to help their lack of plot. Their arc was all over the place (three primary villains who could have been stopped by Luke in about five minutes). It was just a mess.


Agents of SHIELD, I have never been able to connect with. The characters have always struck me as characters, or actors playing characters. They've never had any chemistry or personality, or anything natural about them. The way they talk is unnatural, the way they are directed through the episodes is unnatural. It's just always been a totally hollow series for me. Even when they had a chance to do something interesting, having Fitz's brain damaged, they didn't even find a clever way to fix it or present the struggle. It was totally disingenuous (much like Felicity being shot on Arrow, during that season that we shall never talk about again).
I just don't get the sense that anyone making the show has ever actually cared about it, or taken it seriously. It's always been paint-by-numbers, visually speaking. And most of the time, you could probably switch around character names in the script and you'd never know it from the dialogue. So few of the characters have unique voices, outside of their basic character descriptions.

On The Flash, which is an absurd show, the actors seem to take their work seriously and there is real chemistry between cast members. The effort that is put into creating the visual style of the show is evident. The show isn't always brilliantly written, but there is always something genuine about each episode.

Likewise with Arrow, when it's done well, there is legitimate chemistry between the actors. There is legitimate effort put into the look and feel of the show.

But I will give you Legends of Tomorrow and Supergirl. They are similar to Agents of SHIELD in a lot of ways. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I don't know if Punisher or the second season of Daredevil could toward the original contract for the Netflix shows.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant wrote:

I don't know if Punisher or the second season of Daredevil could toward the original contract for the Netflix shows.

Yeah, I'm guessing that's a new contract.

Regarding the characters on Agents of Shield, I think they've grown into their roles.  They weren't entirely sure what to do with Daisy/Skye, but I think her progression has been mostly organic.  Coulson has been Coulson.  And they've humanized May to the point where she's a character you can sorta understand, especially this season.  Putting Fitz and Simmons together has humanized them to where they aren't just the science team.  I think Mac is a pretty cool character, and putting him with Yo-Yo has shown off his depth.

When you listen to Chloe Bennet talk about how they're virtually ignored by the MCU, you see how proud she is of the show and how disappointed she is that it doesn't get treated the same way.  And I know you don't like LoT or Supergirl, but I think there's a place on TV for those kind of shows - something just engaging enough but also fun.  I think, at it's best, AoS can be as good as Flash or Arrow.  I think Amell and Gustin are just more charismatic and can carry a show.  As much as I like the character of Coulson, he's not strong enough to be the lead, and the ensemble isn't strong enough for it to be completely engaging.

But when it's good, it's pretty good.  And there've been fewer and fewer bad moments the last season or two.  It might not matter because it's on the bubble, and Marvel might want to focus on the Inhumans TV show and their Netflix shows.  But we'll see.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I know I have a reputation for not liking fun shows or just silly entertainment, but I actually do. I like comedies, like Man in the High Castle, The Walking Dead, and Dexter, as well as the more serious shows...

smile

But seriously, I do like some goofy shows. I just think that I have to feel some amount of care when I'm watching it. To me, when I watched Agents of SHIELD for the 3.4 (or whatever) seasons, I just saw people getting a paycheck. I saw billboards for whatever movie was coming out, or whichever phase of the MCU plan was about to kick in. They never created a world that I could believe in. And that might just be me, but it is what it is. The same is true with Supergirl, which I honestly don't even think they try with. And it's the same with LoT, except Legends has some chemistry between some of the actors which can make it fun at times, despite the horrible, lazy writing.

I do have a place in my life for shows that I just watch because they're silly fun. I actually really like Fuller House, which a lot of people probably wouldn't expect, but there you go.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I TRIED watching Agends of SHIELD back when Agent Carter was paired with it.  I just couldn't.  Nothing against it, but it reminded me of how TV was produced 15, 20, 25 years ago.  That's actually a good thing, but 20-something episodes series are REALLY a pain to keep up with, and the story/characters didn't catch me enough.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant wrote:

But seriously, I do like some goofy shows. I just think that I have to feel some amount of care when I'm watching it. To me, when I watched Agents of SHIELD for the 3.4 (or whatever) seasons, I just saw people getting a paycheck. I saw billboards for whatever movie was coming out, or whichever phase of the MCU plan was about to kick in.

I agree with this sentiment as far as the first couple seasons went.  Every episode there was a name-drop or a wink or a reference.  Nick Fury would show up.  Or lesser characters from the movies (Sif from Thor, for example).  And whenever a movie would come out, they'd scramble to change for it or have an "event" episode in the aftermath.  There was a big, complicated story arc on AoS where they explained how they obtained a Helicarrier for Nick Fury to use.  It's a big part of Age of Ultron, but the show isn't mentioned at all (or even a wink to the show - he just has it).

Since they did the Inhumans arc, the show's sorta done its own thing.  And, this season, magic has been at the forefront, but they aren't tying it to Dr. Strange.  In season 2, the whole season would be about helping Strange and there'd be a cameo from Wang or something.  Instead, they're focusing on other aspects of magic, and (as far as I know), Strange hasn't been mentioned.  No references at all.

And, yeah, there's not Emmy-level performances or really deep characters, but I feel like they've grown a lot more.  It used to be a show that I just watched, but now I look forward to it.  It's fun.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant wrote:

Thor should be A-level, but he really isn't. I don't expect much from his movie. http://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=5312#p5312

I've never cared much for the Thor movies; and I think the main value of Ragnarok is going to be the reveal of the last infinity stone - the soul stone.  Speculation is that Heimdall has it.  It would explain why his eyes glow orange (the color the last stone will be); it would explain why his eyes were different in Thor's vision during Avengers: Age of Ultron (if Thanos had stolen it); and it would explain his comment in the first movie about how he sees people as souls.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

THOR is a perfect movie, a cinematic achievement unmatched and unparalleled by any. Why? Because it had Einstein Rosen Bridges and a restaurant called Arturo's. I also loved AMAZING SPIDER-MAN because Andrew Garfield was playing the perfect Quinn Mallory. That's right. I evaluate films entirely in terms of how much they remind me of SLIDERS. :-D

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I don't care much for Thor or Thor: the Dark World.  It isn't really that the character isn't well played or well written...I just don't really care about the character. 

That being said, I'm actually pretty excited about Ragnarok.  Take away his hammer and make him fight the Hulk?  A Planet Hulk - ish movie?  That could be fun.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I just imagine that this Thor movie will be painful. Thor's movies have been among the most boring of the franchise, and they're now adding the Hulk, who has been another of the weaker parts. Ruffalo just brings nothing to the screen. This has all the makings of a snooze-fest.

And now the Spider-Man movie is looking to be in trouble!!!!!
https://www.comicbookmovie.com/spider-m … ay-a149622

Reshoots! The entire franchise is pretty much over! Reshoots!

I'm joking, of course. But it is funny how the article goes out of its way to explain how normal reshoots are.

Spider-Man still looks horrible in the MCU. Just my opinion. Definitely the weakest movie costume yet for the character.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

To be fair, everything in the MCU looks terrible to Informant and he hated CIVIL WAR which the rest of us liked, so that just indicates that Marvel's maintaining their baseline of quality.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Nah, I still like Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man was fun, and I like Daredevil. I'll be giving Iron Fist a fair shot too. I'm willing to admit when they get something right.

Civil War had potential. All they needed was a plot and a good editor.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Alan Sepinwall absolutely hated Iron Fist.  He's enjoyed (for the most part) the other Netflix series, so that's a bad sign.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I've never thought Iron Fist worked well on his own.  When he was teamed with Luke Cage, it just kind of clicked in an old 70's / 80's buddy cop show way.  I think it's probably because Cage pulled Danny into all kinds of situations he wouldn't have gotten into if he was just out there living the Iron Fist life.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

FWIW I too find most of the MCU films fun to watch ONCE, and never again.  GOTG, Ant-Man, Dr. Strange are exceptions, because they have stories.  Daredevil was good, the rest of what Netflix has done has been dreadful.  Will see about Iron Fist but not hopeful.  FWIW I did Legion on FX, but it's probably too cerebral for most viewers.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Legion is good. I like that one a lot, but I have talked to a ton of people who hate it. I guess I like shows where people put thought and effort into stories and characters, as well as the visual style, while some people prefer to watch superheroes have big battles every week. I don't know. I just know that I find the exploration of character on Legion to be really compelling, while others say that the show is boring and nothing happens.


When it comes to Iron Fist, I'm just going to have to wait and see. Critics are morons who don't know anything, so we can't go by them. Complaining that a white comic book character being white on screen is "whitewashing" is stupid (and possibly a little racist). A lot of those same people would be complaining if they had cast an Asian actor, because they complain about the martial arts stereotype all the time. The star of the show says that it's because people don't like Trump and don't want to cheer for a billionaire superhero. I think that's a bit of a stretch, but who knows?

All I know for sure is that plenty of critics praised Luke Cage, which has to be one of the low points of the franchise, so we can't count their opinions for much.


Plus, they bashed some really good DC films. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Sepinwall doesn't usually get caught in that BS.  He likes it or he doesn't, and his complaints about Marvel shows have been pretty similar to yours.  Good but drags on too long.  Too repetitive.  He really liked season one of Daredevil and didn't care as much for season two.  Was less into Jessica Jones and Luke Cage.

He says to simply skip this one.  Not "it's bad, go in knowing that" - "Don't worry about it.  You'll catch up when Defenders airs"

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I don't get why people think season 2 of Daredevil was such a big fall from season 1. It had some solid new characters and the arc was pretty smooth, compared to JJ or LC.

I guess it's also possible that season 1 earned the show a little more wiggle room from me. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I have watched the first two episodes of Iron Fist. I have thoughts.

1. I don't know what the critics are smoking. This show is closer to Daredevil quality than JJ or LC were. Are they really just pissing and moaning over race issues?

2. Honestly, I know nothing about this character going in. He definitely has Bruce Wayne/Oliver Queen stuff going on, but it's working well so far. I'm interested in following this.

3. I can't judge the whole series yet. There could well be a slump coming up. That seems to be a thing with these shows. But if they can hold this quality of character/story, I will be happy.

4. I do have some issues. It felt weird to have the doctor look at Danny as though he were crazy for referencing other dimensions when they exist in a universe full of alien invasions and mythical gods using a magic hammer to fly. Also, Danny probably could have helped himself by replacing a few "could we just talk?" lines with some "you once poured pancake batter on my head" type lines.

5. I find myself sitting here, waiting for Claire to show up. I know she's around here somewhere. smile

6. Why am I numbering these thoughts?

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Further proof that critics are useless idiots. Iron Fist has a Rotten Tomatoes score of 17% from critics! Audience score of 87%... Which is closer to where it should be. And the critics comments are largely political, with cries of racism, cultural appropriation, "mansplaining"... It's like they don't care about the writing, acting or directing, and only care about their SJW bingo cards.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Seriously though... Don't the new Spider-Man posters look more like the posters for an animated movie than live action? Bright colors aside, they don't even look photographic and the composition is weird. Someone went a little crazy in Photoshop.

I haven't been keeping up with news on this movie. What does "Homecoming" refer to, aside from Disney getting the ability to integrate him into their franchise? Does the story involve him coming back to New York after some great amount of time? I'm a little confused.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant wrote:

I haven't been keeping up with news on this movie. What does "Homecoming" refer to, aside from Disney getting the ability to integrate him into their franchise? Does the story involve him coming back to New York after some great amount of time? I'm a little confused.

From my understanding, it's set in the lead-up to and during Peter's high school homecoming dance.  They've said they really want this to be a John Hughes movie (Breakfast Club, 16 Candles, etc) mixed in with super-heroes.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Ah. Interesting.

I will reserve judgement on that until I see it on Netflix. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Informant not knowing what a homecoming dance is only deepens my grief for him and his genetic inability to have fun. Stay strong, buddy. We'll get through this.

**

I sure hope Claire shows up soon! I only got around to watching LUKE CAGE now. Honestly, while Luke Cage is one of my favourite Avengers (he plays the straightman to the insanity of Tony Stark and Thor), I'm not really into stories about street gangs. But once I got past that, I really enjoyed this series -- and I've decided that Claire is my favourite MCU character.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I know what a homecoming dance is. I just didn't expect a superhero movie to have a school dance as its big draw.

Winter Soldier. The First Avenger. Civil War. Age of Ultron... Homecoming.

I guess it can be pretty harrowing, trying to pin a boutonnière to a super suit. And it's going to be a tough moment when it's time to take pictures and he doesn't want to remove his mask.
Finally, the film will end with a chase scene after Spider-Man gets his date home after her curfew, and her father chases him through the city with a shotgun.

Second thought, I might love this movie.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Luke Cage sucked though. It was painful to get through. Claire didn't save it. I might rather go to the dentist and get my teeth drilled than sit through that series again. It was horrible. Which is sad, because Luke was a strong character on Jessica Jones.

I'm still watching Iron Fist. Still liking it.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

A new Spider-Man trailer is out. I'm curious to know what you all think.

https://youtu.be/DiTECkLZ8HM

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

The movie looks good.

The trailer seemingly tells the entire story, beat by beat.  In chronological order.  I haven't read a single online spoiler, but I can basically tell you the entire plot based on this one trailer.

It's baffling why studios do this.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Yeah, it is stupid. They've lost the ability to build mystery. I think that mystery and subtlety are dead in our entire culture.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Star Wars was able to do it.  You can watch all the trailers and promos and not really learn much of anything.  I think the Deadpool trailers created the right feel without ruining the movie.  Guardians has done a pretty good job.

The trailers for Life apparently did the same thing - tell the movie in two minutes beat by beat.  I think the BvS trailer (and I know I'm banned from talking about it) shouldn't have spoiled the Doomsday bit.  I think they need to do one of two things:

1. Let the directors edit the trailer (or they can let someone they trust do it).  Having 3rd parties make the trailers creates a situation where their goals (making a cool trailer) don't mesh with the goals for the movie (get people interested in movie).

2. Only provide scenes from the first two acts to the 3rd party.  Most genre movies have a big action setpiece in the first two acts, and all you really need to know is the inciting incident to get a feel for what the plot is going to be.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

Star Wars was able to do it.  You can watch all the trailers and promos and not really learn much of anything.  I think the Deadpool trailers created the right feel without ruining the movie.  Guardians has done a pretty good job.

The trailers for Life apparently did the same thing - tell the movie in two minutes beat by beat.  I think the BvS trailer (and I know I'm banned from talking about it) shouldn't have spoiled the Doomsday bit.  I think they need to do one of two things:

1. Let the directors edit the trailer (or they can let someone they trust do it).  Having 3rd parties make the trailers creates a situation where their goals (making a cool trailer) don't mesh with the goals for the movie (get people interested in movie).

2. Only provide scenes from the first two acts to the 3rd party.  Most genre movies have a big action setpiece in the first two acts, and all you really need to know is the inciting incident to get a feel for what the plot is going to be.

If we're talking about The Force Awakens, I think it might be because there was no plot to give away. smile

With BvS, people like to blame Snyder for the missteps, but I think the studio genuinely doesn't know what to do with those movies. They don't know how to market to comic book fans, and they aren't comic book fans themselves, so they don't know what's good and what isn't. This is probably why they edited a lot of Superman's story out of BvS when they got their hands on it. People love Batman and he makes a lot of money, so play that up. With the trailer, they just wanted to throw everything at the wall and see what stuck, I think.

Especially because the people making those movies now aren't creating the simple tellings of those stories anymore, which is a lot easier to do than to really explore the characters. Snyder's version of the movie was much more solid. Plus, it set up Justice League a little bit more by letting us get a glimpse of... wait, you haven't seen it. I won't spoil that.

The directors and editors should probably make the trailers.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Well, I just think we've moved to a place where people assume that stuff is going to be spoiled so they show it.  How cool would it have been for Doomsday to show up with absolutely no reference to him in the trailers?  Apparently the ending to Life was spoiled by the trailers (and it's a twist ending, allegedly - I haven't seen the trailer or the movie).  And the Spider-Man trailer spoils a great deal of the relationship between Peter and Tony Stark, almost the entirety of a huge action setpiece in the middle of the film, and Peter's entire motivation throughout.

It was just too much.  Maybe the director would've spoiled the same stuff, but I doubt it.  Maybe you tease the boat splitting in half and have you wonder "how's he going to get out of this one?" like they did with the skydivers in Iron Man 3. 

Guardians didn't do that in their trailer.  Justice League gave a lot of character information without really giving much away.  These are big movies that didn't feel the need to make the same mistakes.

Maybe there's a great ending to Spider-Man.  Maybe the rest of the movie is great.  But if they're going to show so much (which looks great), my first instinct is to assume that the rest of the movie wasn't worth showing.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

IRON FIST is pretty mediocre. The corporate machinations are extremely dull and Finn Jones is thoroughly uninteresting as the already blandly scripted Danny Rand. Colleen Wing and Claire Temple are pretty much perfection, though, and they elevate the series from lifelessly indistinct to watchable. The drunken boxen sequence was good, though.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I don't understand the IRON FIST series at all. Why did Marvel TV commission a series about a martial artist character but fill the series with corporate intrigue and boardroom debates instead of martial arts action?

Why did Marvel TV hire an actor with no fighting skills and no time to learn how to fake it to play a master martial artist in this show?

Why did Marvel TV greenlight a show about Iron Fist when the Iron Fist superpower is barely present and Danny Rand never wears the Iron Fist costume?

Why did Marvel TV want to do an Iron Fist TV show about the character's origin story where the mystical city in which the story takes place -- K'un Lun -- is never shown onscreen and where the magic dragon -- which each applicant must fight to become the Iron Fist -- never appears in person?

Why is Harold Meachum the final villain of the first season when Harold has been established as weaker than the Hand ninjas and subservient to villains that Iron Fist has already defeated and dispatched?

If Marvel TV felt uncomfortable with the martial arts, the costume, the mystical city from which the martial arts came, the superpower and the origin behind the superpower, why are they doing this show at all?

IRON FIST is a series that doesn't seem to have any concrete goals and it keeps sabotaging itself throughout its run.

It's almost as though somebody decided years previous that Netflix would have a DEFENDERS series featuring Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage and Iron Fist who'd first appear in their individual shows, but the Iron Fist show was thrown together at the last second to justify the character appearing in DEFENDERS without any sense of what IRON FIST would be and no commitment or interest in the aspects of Iron Fist that are present in the comics.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I had family in town, so I still haven't finished Iron Fist.

We did watch Doctor Strange though. So... Yeah.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Dr Strange was harmless fun, I thought.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I guess it was harmless. I mean, it probably didn't give me cancer or anything. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

We don't talk about it much, but I think Agents of Shield has really found its footing.  I actually look forward to watching it each week, and I think it's a lot of fun.  It's annoying that the movies don't care about it, and it's crazy that AoS takes place in the same universe as Daredevil.  But for what it is, I think it's a lot of fun.  Ghost Rider was a fun story, LMD was zany but allowed for some great character work, and I think Agents of Hydra will be pretty cool too.

Bringing back (spoiler) is upsetting, but hopefully they do it right.

Informant wrote:

I haven't watched the show in months. I started this season watching, but eventually forgot to watch and didn't care. Then I went and watched an episode and it just seemed stupid, so I never went back. I never got past the Ghost Rider story.

I don't really know how to describe AGENTS OF SHIELD, and every time I try, I ramble endlessly. I think the best way I have to explain the show is that it has constantly reinvented itself with each season and with Season 4, they did the annual reinvention early, in the middle of the season, wrapping up the Ghost Rider arc and shifting into the artificial intelligence war.

Season 1 was the children's version of a spy show and the series only seemed to find its footing when SHIELD was destroyed and the agents were made fugitives and outsiders which is a more Marvel-approach than having them as agents of the establishment. Season 2 were the agents trying to do their jobs when it wasn't their job anymore and it set up the Inhuman arc of Season 3 which did a really neat job of finally creating Inhumans to truly represent the best Marvel characters as misfits and freaks.

With Season 2, there was a cinematic, crisp, fast-paced approach to the show with tight editing and a snappy sense of rhythm. The series also pushed the actors to their limits with Clark Gregg, Chloe Bennett, Elizabeth Henstridge and Iain De Caestecker playing characters who were increasingly strained and maddened and pushed to their limits. And Brett Dalton as Grant Ward found deeper and more disturbing layers of horror and twisted monstrosity in a character who initially seemed incredibly bland and flat. The Ghost Rider arc was very fulfilling and exiting. The AI war has really grabbed me with the nightmarish Framework environment.

But I honestly can't point to any coherent throughline or central purpose to the series beyond being an exciting, PG-13 espionage series in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It isn't a film noir adventure like DAREDEVIL; it's not a detective drama like JESSICA JONES; it's not a street-level exercise in atmosphere like LUKE CAGE; it's not a goofy space comedy like GUARDIANS and it's not a charming character piece like ANT MAN. It was a supernatural procedural thriller in the Ghost  Rider arc and it's currently a techno-action spy adventure. Who knows what it'll be next week?

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Yeah there's not much to it as a whole, but I enjoy it weekly and am glad it exists.

So I watched the original Iron Man movie tonight.  And while I think it did a lot to create the world of the MCU, I gotta say it doesn't feel like an MCU movie.  The MCU is hitting on all cylinders these days (if only as a machine, Informant), and when you watch Dr. Strange or Guardians of the Galaxy or Ant-Man, it all feels authentic to me.  They introduce something strange, and I say, "yeah, that makes sense."

Iron Man shows a world that would feel a bit odd if a Hulk randomly showed up.  A world that doesn't really feel like Red Skull would've fought Captain America.  A world where Hank Pym had already had a lengthy career as Ant-Man.

What really drove that home was, in fact, Phil Coulson.  When I saw Coulson show up, I smiled.  I'd almost forgotten that his character goes back to the beginning....that he, not Nick Fury, was the introduction of SHIELD.  I even forgot that Coulson says Shield first - I thought Fury was the first one to say it.

But at the end of the movie, Coulson and some agents go to arrest Obadiah Stane, and they're surprised when it happens.  At the time, they were just faceless agents.  But as Coulson was leading them in, I watched him with four seasons of a show under his belt, and he felt....underprepared.  He felt sloppy.  I don't even remember how Coulson made it out of the situation alive, and I'm fairly certain the other agents were killed or seriously wounded.

The world hadn't, quite, gotten away from SHIELD yet.  It'd been decades since the Tesseract was causing problems.  Hank Pym had retired already.  The Hulk hadn't made himself known to the world, and he was still in hiding.  No one knew about aliens or Asgardians.  Spider-Man is about 8 years old.  So Coulson probably hadn't faced many supernatural threats at this point in his career, but outside of a small gadget to get into a secure location, it doesn't feel like Coulson works for any SHIELD I understand.

The movie is great, though.  It still might be the best overall movie in the MCU.  They got so lucky that it worked out, or that Nick Fury stinger would've felt really empty.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I think Iron Man worked the best, because it was its own movie. It wasn't bending over backwards to establish some character to plot device that will become important 75 years down the line. It wasn't trying to be cute, with references to things in every other movie and jabs at characters from other movies. Iron Man was... pure.

Then you get to Iron Man 2 and it's a sea of character setups and building up to something down the line. Captain America never got to have his own movie, outside of the machine.


The Marvel machine is great for marketing. It's like Apple... at some point, it doesn't matter what they point out, because you've invested too many hours into this thing and you refuse to give up on it. But the machine is the killer of stories and characters. It's a parasite, feeding off of every movie. And it's completely unnecessary. Not every future movie needs to be teased in three otherwise unrelated movies before it. When something big happens in my life, there isn't always a post-credits scene from three years ago that set it up in advance.

One of the things that I'm really looking forward to with Wonder Woman, for example, is that she doesn't get frozen and wake up 100 years later. She can have ten movies set in the first quarter of the 20th century. Her romance with Steve doesn't have to be rushed and then thrown away. She can marry him and watch him grow into a 100 year old man without stepping on the toes of the Justice League movies in any way. This is what they should have done with Captain America, with his final movie having him frozen and waking up just before The Avengers. As it stands, his first movie feels like a rushed setup for The Avengers. His relationships in his first movie are a waste of time, for the most part. His transition to the present is glossed over. He makes out with the niece of the love of his life, about five minutes after said love of his life died unceremoniously. The actual Captain America character is like an afterthought in his own movies, because of the big machine that he is serving.

Iron Man didn't have that problem. It was clean and had its own soul. Not unlike Guardians of the Galaxy.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I finally finished Iron Fist the other day. It took me a while, because life got in the way, but I finally got through it.

Overall, I enjoyed it. I think it's easily better than Luke Cage or Jessica Jones, but not up to Daredevil level. I'm a little over this whole trope of the evil corporations, etc., but I still enjoyed the story.

Danny is an interesting character. I don't know the comic book character, so I can only speak about the TV version, but I think it's interesting how he is highly skilled and trained in some ways, but completely developmentally stunted in other ways. He suffered a horrible trauma as a child and was immediately told to repress any and all feelings about that trauma. He was forced to live in a place that he was never meant to live in, and physically abused until he became what they wanted him to become. So it's not surprising that he has anger issues and that his walls start to crumble when he is reintroduced to the normal world. He interacts with it in the only way he knows how, which is as a child. At times it seems silly, but when you stop to think of someone who has essentially been held captive and brainwashed for a decade and a half, it's not really unthinkable.

Do I think it was a little heavy-handed at times? Yeah. But it was still interesting.

The corporate stuff... it is what it is. Yeah, Danny has been trained to fight the Hand, but he doesn't know how to fight someone like Harold, who is a master at controlling people and situations. He used Danny and the Hand against each other, not unlike Lex Luthor in Batman v Superman. I think they could have played him with a little bit more subtlety toward the end, but I do understand why they went with him. The Hand, I imaging, will be an issue to be dealt with in The Defenders, so they couldn't just resolve it here.

I had a hard time getting a feel for Joy in this series. She was a poorly defined character whose reactions and motives seemed to change from episode to episode. Did she love Danny like a brother? She seems to be a lifeline in the first episode or two, but then whatever bond they might have had is sidelined. I think that perhaps Claire didn't need to be as prominent as she was in this series, because she took over some of what Joy could have been doing.

Iron Fist wasn't the best series I've ever seen in my life. And at times, I felt like the OA was going to step out of the shadows and start doing her five movements as he did his tai chi, but that's just my wacky imagination.

I do think that the series was ridiculously over-slammed by critics. Especially after they praised Luke Cage, which was painful to get through.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

AGENTS OF SHIELD continues to impress with a story that shouldn't work. The Framework is a simulated dreamworld, so why should what happens in a dreamworld matter in the slightest? But the AGENTS OF HYDRA arc has found all sorts of ways to make it immersive, first through the disorientation of Daisy waking up as an agent of HYDRA and Simmons having to dig out of her own grave to find herself in a hellish dystopia. Then there's the history of this simulated reality where the regrets each character had cost them the strength, honour and compassion they would have otherwise had to defeat HYDRA.

There's also the sense that the Framework reality is not a simulation even if AIDA and Radcliffe may have programmed it, first indicated by Fitz being a sadistic monstrosity whose memories cannot be unlocked, then by the Grant Ward revealed as a hero with his alternate history being that Victoria Hand was his SHIELD recruiter instead of John Garrett -- these potentialities are not a video game but a genuine path not taken that, while having only simulative form in the Framework, may gain reality in our world through Project Looking Glass.

Despite the fact that the Framework isn't real, there's been such beautiful poignancy and horror. There's Fitz's increased depravity as his love for his father and AIDA are used to transform him into a psychopath. There's Grant Ward apologizing for what his counterpart may have done and Daisy realizing that the self-justifying villain who deluded himself that he was a hero could've actually been one had Garrett never gotten to him. There's Coulson seeming more natural as a schoolteacher than a secret agent before embracing his secret agent identity. There's the grief of Mace's sacrifice in a world that isn't real.

It's beautiful.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

It really is well done.  Although I'm wondering if this is going to be a problem for the show.  Giving Ward a chance for redemption is interesting, but what if they use this as a way to bring Ward back into the real world as a good guy?  It wouldn't really be redeeming our Ward, but I was actually pretty impressed by the idea that they moved beyond Ward in a way that Heroes never moved beyond Sylar.

Now he's back, and I'm worried they're going to use this as a way to bring him back.  Maybe Tripp too.

If they don't do that, I'm actually really impressed by this segment.  It's playing on a lot of the show's mythology....which brings up how much actual mythology the show has to play with.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

There was a time when I thought like you did -- that Sylar was a played out character that the writers were burdened with, that the character was a serious problem -- but now I think that's total BS. At the end of the day, the character is a fictional construct and all the choices and consideration and planning is being carried out not by a character, but by the writers. Which leads me to my position that the problem was not the character as much as the choices made by the writers controlling him. Volume 1 established Sylar as a serial killer. Volume 2 was a replay of his Season 1 arc except he had no powers which stretched out his story while contributing nothing new.

Volume 3 toyed with the idea of making Sylar a hero, then abruptly abandoned it and reverted back to the Volume 1 playbook. Volume 4 actually found a new angle: Sylar joined the government task force to hunt evolved humans, and you can tell that it's the Volume for which Volume 1 writer Bryan Fuller returned. Volume 4 created a Sylar who was the devil in Nathan's persona, then created an amnesiac Sylar, then reverted back to the Volume 1 playbook, then took away his ability to kill and have him live out decades in a dreamworld in which he changed... but we didn't get any further development and Tim Kring's interviews indicated he would have made Sylar villainous again in Volume 5 had he returned.

So, the problem isn't the character; it's that despite raising numerous avenues of development, the writers reverted back to the original template over and over again.

I don't see that problem with Grant Ward; he was killed off in Season 3 and the actor stayed on playing a different character who'd possessed Ward's body. Frameward, as Reddit seems to have dubbed him, is another new angle: this is the same character with the same sense of loyalty, except in this reality, his loyalty was to Victoria Hand and then the Skye/Daisy, so Frameward was never twisted into a detached killer constantly engaging in sick and bloody efforts to justify murder after murder after murder. This is something new, something they can continue develop, and AGENTS OF SHIELD has shown that it's willing to reinvent its playbook every season has reinvented itself three times alone this season.

It's funny, though, to see a fan of SLIDERS protesting a show being able to retain its cast. ;-)

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

From what I watched of the series, Ward suffered from the same issue as Sylar, Spike (from Buffy), Crowley and Castiel (Supernatural) and many others. It isn't about the character vs the writing. They're the same things. Usually, the writers get attached to the actor and they don't want to lose them. This selfish writing results in sweet fruit staying on the tree for too long. What was cool at one point eventually starts to rot.

These characters aren't meant to last. Villains (which most of these are) need to either kill the good guys and end the show, or they need to die. If you just have the characters circle each other for five years, with everyone having various chances to end the war but somehow never doing it, you end up in a situation where the heroes and villains both look incompetent.

With Ward, I always had the sense that the writers didn't want to let the actor go (not sure why, since he wasn't anything super special) and they kept making excuses to try to keep him around. It wasn't natural or logical. When the wants of the writer start to become more visible than the needs of the story, everything breaks down.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

While I understand the view that some characters run their course, surely a television show should be designed to carry on with its core cast indefinitely. And surely writers working on a TV show should be able to keep their cast and characters a going concern because if they can't, why are they working in TV in the first place? That's the format of serial fiction whether it's a five to ten season show or a comic book that's run since 1962. That's the job.

I never hear Spider-Man and Batman writers saying there aren't any stories left to tell with their leads and if they did, are Spidey and Batman the problem? Or is it the writers?

A TV writer saying they can't come up with new stories for a TV character is like a truck driver complaining they hate long drives.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

It depends on the character. Some characters are designed to serve a specific arc, and keeping them around for longer than that arc means that you are sacrificing the original intent of the story, and the foundation of the character. Yes, they can be kept around, but it is usually a matter of whether they *should* be kept around.

On Supernatural, Crowley is a neutered joke of a character. He has had many chances to kill the Winchesters and they have had many chances to kill him, but they never do. It is even a joke within the show, but they never justify it. He is evil. Why don't they kill him?! And because these characters can't move in any direction, they become useless and boring. Crowley spends most of his time in a dungeon-looking place, talking about how bad he is while never contributing to the story.

On the other hand, Bobby Singer was meant to be in one episode, but stayed for many seasons, and he contributed a ton. But his character was never written into a box that depended on him either killing the good guys or being killed by the good guys.

The longer a villain stays on a show, the more pathetic both the villain and the hero begin to look. Imagine if Buffy were still fighting the Master in season 7.


Wait, that might have actually been better. smile

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I think it's a delicate balance.  I have no problem with shows keeping their casts together, but I think it's different when it's heroes and villains.  No one gets mad when, say, Coulson escapes death over and over again because he's the hero.  When he survives, it's a win.

When Sylar survives, the "win" is either minimized or taken away completely.  In the audience, it's frustrating.

There are clearly ways to keep villains around when they're interesting.  But sorta like "will they, won't they" romances in sitcoms, there's a delicate balance.  Most of the fun is watching them go bad.  Once they go fully evil, then there's a countdown clock that starts.  And once it hits zero, the character needs to go away.

What's funny is that it doesn't really matter what the villain does...just whether the hero knows it.  Look at Hannibal.  Hannibal is an evil, awful person from the start of the show.  We're supposed to hate him, but he's charming.  His friendship with Will Graham is fascinating.  So we're cool with whatever he does....and we're thrilled watching Will try and catch him.  But once Will knows, the countdown starts.

It was fun watching Lex and Clark on Smallville.  Lex would bend a rule here, compromise his morals there, and he was a lot of fun.   But once his villainy became cartoonish, he stopped being fun, and I wanted Clark to take him down.  If Clark didn't take him down, it was a failure of our hero and less fun.

With Sylar, he was always 100% evil.  He's a serial killer.  A villain.  Beating him was the whole point, and when he kept coming back, it was a failure.  A problem.  I didn't have any interest in his redemption because I didn't think he was worthy of it.  And I knew, sooner or later, he'd be back t his old tricks. 

I think the same can be said for Ward.  He went fully bad, and the team took him down.  The show had some fun with him as Hive, and then he died again.  The show as able to move on, and I think it was better for it.

I know he's technically a different person, but if Ward comes back to life, it's going to be like Ward (season 1-3 one) found a loophole and redeemed himself.  When I still see Ward (fairly or unfairly, including the fake one) as being evil.  Like Daisy, I don't trust him.  Even though it'd be like holding one twin accountable for the sins of another one.

It just feels cheap to me.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I'm not watching AoS, but on this topic, I think it's at its worst when the writers want to keep the character around and they want to keep him as he was when he was the most fun, so it's like there's a bungee tied to his character arcs, and he keeps snapping back to his original setting.

When Crowley went through that ritual that partially cleansed him and almost purified him, I was intrigued. It was movement of some sort. But then it was back to normal, in that stupid dungeon. What happened to his mansion from season 5?

I hated Rowena with a passion. Then she met God and the character suddenly shifted into someone not quite good, but not quite bad. Now I don't find her nearly as irritating, because she's not just twirling her mustache (so to speak).

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Daisy trusts Frameward. That said, it's a moot point -- Jed Whedon addressed the question and says that the Framework will not be used to bring Ward back as a regular character. It seems his appearance in the Framework was simply to deepen our understanding of the real Ward and realize that he could have been a hero if he'd had the right influence.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

And if that's the case, I think it's a pretty cool idea smile

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

But wasn't Ward crazy as a kid too? I thought he was evil on a deeper level.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Ward was severely abused by his parents and older brother, and the latter forced Ward to beat up the youngest of the brothers, Thomas, and leave Thomas to nearly drown in a well. Ward was later sent to a brutal boarding school after he began openly defying his parents. One night, Ward escaped the school and attempted to burn down his family home with his parents and older brother inside, enraged at their treatment of him and Thomas.

The parents and brother escaped and Ward was arrested and tried as an adult until Garrett (Bill Paxton) broke him out. He then left the teenaged Ward alone in the wilderness with no supplies or equipment for six months and Ward nearly froze and starved until he taught himself to hunt and build shelter. Garrett refined Ward's survival skills and emotional detachment while inducing Ward's loyalty to Garrett by Garrett being the person who gave Ward his freedom and the only one who saw his value, and Garrett joined HYDRA and had Ward do the same, not because they subscribed to HYDRA but because Garrett sought revenge on SHIELD and Ward was obedient to Garrett.

After Garrett is killed and Ward's treachery is revealed, he initially insists that he's still part of Coulson's team and loyal to Daisy, offering them intel and insisting he'd never have harmed the team. But his injuring Fitz and murdering Victoria Hand proves unforgivable and Coulson decides to hand Ward over to Ward's abusive older brother, now a senator, in exchange for cooperation and access. Enraged, Ward escapes custody, kidnaps his brother and forces him to confess his abuse, at which point Ward ties his brother and parents up in their house and burns it down, this time succeeding in murdering his family.

Then Ward joins HYDRA as a sting to aid Daisy in finding her missing father, declaring his loyalty to her and Coulson's team again, but Daisy shoots Ward the first chance she gets and Ward realizes he has no hope. Ward falls in with a disavowed SHIELD agent, Kara, and inducts the traumatized former agent into his soldier and falls in love with her, only to accidentally kill her when setting a trap for SHIELD.

Blaming SHIELD, Ward reforms HYDRA and goes into open warfare, murdering Coulson's new girlfriend. Coulson begins a thorough analysis on Ward and determines that all of Ward's actions are a sick attempt to justify his past and blame others for his actions while claiming he alone acted correctly -- and Coulson locates Ward's younger brother, Thomas, who calls Ward and declares him a monster, saying Ward had no need to murder their parents and brother, that they could have moved on from their abuse, but Ward uses it as an excuse to act out his bloodlust and sadism. Ward's emotional breakdown allows Coulson to trace his location and kill him.

So... what it comes down to is that Ward was defined by his loyalties. Garrett encouraged Ward's anger and bitterness towards his family and, by extension, anyone in his way. Hand apparently encouraged Ward to leave his past behind. Ward's loyalty, in the Framework timeline, saw him build a new life and find new purpose whereas in the real world, he never cast away his demons.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

http://www.superherohype.com/news/39634 … er-is-here

The trailer for the Defenders.  More hallway fight fun!

(It does look good.  And is only 8 episodes.)

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

I heard an interview with James Gunn.  I figured he'd sound exactly like Sam Rockwell (because he looks like Sam Rockwell sorta), and he doesn't.  It freaked me out a bit.

I also thought GOTG Vol. 2 was fun.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

AGENTS OF SHIELD continues to impress. Mallory Jansen, who plays Agnes/Aida/Madame Hydra, is terrifying and chameleonic in these multiple roles and quite possibly the best villain of the series since Maveth. It's fascinating how Jansen can illicit sympathy while being completely contemptible. I hope they can find some way to keep her around next year even if her character doesn't remain.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Season 4 was pretty great.  After it was just one of those series that I watched for a long time, it got some footing.  I don't know how good Inhumans will be, but I'm wondering if the tag at the end has to do with them.  We won't see season 5 of AoS until after Inhumans ends.  We'll have also had Thor: Ragnarok in between then and now, so the whole universe could be different by that point.

Not that much of that matters.  Agents of Shield can definitely stand on its own now.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Anyone else find it weird that Sony is insisting on doing all these Spinoff (but not Spinoff) movies of a defunct Spider-Man universe?  They're moving forward with a Venom movie (with Tom Hardy) and a Silver Sable/Black Cat movie (a director was announced today).

I'm still not 100% how these movies are gonna work.  Is Tom Holland able to do cameos in this universe?  Will the Venom movie be in the same universe as the Black Cat movie?  Does anyone think a "Spider-Man's guest characters universe" is sustainable?

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Sony is still involved with the new Spider-Man movie, right? Its made with Disney, but they're still the main studio, aren't they?

Anyway, Marvel has made billions off of half-assed movies and shows that are kinda-sorta connected, but not really. So it's probably not a big deal.

Please be informed that the political, scientific, sociological, economic and legal views expressed in Informant's posts and social media accounts do not reflect any consensus of Sliders.tv.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Venom could be a decent horror / anti-hero movie; Black Cat / Silver Sable could be a decent buddy movie with a thief and a spy.   The problem is that Sony doesn't really need the trademarks to do those movies - the brand awareness will likely help Venom, but it's going to do nothing for Cat / Sable.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Saw Guardians Vol 2 the other night, and enjoyed it quite a bit.  The ending and credits were dumb, and Stallone was pointless, but the film really felt like I was watching an 80's cartoon!

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Stallone was the leader of the original lineup of the Guardians of the Galaxy....which will apparently be used in a future movie somehow.  Miley Cyrus was the voice of one of them.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Finally giving Iron Fist a shot.  Let's see how it works.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

It's not as terrible as I was led to believe.  But I did notice that Finn Jones' action sequences (especially at the beginning) seemed like they were at 3/4 speed.  If he was truly learning the fight moves the day of shooting (or something like that), then it makes sense.  I just don't know how that was allowed in the first place.

But I like the characters so far.  I'll watch the rest.

Re: Marvel Cinematic Universe by Slider_Quinn21

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

Stallone was the leader of the original lineup of the Guardians of the Galaxy....which will apparently be used in a future movie somehow.  Miley Cyrus was the voice of one of them.

The original Guardians was set 1000 years from present day and explored the future of the Marvel Universe (for instance an evil alien race known as the Stark who based their entire society around the technology found in some armor Iron Man had jettisoned).

Stallone was playing a character named Starhawk (the guy in blue pictured below):

http://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Guardians-of-the-Galaxy-By-Jim-Valentino-Vol.-01-001-1-322x268.jpg

Ving Rhames was playing the big guy (Charlie-27), and Michelle Yeoh (the grungy looking girl) was Starhawk's sister Aleta.  The crystal guy always with Stallone was another original Guardian named Martinex (played by Michael Rosenbaum).

Stallone's Starhawk thought he was the leader of the original Guardians, but the leader was really a guy named Vance Astro (a guy from present day who ended up in the future - Vance would even later find Captain America's shield in the future and start using it).  But Starhawk thought he should be leader because he had a seeming precognitive ability; in truth, he was just a guy like Bill Murray stuck in a time loop trying to manipulate events to get out of it.  Starhawk always called himself "The One Who Knows" which sounds like something Stallone would say, honestly.

As for Miley, she was voicing Mainframe who is what the Vision becomes 1000 years from now.   And the red alien was Krugarr who is the Sorercer Supreme a thousand tears from now (which is why they put those Doctor Strange effects on him in the movie).