Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 6, 2016 14:48:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 6, 2016 15:12:28 GMT -5
Funny that it sounds like Gibson actually saw the movie! And... Gibson I understand got a giant chunk of profit from "Passion of the Christ"- so he probably has nothing to fear from Hollywood at this point.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 6, 2016 17:06:12 GMT -5
He's one of those folks who just doesn't care. Kind of like Kidder. She's not in movies or tv anymore and has nothing to lose. Gibson's still making movies but like you said he's pretty well off financially so he doesn't have to play the game as much. And with him being a sort of pariah in Hollywood after some of his drunken tirades the damage to his career is already done.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,769
|
Post by atp on Sept 6, 2016 17:13:06 GMT -5
Well I guess Mel Gibson will not be included in the secret Facebook group either.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 7, 2016 9:26:29 GMT -5
He's one of those folks who just doesn't care. Kind of like Kidder. She's not in movies or tv anymore and has nothing to lose. Gibson's still making movies but like you said he's pretty well off financially so he doesn't have to play the game as much. And with him being a sort of pariah in Hollywood after some of his drunken tirades the damage to his career is already done. I'm a bit suprised that he was able to get another movie through the Hwood system after that.... with seeing how Sam Raimi and James Cameron brought in bank, but weren't treated that great for sequels to some of their greatest hits by the studio- I know big money isn't the only thing that guides Hollywood, but personal politics- so, I wonder how Gibson was able to navigate back through the gates.
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Sept 7, 2016 18:56:02 GMT -5
Well I guess Mel Gibson will not be included in the secret Facebook group either. And they were going to ask him to join them.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 8, 2016 2:46:24 GMT -5
Well I guess Mel Gibson will not be included in the secret Facebook group either. And they were going to ask him to join them. I heard Mel Gibson was arrested for a DUI and went on a rant about how "Reeve Only People" are responsible for all the wars in the world.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,769
|
Post by atp on Sept 8, 2016 16:25:58 GMT -5
Well I guess Mel Gibson will not be included in the secret Facebook group either. And they were going to ask him to join them. We are all ready to win, just as we are born knowing only Reeve. It is bullying that you must learn to prepare for.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 8, 2016 17:55:53 GMT -5
Well I guess Mel Gibson will not be included in the secret Facebook group either. And they were going to ask him to join them. Let him join Marvel. I want Mel directing Iron Man 4. Him doing a real demon in a bottle story adaptation would be amazing (and apt). It'll never happen though. Not with Disney being family friendly. I still want to see him doing IM4. Downey would be down since they are buddies but Disney would put the kibosh on it. He'd also make a killer Thor movie.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 8, 2016 18:02:10 GMT -5
And they were going to ask him to join them. Let him join Marvel. I want Mel directing Iron Man 4. Him doing a real demon in a bottle story adaptation would be amazing (and apt). It'll never happen though. Not with Disney being family friendly. I still want to see him doing IM4. Downey would be down since they are buddies but Disney would put the kibosh on it. He'd also make a killer Thor movie. That would be awesome. "Passion of the Thor". I love it.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 8, 2016 19:17:21 GMT -5
Let him join Marvel. I want Mel directing Iron Man 4. Him doing a real demon in a bottle story adaptation would be amazing (and apt). It'll never happen though. Not with Disney being family friendly. I still want to see him doing IM4. Downey would be down since they are buddies but Disney would put the kibosh on it. He'd also make a killer Thor movie. That would be awesome. "Passion of the Thor". I love it. I always got Superman Returns and The Passion of the Christ mixed up... they're essentially the exact same movie.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 8, 2016 22:57:21 GMT -5
That would be awesome. "Passion of the Thor". I love it. I always got Superman Returns and The Passion of the Christ mixed up... they're essentially the exact same movie. Part of why I really dug (most of) Superman Returns. Can't say that Singer didn't try to have depth with a Superman sequel.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 9, 2016 3:39:24 GMT -5
I always got Superman Returns and The Passion of the Christ mixed up... they're essentially the exact same movie. Part of why I really dug (most of) Superman Returns. Can't say that Singer didn't try to have depth with a Superman sequel. Yeah, Singer tried to have depth with Superman Returns but failed so miserably that the film is actually embarrassing to sit through. Shows what happens when a Donner sycophant and his two 20 year old lovers ("writers" Harris and Doherty which I'm sure Singer has disposed of by now since they aged out) try to remake a 1970's classic film. They seemed like a couple of young inexperienced STM fanboys writing a love letter fanfic and going waaaay overboard.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 9, 2016 7:21:22 GMT -5
Let him join Marvel. I want Mel directing Iron Man 4. Him doing a real demon in a bottle story adaptation would be amazing (and apt). It'll never happen though. Not with Disney being family friendly. I still want to see him doing IM4. Downey would be down since they are buddies but Disney would put the kibosh on it. He'd also make a killer Thor movie. That would be awesome. "Passion of the Thor". I love it. I think Gibson excels at directing period set films which Thor has elements of. There so much of that that I think he could really make work. I'd like to see Gibson tackle something modern which Iron Man would be.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 9, 2016 11:34:43 GMT -5
Part of why I really dug (most of) Superman Returns. Can't say that Singer didn't try to have depth with a Superman sequel. Yeah, Singer tried to have depth with Superman Returns but failed so miserably that the film is actually embarrassing to sit through. Shows what happens when a Donner sycophant and his two 20 year old lovers ("writers" Harris and Doherty which I'm sure Singer has disposed of by now since they aged out) try to remake a 1970's classic film. They seemed like a couple of young inexperienced STM fanboys writing a love letter fanfic and going waaaay overboard. I think it's difficult to show a character who loses hope after seeing that he really IS the last survivor of his planet (though removing that 'Return to Krypton' scene was really a bad idea) - as well as the love of his life - and then regaining that hope by the end of the picture. I think Singer & his writers succeeded. There are parts that don't quite work (if he is a messiah and hears all the suffering of the world, hard to believe that the main thing he chooses is to foil a bank robbery), but keeping the Donner interpretation, updating it, and extending it in a fresh way (having Superman be a father) made it an interesting starting point. I didn't mind Snyder doing a full-out reboot, but it was an option ALWAYS on the table. Singer's task was far more difficult. And- I do think Snyder/Goyer may have placed seeds of something with depth with the scene with the preacher in the church, but if Singer missed the mark slightly, I do feel that Snyder's version missed it completely.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 9, 2016 11:37:34 GMT -5
That would be awesome. "Passion of the Thor". I love it. I think Gibson excels at directing period set films which Thor has elements of. There so much of that that I think he could really make work. I'd like to see Gibson tackle something modern which Iron Man would be. It would be awesome. Though Marvel's idea of making Thor a (mostly) rom-com I think shot that series in the foot. The parts where Kenneth Branagh was aping Lord of the Rings I thought worked best. Sad that it's the second fantasy series to make Natalie Portman look like a really bad actress.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 9, 2016 13:20:57 GMT -5
She and Hemsworth have virtually no chemistry. They're more like brother and sister than star crossed romantics. Her character is also kind of flat. Not bad or annoying but just...there. She's the weakest love interest of phase one. Jane Foster in the comics was never much of a character to me either. At least Paltrow breathed some new life into Pepper Potts and I can see why Marvel started doing more with her after the first Iron Man movie. They've worked around not using Jane and no one really cares but some people probably do miss not seeing Pepper as much. Selvig was even a more interesting character.
Thor's strongest character arc was in the first movie. Thor: TDW was servicable but nothing special. Fun in parts but as a whole it didn't really make a big mark. The death of his mother Frigga was a stronger moment for Loki than it was for Thor. They didn't do enough with that. To be honest I think Thor hasn't really shined since the first Avengers movie. Out of the core Avengers I feel he's fallen by the wayside the most. Hulk doesn't even have his own movies right now but even he's shined more in the last 3 or 4 years.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 9, 2016 16:04:58 GMT -5
She and Hemsworth have virtually no chemistry. They're more like brother and sister than star crossed romantics. Her character is also kind of flat. Not bad or annoying but just...there. She's the weakest love interest of phase one. Jane Foster in the comics was never much of a character to me either. At least Paltrow breathed some new life into Pepper Potts and I can see why Marvel started doing more with her after the first Iron Man movie. They've worked around not using Jane and no one really cares but some people probably do miss not seeing Pepper as much. Selvig was even a more interesting character. Thor's strongest character arc was in the first movie. Thor: TDW was servicable but nothing special. Fun in parts but as a whole it didn't really make a big mark. The death of his mother Frigga was a stronger moment for Loki than it was for Thor. They didn't do enough with that. To be honest I think Thor hasn't really shined since the first Avengers movie. Out of the core Avengers I feel he's fallen by the wayside the most. Hulk doesn't even have his own movies right now but even he's shined more in the last 3 or 4 years. There's no real arc with the relationships in the Marvel movies, and if there is, then it's mostly by accident or just thrown out there- Sadly, it keeps much of the events superficial and not deep. When those relationships aren't important to the filmmakers, it feels even less important to the audience. Jane Foster/Portman was poorly designed for the movies. As you said, it's just- there. In the first movie, Jane was supposed to show Thor how great humanity was, but the script and direction didn't really support that. Pepper is/was Tony's 'mom' surrogate in a way. That relationship actually had a bit of an arc and a way into what was going on in Tony's head- but not having a split up scene in Iron Man 4 was a bit of an audience betrayal I think, if they were bothering to keep going back to Pepper to tell you that what was going on was that important to begin with. I agree- the death of Thor's mom should have cut deeper, instead of it just being a bit for an eye candy scene later on during the funeral. They should have thought more of how effective Raimi's Spiderman was with similar material. I think Thor is one character that they don't have a strong enough take on. How human is he supposed to be, versus 'godlike'. The only thing that they feel strong about is how relatable Thor can be in his sibling rivalry. Sif and his trio of friends also were a missed opportunity to explore more of who Thor is/was.... but looks like they're going into just more broad material with Hulk in the next one. Pity.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 10, 2016 19:07:03 GMT -5
I'd have to disagree with that. As far as romantic relationships there are definitely arcs. Steve and Peggy had one. It's tragic in that neither one of them can really totally move on from the other because they are seperated by decades both chronologically and biologically. She's old and dying. He's not. She moved on with her life decades ago. For him it may as well have been yesterday. Civil War sees the closing of that arc with Peggys death and him getting closer to Sharon.
We haven't seen Pepper since IM3 so that's limited how effective it is but their whole relationship has been her cleaning up after him and him maturing and becoming responsible as slowly as possible. In every movie he grows but it's a stain on their relashionship because Tony always thinks he's right and he gets wrapped up in other stuff. That's why they've split up in Civil War. I think their handeling of the growth Tony Stark has been excellent. He retains his same character traits and flaws but in every movie he grows a little bit. His problem is wanting to do the right thing but his choices aren't always right.
The relationship with Black Widow and Banner...I see what Whedon was trying to do but it didn't really work. You can see the genesis of where they were going in the first movie. Romanovs never met anyone like Banner and it first manifested in her fear of him. The characters don't have much chemistry. Maybe the point of it should have been it couldn't work but I also hope they don't sweep it under the rug.
I'm very interested to see where Vision and Wanda go. They're connected in a way most people aren't. They were made what they are from the same source. The mind stone connects them. You could see the spark of something when he saved her in AOU and how things were getting more complicated in CW. Vision wanted to do what was best for Wanda but didn't understand he was hurting her and later his judgment was clouded by his feelings"
As for non romantic relashionships: Steve and Tony have had a great ebb and flow over the last four years. Tony went from being independent and breaking the rules to being a man who wants a system in place. He wants a day when the world won't need him as iron man. Steve went from a guy who followed orders to being a guy who wanted to always do the right thing but began to question authority. They don't always line up and he knows it. He's accepted that he will always be a soldier.
They've sort of switched sides and while their differing philosophies and personalities have caused tension and put them at odds their relashionship has evolved to one of mutual respect. Despite everything that happened in Civil War that's why Steve left him the cel phone. It was because deep down he'd learned to trust Tony and count him as a friend after first thinking of him as an out of control self centered egotist.
I recently rewatched The Avengers and it's those character moments and dialogue scenes that puts these movies above the DCEU. The DCUE had almost none of that. Steve and Tony laid everything out
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 11, 2016 11:32:43 GMT -5
I'd have to disagree with that. As far as romantic relashionships there are definitely arcs. Steve and Peggy had one. It's tragic you see it olin that neither one of them can really totally movie on from the other because they are seperate by decades. Civil War sees the closing of that arc won Peggys death and him getting closer to Sharon. We haven't seen Pepper since IM3 so that's limited how effective it is but their whole relashionship has been her cleaning up after him and him maturing and becoming responsible as slowly as possible. In every movie he grows but it's a stain on their relashionship because Tony always thinks he's right and he gets wrapped up in other stuff. That's why they've split up in Civil War. I think their handeling of the growth Tony Stark has been excellent. He retains his same character traits and flaws but in every movie he grows a little bit. Is problem is wanting to do the right thing but his choices aren't always right. The relashionship with Black Widow and Banner...I see what Whedon was trying to do but it didn't really work. You can see the genesis of where they were going in the first movie. Romanovs never met anyone like Banner and it first manifested in her fear of him. The characters don't have much chemistry. Maybe the point of it should have been it could work but I also hope they don't sweep it under the rug. I'm very interested to see where Vision and Wanda go. They're connected in a way most people aren't. They were made what they are from the same source. The mind stone connects them. You could see the spark of something when he saved her on AOU and how things were getting more complicated in CW. Vision wanted to do what was best for Wanda but didn't understand he was hurting her and later his judgment was clouded by his feelings" As for non romantic relashionships: Steve and Tony have had a great ebb and flow over the last four years. Tony went from being independent and breaking the rules to being a man who wants a system in place. He wants a day when the world won't need him as iron man. Steve went from a guy who followed orders to being a guy who wanted to always do the right thing but began to question authority. They don't always line up and he knows it. He's accepted that he will always be a soldier. They've sort of switched sides and while their differing philosophies and personalities have caused tension and put them at odds their relashionship has evolved to one of mutual respect. Despite everything that happened in Civil War that's why Steve left him the cel phone. It was because deep down he'd learned to trust Tony and count him as a friend after first thinking of him as an out of control self centered egotist. I recently rewatched The Avengers and it's those character moments and dialogue scenes that puts these movies above the DCEU. The DCUE had almost none of that. Steve and Tony laid everything out With the romantic ones- I forgot about the Captain America/Peggy Carter romance, you're right. (Though I still think it was a misstep for him to get over the grief so quickly and give Sharon a big smooth five minutes later, even though it resulted in one of the best laughs in Civil War) The Black Widow/Hulk hookup in Avengers 2 felt really weird, (especially Cap's cheering on, on the side?) ... but the Black Widow/Cap sorta hookup felt more authentic ("I can be who I need to be")- as it made Widow seem more cold blooded and aloof. If the original bit of Banner ending the hookup right away (the shower scene) had stayed in the film, it might have come off better. Pepper's leaving, I think, deserved a scene. I hate it when it's supposed to be important but then referred to off-camera (i.e. the deaths of First Class characters in DOFP) as it's cheaper to not shoot it and not have to pay the actor. With the bromance with Steve and Tony: Yeah, it was/is pretty well done- though I also wish Whedon would release "THE" scene that he wrote with the two of them arguing about dad issues in the first Avengers, that Whedon felt strong about, but that RDJ felt strongly NOT doing. It'll be interesting to see how much we get of all the characters in the Infinity Wars movie. I hope it's more balanced like in the two Avengers' films, than the Civil War film (which wasn't bad in balancing, but I wanted more).
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Sept 11, 2016 20:25:42 GMT -5
And they were going to ask him to join them. We are all ready to win, just as we are born knowing only Reeve. It is bullying that you must learn to prepare for. Don't waste my time with it. When it comes, I won't even notice.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 11, 2016 20:36:39 GMT -5
What did Mel Gibson think about Superman Returns?
Superman Returns was basically a remake of the Passion of the Christ so I'd wonder how Mel Gibson felt about that.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 12, 2016 23:02:47 GMT -5
What did Mel Gibson think about Superman Returns? Superman Returns was basically a remake of the Passion of the Christ so I'd wonder how Mel Gibson felt about that. He said, "Not enough blood."
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Sept 13, 2016 1:10:05 GMT -5
What did Mel Gibson think about Superman Returns? Superman Returns was basically a remake of the Passion of the Christ so I'd wonder how Mel Gibson felt about that. He said, "Not enough blood." When Singer released this teaser trailer for Superman Returns I really thought it would be a good movie.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 14, 2016 14:27:59 GMT -5
He said, "Not enough blood." When Singer released this teaser trailer for Superman Returns I really thought it would be a good movie.
|
|