Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:15:35 GMT -5
Lol. It’s the same stalling for time gag from Star Trek II AND III! m Kirk even keeps on interrupting Khan similar to how Thor and Poe interrupt Surtur and Hux! Disney didn’t come up with this you know. What makes you think both movies didn’t just take it from other movies and not each other? Do you believe Star Trek played those moments for laughs? Lol you really have a hard on for this don’t you. The point of all these scenes is the hero is stalling to attack or beat the bad guy. Yeah there are laughs in those scenes. The back and forth between Kirk and Khan for one. Kirks line about keep on quoting regulations being another. Both films had plenty of humor. Scotty sabotaging Excelsior in Star Trek III was a comedy scene with cartoon sound effects...in space. There are probably plenty of examples of this in plenty of other films too. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:16:38 GMT -5
I'm curious, do you watch films aside from superhero/big franchise sci-fi or animated films? Like, any film in the past 10 years really rock your world? Are you trolling because it seems like you’re implying something. Why do you want to know? Do you like anything besides gloomy films that take themselves too seriously? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2019 17:17:02 GMT -5
Sorry man, you don't make me hard at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2019 17:18:22 GMT -5
I'm curious, do you watch films aside from superhero/big franchise sci-fi or animated films? Like, any film in the past 10 years really rock your world? Are you trolling because it seems like you’re implying something. Why do you want to know? I'm interested in if there's any common ground in our film taste. Since this is a board about Superman, topics skew that way, but maybe there's something else you're really into. Might make for a better conversation than us getting defensive about our superhero films. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:18:29 GMT -5
I said hard on for the films. Freudian slip?
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:20:01 GMT -5
Are you trolling because it seems like you’re implying something. Why do you want to know? I'm interested in if there's any common ground in our film taste. Since this is a board about Superman, topics skew that way, but maybe there's something else you're really into. What does that have to do with this conversation? Are you trying to discern something? If you’ve read this board you know what films I like. Are you questioning my taste? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2019 17:20:12 GMT -5
I said hard on for the films. Freudian slip? No, my attempt at a joke. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2019 17:21:49 GMT -5
I'm interested in if there's any common ground in our film taste. Since this is a board about Superman, topics skew that way, but maybe there's something else you're really into. What does that have to do with this conversation? Are you trying to discern something? If you’ve read this board you know what films I like. Are you questioning my taste? I've read your opinions on superhero films. I'm curious if you're into other films. Like, no big deal if you're not into others, it's cool to be into things you're passionate about. Like I said, trying to find something not to get defensive about. I've failed there too, I guess. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:27:40 GMT -5
Not getting defensive. I’m wondering about your motives. Why are you asking about what I like now despite me posting here for...how many years? What’s so special about now? Why not ask five years ago? Or two years ago? One year ago. Anybody whose read the board knows what films I’ve seen or like. Do you just never go to the Dons Diner section? It’s like you’ve got something to prove or you want me to prove something. Like that dig about me not being into other films.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2019 17:29:50 GMT -5
It's that my conversations with you are generally pretty toxic, and toxicity is pretty common in fandom. Any attempt I try to humanize you or find a way to relate to you in some regard fails. I guess that's more or less it. Maybe in person we'd get along fine, but here, not so much.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:42:04 GMT -5
Maybe that’s just as much on you? Have you ever thought about that? Some of your comments are pretty passive aggressive. Maybe you’re pushing it for whatever reason because you don’t like my response or get defensive because of what I say.. I mean...I just saw you post the Diner so I know you go there. There’s several topics I’ve commenton on or started that aren’t superhero movies so that bit about “it’s cool if you’re only into that” is knowingly innacurate.
Like you said this section is a Superman section so of course I’m talking about superhero movies here.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 17:52:12 GMT -5
Regardless, if you don't think a mix of light-hearted gags and humor, with some adventure mixed isn't part of Disney's branded family-friendly live-action formula, I'm not really sure what to say. And yes, I'm aware Disney owns other imprints specifically so they can make films that don't follow these formulas ( Is Buena Vista still a thing?) I just said Disney has a family friendly image. But that’s not exclusive to Disney. That’s also not a house style though that’s more about marketing. A house style is a type of filmmaking. Something like what Hammer films used to do. What you’re talking about is a brand IMAGE. Some companies tried to keep things family friendly and humorous before Disney bought them. Jim Henson Company is an obvious one. It’s one reason why Disney bought them. Amblin Entertainment is another company that specialized in family friendly films for years with a few exceptions. Not Disney but very much like Disney they also tried to avoid anything too controversial in most of their films. That’s how we got guns turned into walkie talkies in ET for a while. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 18:18:53 GMT -5
Just thought about it and you not only just described a lot of Amblins catalogue but a large chunk of Steven Spielberg’s personal filmography. Family friendly mixed with adventure and light hearted gags. Most of the indy movies. The Superman movies. Don Bluths filmography.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 6, 2019 20:19:26 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be nice if WB/DC made a deal with Kevin Feige as consultant? He seems to know more how to keep quality control on these hero films... I'd rather they let creative talent do their own thing, and allow the possibility of creative misfires rather than have a house look and feel. Disney films in particular feel homogeneous enough, with gags and plot beats reused across Star Wars and Marvel films. That's a good point. One thing that I'm not necessarily crazy about with Marvel is what you mention... at times a feel of homogeny... but overall their pluses are far far greater than their weaknesses imo. I do have to admit- when stuff like "Guardians", "Thor 3", and "Black Panther" stay in Marvel's mode but also transcend it--- I can't help but feel that they're WAY on the right path. Having said that, I'm a touch worried about Captain Marvel being another "Thor 2" and/or underwhelming.... |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 6, 2019 20:26:05 GMT -5
Why would they get him? Walter Hamada already has that role or their closest equivalent to it. He’s going to be one guy that claims victory for Aquamans success. It’s going to cross a billion. I think the creative problems are a result of them doing some massive restructuring between BvS and now. This isn’t a Snyder style movie though Snyder set the table for them. They had to deal with that and which way to go. Johns new origin was pretty good but this film was doing a lot as far as filling in the holes of Aquamans story despite us already seeing him. It was just too much to introduce us to the kingdoms of the seven seas, Atlantis and it’s history, cover Aquamans origin, Black Mantas origin, and set up the battle against ocean master. If a lot of the same ground had been covered in Justice League the Aquaman solo movie wouldn’t have needed to have been as bloated. Really the whole release strategy has been a mistake. They should have done solo films first leading to JL. They never should have hired Snyder to oversee it all and just used this tone from the beginning. Trying to course correct after Snyder meant Aquaman had to use up even more time that could have been used to develop a better story and characters. I confess I haven't stayed on top of the bigger names behind the scenes on WB/DC. I would LOVE to be able to have heard what was discussed in the WB conference rooms after they decided to change course after BvS/ Justice League. With Kevin Feige, the course he set more or less looks clear- particularly with the Avengers... plus, one of the writers of Iron Man 2 was asked on a radio show about the parameters given to them by Feige at the time in regards to what the larger picture was and what they could do with the individual movies. (though, again, this could have changed since IM2).... one weakness I have (among others sadly) is that I don't keep links on these shows to share. (Sorry guys!)  |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 6, 2019 20:28:39 GMT -5
Regardless, if you don't think a mix of light-hearted gags and humor, with some adventure mixed isn't part of Disney's branded family-friendly live-action formula, I'm not really sure what to say. And yes, I'm aware Disney owns other imprints specifically so they can make films that don't follow these formulas ( Is Buena Vista still a thing?) I just said Disney has a family friendly image. But that’s not exclusive to Disney. That’s also not a house style though that’s more about marketing. A house style is a type of filmmaking. Something like what Hammer films used to do. What you’re talking about is a brand IMAGE. Some companies tried to keep things family friendly and humorous before Disney bought them. Jim Henson Company is an obvious one. It’s one reason why Disney bought them. Amblin Entertainment is another company that specialized in family friendly films for years with a few exceptions. Not Disney but very much like Disney they also tried to avoid anything too controversial in most of their films. That’s how we got guns turned into walkie talkies in ET for a while. An aside on the family friendly nature of Disney:I am surprised a bit that Disney let the MCU swear at all.... but if that's a sign that Disney is mostly 'hands off' (outside of the extremely bummer firing of Gunn)- for Marvel, that's fantastic. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 20:58:29 GMT -5
I'd rather they let creative talent do their own thing, and allow the possibility of creative misfires rather than have a house look and feel. Disney films in particular feel homogeneous enough, with gags and plot beats reused across Star Wars and Marvel films. That's a good point. One thing that I'm not necessarily crazy about with Marvel is what you mention... at times a feel of homogeny... but overall their pluses are far far greater than their weaknesses imo. I do have to admit- when stuff like "Guardians", "Thor 3", and "Black Panther" stay in Marvel's mode but also transcend it--- I can't help but feel that they're WAY on the right path. Having said that, I'm a touch worried about Captain Marvel being another "Thor 2" and/or underwhelming.... Captain marvel looks too formulaic. Looks like it’s treading ground green lantern already did. Not much in the trailers has really poped so far. I prefer different movies but with what marvel is doing they kinda have to fall in line a little. There’s so much connectivity. The opposite is what you get with the X-men films. The hits as huge but the misses are embarrassing. Even in the good movies things slip through the cracks that never should have. I’d rather they keep the films totally separate or reboot hard if that stuffs going to happen. Certain things like that take me right out of the movie. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 21:03:19 GMT -5
Why would they get him? Walter Hamada already has that role or their closest equivalent to it. He’s going to be one guy that claims victory for Aquamans success. It’s going to cross a billion. I think the creative problems are a result of them doing some massive restructuring between BvS and now. This isn’t a Snyder style movie though Snyder set the table for them. They had to deal with that and which way to go. Johns new origin was pretty good but this film was doing a lot as far as filling in the holes of Aquamans story despite us already seeing him. It was just too much to introduce us to the kingdoms of the seven seas, Atlantis and it’s history, cover Aquamans origin, Black Mantas origin, and set up the battle against ocean master. If a lot of the same ground had been covered in Justice League the Aquaman solo movie wouldn’t have needed to have been as bloated. Really the whole release strategy has been a mistake. They should have done solo films first leading to JL. They never should have hired Snyder to oversee it all and just used this tone from the beginning. Trying to course correct after Snyder meant Aquaman had to use up even more time that could have been used to develop a better story and characters. I confess I haven't stayed on top of the bigger names behind the scenes on WB/DC. I would LOVE to be able to have heard what was discussed in the WB conference rooms after they decided to change course after BvS/ Justice League. With Kevin Feige, the course he set more or less looks clear- particularly with the Avengers... plus, one of the writers of Iron Man 2 was asked on a radio show about the parameters given to them by Feige at the time in regards to what the larger picture was and what they could do with the individual movies. (though, again, this could have changed since IM2).... one weakness I have (among others sadly) is that I don't keep links on these shows to share. (Sorry guys!) I bet it looked like the ICU after someone died. Or a funeral. Not the warm remembrance kind either. The “that guy knocked up my sister and left me 50 thousand dollars in debt” kind. Or the “I wish it were me” kind. You know some people lost their jobs after BvS and Justice League. You know half that room was dying to fire Snyder right there. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 6, 2019 21:05:06 GMT -5
I just said Disney has a family friendly image. But that’s not exclusive to Disney. That’s also not a house style though that’s more about marketing. A house style is a type of filmmaking. Something like what Hammer films used to do. What you’re talking about is a brand IMAGE. Some companies tried to keep things family friendly and humorous before Disney bought them. Jim Henson Company is an obvious one. It’s one reason why Disney bought them. Amblin Entertainment is another company that specialized in family friendly films for years with a few exceptions. Not Disney but very much like Disney they also tried to avoid anything too controversial in most of their films. That’s how we got guns turned into walkie talkies in ET for a while. An aside on the family friendly nature of Disney:I am surprised a bit that Disney let the MCU swear at all.... but if that's a sign that Disney is mostly 'hands off' (outside of the extremely bummer firing of Gunn)- for Marvel, that's fantastic. Marvel studios made four billion dollars last year. Don’t mess with the golden goose. They’re making tons off these movies and merchandising. They also have to know how hard it would be to replace Feige. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 7, 2019 4:21:50 GMT -5
I confess I haven't stayed on top of the bigger names behind the scenes on WB/DC. I would LOVE to be able to have heard what was discussed in the WB conference rooms after they decided to change course after BvS/ Justice League. With Kevin Feige, the course he set more or less looks clear- particularly with the Avengers... plus, one of the writers of Iron Man 2 was asked on a radio show about the parameters given to them by Feige at the time in regards to what the larger picture was and what they could do with the individual movies. (though, again, this could have changed since IM2).... one weakness I have (among others sadly) is that I don't keep links on these shows to share. (Sorry guys!) I bet it looked like the ICU after someone died. Or a funeral. Not the warm remembrance kind either. The “that guy knocked up my sister and left me 50 thousand dollars in debt” kind. Or the “I wish it were me” kind. You know some people lost their jobs after BvS and Justice League. You know half that room was dying to fire Snyder right there. The sense I get with Marvel Studios is that the people behind the scenes GENUINELY are fans of the comics... whereas, with DC- Nolan has said he wasn't really much of a comic book fan, and Snyder was a comic book fan, but put out the misguided Watchmen. The rest of the folks in the WB conference room (outside of Joss Whedon) I get a feeling aren't really all that passionate about seeing comic book characters come to life, but just see the comic book properties as a necessary evil to please stockholders who know how much Marvel is making. What I wonder is: is the mantra now "keep everything separated on the DC movies"? I actually think things COULD have worked with introducing the JLA characters first before spinning things off, but the JL movie as It was, was just 'ok' even with the Whedon patch-ups. If the movie was spectacular, I still don't think it would have matched the 'cool!' factor that Marvel was able to have by giving the characters solo films first, but I don't think it would have been as big a disappointment as JL ended up being on arrival. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 7, 2019 4:22:47 GMT -5
An aside on the family friendly nature of Disney:I am surprised a bit that Disney let the MCU swear at all.... but if that's a sign that Disney is mostly 'hands off' (outside of the extremely bummer firing of Gunn)- for Marvel, that's fantastic. Marvel studios made four billion dollars last year. Don’t mess with the golden goose. They’re making tons off these movies and merchandising. They also have to know how hard it would be to replace Feige. Thank goodness Feige didn't make any controversial jokes on the internet when he was younger.... |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 7, 2019 4:29:27 GMT -5
That's a good point. One thing that I'm not necessarily crazy about with Marvel is what you mention... at times a feel of homogeny... but overall their pluses are far far greater than their weaknesses imo. I do have to admit- when stuff like "Guardians", "Thor 3", and "Black Panther" stay in Marvel's mode but also transcend it--- I can't help but feel that they're WAY on the right path. Having said that, I'm a touch worried about Captain Marvel being another "Thor 2" and/or underwhelming.... Captain marvel looks too formulaic. Looks like it’s treading ground green lantern already did. Not much in the trailers has really poped so far. I prefer different movies but with what marvel is doing they kinda have to fall in line a little. There’s so much connectivity. The opposite is what you get with the X-men films. The hits as huge but the misses are embarrassing. Even in the good movies things slip through the cracks that never should have. I’d rather they keep the films totally separate or reboot hard if that stuffs going to happen. Certain things like that take me right out of the movie. The X-men films are such a mixed bag.... on one hand, when they're great, they're REAAAALLY good- but even then, they do something ridiculously (and unnecessarily) dumb - for example, like killing off half of the cast of "First Class" in one line for DOFP after getting us to actually enjoy and care about these characters in the first place, or giving Jennifer Lawrence's character WAYYYYY too much importance. I'm not sure who to blame for the somewhat chaotic quality control on the X-men movies.... did Lauren Schuler Donner have the final say before Fox? Was it 50/50 on control? In hindsight it's too bad that Singer wasn't interested in going back to these films and re-editing/whatever to make them all fit or fit better for a blu-ray set- but then again, some of the stuff he decides to cut of his own stuff at times is just ridiculous, too.... so... I dunno.... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 7, 2019 8:38:35 GMT -5
I’d rather be left them as is warts and all. Maybe include some re-edited special edition versions with the unaltered ones but even that feels kind of dirty to me. But on the other hand we live in an age of alternate versions like the rogue cut or the DD directors cut so why not?
I put most of the blame on Tom Rothman before he left Fox, then Lauren Schuler Donner, then Simon Kinberg. That’s been the chain of command at times. Whoever’s in charge of the studio shares the lions share of the blame but Donners been involved as a producer for years and Kinberg was the a lead writer and oversaw the franchise the last few movies. It was his job to get things like that right and deliver good films. A lot is beyond his control so I don’t blame him for everything but there are some things he easily could have fixed that I doubt studio cared about like the Caliban issue. Or Magneto being let off the hook the way he was.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 7, 2019 23:25:32 GMT -5
I’d rather be left them as is warts and all. Maybe include some re-edited special edition versions with the unaltered ones but even that feels kind of dirty to me. But on the other hand we live in an age of alternate versions like the rogue cut or the DD directors cut so why not? I put most of the blame on Tom Rothman before he left Fox, then Lauren Schuler Donner, then Simon Kinberg. That’s been the chain of command at times. Whoever’s in charge of the studio shares the lions share of the blame but Donners been involved as a producer for years and Kinberg was the a lead writer and oversaw the franchise the last few movies. It was his job to get things like that right and deliver good films. A lot is beyond his control so I don’t blame him for everything but there are some things he easily could have fixed that I doubt studio cared about like the Caliban issue. Or Magneto being let off the hook the way he was. I think getting spoiled early on by the tv cuts of Superman and James Cameron's fantastic Alien and T2 extended cuts made me always hungry for a better version out there on many a film... I agree on Kinberg being responsible for a significant chunk- that makes sense. The bit with Magneto being forgiven so quickly after helping murder millions still rubs me the wrong way in Apocalypse. All it would have taken to make it feel a little more truthful might have been a one minute scene of Xavier calling Magneto on it at the end, even if he switched sides. (Same with Ororo--- what the heck?) |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 8, 2019 9:13:45 GMT -5
Kinberg is highly overrated. Most of the successful films he was involved with were successful because of someone else. People
Forget the guy co-wrote X-men the last stand. Dark Phoenix looks to be a behind the scenes clusterf*fk. I’m sure it was fox that wanted him to make it but he was still the wrong guy for it.
|
|
