|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 4, 2017 14:18:16 GMT
His purpose and motivation was explained rather properly. The movie just never forgot the film was about the Guardians first and foremost. this is why I used the word "proper", Ego's plan was one of the silliest "Muahahah"-villain plan in recent C-movie history. To recreate the universe in his image with his seed, to wipe the slate clean and make the universe a big steaming pool of himself. And yes I know he created a penis, and not a half bad one... The penis question was reasonable. Drax was wondering how an avatar of a planet could reproduce with anyone. Honestly man, grow a thicker skin. Ego's plan is hardly different from something Magneto would cook up like "Mutants should rule the world so I'll try to wipe out Humanity". He wanted there to be more beings like himself, so he was gonna make some. Only difference is, he wasn't using the Holocaust to justify his actions.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 4, 2017 14:26:24 GMT
You didn't find him a bit of a fizzle? So he has even mucked with JLA Did you get that vibe? Problem was, in the original Planet Hulk story the Sakaar plot was based on the ruler of the planet wasn't the Grandmaster. It was this random jerk called the Red King. So the used Grandmaster in his place to make it easier to bring him back for Infinity Wars...but this meant we couldn't get a Grandmaster solo film. Nor could they show off all the Grandmaster's powers (and he's WAY powerful in the comics) otherwise the story wouldn't have worked. I believe we'll see him as Collector's brother in the movies. But my complaint with Ragnarok is Waititi isn't specifically a comic book guy so several of the jokes feel as though they could be inserted into any other movie. We saw he brought Sam Neill. My daughter pointed out Rachel House from Hunt for the Wilderpeople. He did Korg as well as Surtur's motion capture Some of the jokes are more something one might have seen in Wilderpeople, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 4, 2017 15:57:58 GMT
His purpose and motivation was explained rather properly. The movie just never forgot the film was about the Guardians first and foremost. this is why I used the word "proper", Ego's plan was one of the silliest "Muahahah"-villain plan in recent C-movie history. To recreate the universe in his image with his seed, to wipe the slate clean and make the universe a big steaming pool of himself. And yes I know he created a penis, and not a half bad one... It's true that it wasn't a original plan. Hell, most CBM villains plans aren't exactly original anymore since most of it been done before. But that being said, I thought it worked for the character. He lived up to his name!
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Nov 4, 2017 16:11:01 GMT
this is why I used the word "proper", Ego's plan was one of the silliest "Muahahah"-villain plan in recent C-movie history. To recreate the universe in his image with his seed, to wipe the slate clean and make the universe a big steaming pool of himself. And yes I know he created a penis, and not a half bad one... It's true that it wasn't a original plan. Hell, most CBM villains plans aren't exactly original more since most of it been done before. But that being said, I thought it worked for the character. He lived up to his name!Indeed, good one.
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Nov 4, 2017 16:16:31 GMT
Good female villains are an even rarer commodity than male ones. The last one I recall really liking was Asaji Ventress from the Clone Wars series and she was just a cartoon with a sexy voice.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 4, 2017 16:40:37 GMT
Well to be fair Ego and Vulture were pretty good by usual Marvel standards this year. Not sure how much of that is thanks to Sony though who always gave their villains more to work with. Hela is the typical decent but forgettable MCU villain though. So basically, the idea is still "We want the villain to totally overshadow the hero" because people still are upset at the idea of the hero being the star of their own movie. No the idea is to not have forgettable mediocre villains constantly like Hela. Loki didn't overshadow Thor in his movie. Vulture didn't overshadow Spider-man in his movie. Winter Solider didn't overshadow Captain America in his movie. They just had a decent amount to actually work with and had a chance to develop and be interesting. That's why they are considered good villains. Unlike the vast majority of Marvel villains.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 4, 2017 17:24:05 GMT
So basically, the idea is still "We want the villain to totally overshadow the hero" because people still are upset at the idea of the hero being the star of their own movie. No the idea is to not have forgettable mediocre villains constantly like Hela. Apparently a villain is instantly "mediocre" if they don't steal the show from the hero 100%. Some would disagree with that. I think that's more because people were just happy to see Keaton. Put any other actor in there and I doubt he'd have been warmly received.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 4, 2017 17:57:40 GMT
formersamhmdNah they're just mediocre in general, it's a widely known issue. They look the part but they're mostly one dimensional and just plain boring. Vulture was a good villain, it wasn't just because he was Keaton, that makes no sense. Unlike the others he actually had some depth and something to actually do.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 4, 2017 21:41:53 GMT
Not really just like Homecoming having an A-list actor elevating another lame villain At least Marvel attracts quality actors Are you telling me you don't think Hela is better than villains like Enchantress or Red Skull? Notice he said "elevating another lame villain." So essentially, Marvel's villain problem is that they don't have a Joker or Green Goblin or Lex Luthor. Marvel's villain problem is that they aren't well known already.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 4, 2017 21:51:07 GMT
formersamhmd Nah they're just mediocre in general, it's a widely known issue. They look the part but they're mostly one dimensional and just plain boring. Vulture was a good villain, it wasn't just because he was Keaton, that makes no sense. Unlike the others he actually had some depth and something to actually do. I'd like to challenge that. Vulture was just a thief. He had no real goal besides making money. He wasn't stealing for anything specific. He'd have just kept going stealing and selling the weapons they made. He did nothing beside tying back to Peter through a friend and threaten him once.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 4, 2017 21:54:18 GMT
Are you telling me you don't think Hela is better than villains like Enchantress or Red Skull? Notice he said "elevating another lame villain." So essentially, Marvel's villain problem is that they don't have a Joker or Green Goblin or Lex Luthor. Marvel's villain problem is that they aren't well known already. Which makes what Marvel has done even more impressive. They don't have the advantage of already famous characters. They started from near scratch.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 4, 2017 22:08:29 GMT
formersamhmd Nah they're just mediocre in general, it's a widely known issue. They look the part but they're mostly one dimensional and just plain boring. For not stealing the show 100% and being the only memorable thing from the movies...mainly because in the MCU the heroes are more than enough. You'd be surprised how often having a name actor attached makes people more willing to respect the villain.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 4, 2017 22:09:48 GMT
Notice he said "elevating another lame villain." So essentially, Marvel's villain problem is that they don't have a Joker or Green Goblin or Lex Luthor. Marvel's villain problem is that they aren't well known already. Which makes what Marvel has done even more impressive. They don't have the advantage of already famous characters. They started from near scratch. That's why I think they are only doing work with villains that aren't really villains. Characters like Loki and the Winter Soldier are more supporting characters than actual villains. Essentially the same as Magneto. Would Magneto be seen as this big and deep villain if he wasn't in all the X-men movies? If they just had Cyclops blast him and he didn't return for X2? Would characters like Red Skull be seen as a good villain if he were in Captain America 2 and 3 also?
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 4, 2017 22:21:42 GMT
formersamhmd Nah they're just mediocre in general, it's a widely known issue. They look the part but they're mostly one dimensional and just plain boring. For not stealing the show 100% and being the only memorable thing from the movies...mainly because in the MCU the heroes are more than enough. You'd be surprised how often having a name actor attached makes people more willing to respect the villain. That hasn't stopped other movies from having good heroes and villains all the time. Marvel just struggles to find the proper balance. And most of Marvel's villains are named actors. Mickey Rourke, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Mads Mikkelson etc. They were still mediocre villains anyway.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 4, 2017 22:24:24 GMT
That hasn't stopped other movies from having good heroes and villains all the time. The only ones to pull that off were the Spider-Man movies, and even then just barely. Rourke, not so much. But Weaving was good as the Red Skull, Cate was good as Hela (especially considering how much that film had to juggle), and Kaecilius was fine for what he was (the real villain's powerhouse).
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 4, 2017 23:30:50 GMT
formersamhmdAnd the original X-men movies, Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Forever, Superman, Superman 2, Man of Steel, The Dark Knight trilogy and more. Plenty of the superhero movies have done it. I don't even mean just superhero movies either. Look at Die Hard for example. Red Skull and Kaecilius were pretty plain and forgettable. Hela at least had personality but again she's never gonna be a memorable villain.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Nov 4, 2017 23:33:49 GMT
Marvel doesn't have a villain problem.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Nov 4, 2017 23:39:14 GMT
Hela was pretty generic, but I did enjoy the Grand Master. You didn't find him a bit of a fizzle? I'm not sure what that means in this context, but I enjoyed the character's dressed-up villainy (to the point of refusing to call his slaves "slaves"). Not a compelling villain, but an amusing one.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 4, 2017 23:39:47 GMT
Well to be fair Ego and Vulture were pretty good by usual Marvel standards this year. Not sure how much of that is thanks to Sony though who always gave their villains more to work with. Hela is the typical decent but forgettable MCU villain though. So basically, the idea is still "We want the villain to totally overshadow the hero" because people still are upset at the idea of the hero being the star of their own movie. That's not at all what anyone is saying and you know it. However, it would be nice if just ONCE it seemed like a mcu villain was at least a semi threat instead of an embarrassingly weak joke. I know jokes are by far the most important thing in a mcu movie but it's kind of pathetic that 15 minutes after you watch a mcu movie you can barely remember the villains name much less what it's alleged "threat" was.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 4, 2017 23:40:53 GMT
For not stealing the show 100% and being the only memorable thing from the movies...mainly because in the MCU the heroes are more than enough. You'd be surprised how often having a name actor attached makes people more willing to respect the villain. That hasn't stopped other movies from having good heroes and villains all the time. Marvel just struggles to find the proper balance. And most of Marvel's villains are named actors. Mickey Rourke, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Mads Mikkelson etc. They were still mediocre villains anyway. Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find a superhero movie that has both a great hero and a great villain. I mean, go ahead, name me a some. They're not as many as you might think.
|
|