|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 11, 2018 13:25:45 GMT
It is. Inception wasn't that good to begin with, it's just Nolan's usual fluff where people act like morons without thinking of the consequences and the movie ends up being more about an idea than characters we could care about. And even then the characters in the movie are really more just archetypes than real characters. Dr Strange was much more inventive and intelligent. Especially the way he stopped the villain. You really make yourself lose credibility when you say Dr Strange is better than inception. It is. Inception is basically just a movie about brainwashing, nothing more. The characters are nothing impressive, and in fact are outright despicable if you think about it. There's nothing really original in Inception. Dicaprio was even just playing the same character type he's usually typecast in. Practical effects aren't inherently better than CGI. In fact in the FX department Dr Strange wins handily.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Feb 11, 2018 13:25:53 GMT
I remember Dr Strange, they told me it was better than Inception. LMAO. It is. Inception wasn't that good to begin with, it's just Nolan's usual fluff where people act like morons without thinking of the consequences and the movie ends up being more about an idea than characters we could care about. And even then the characters in the movie are really more just archetypes than real characters.Dr Strange was much more inventive and intelligent. Especially the way he stopped the villain. Inception ranked 14 of Top 250 since 2010, Dr Strange 2016 nowhere, for a perfectly good reason.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 11, 2018 13:27:49 GMT
It is. Inception wasn't that good to begin with, it's just Nolan's usual fluff where people act like morons without thinking of the consequences and the movie ends up being more about an idea than characters we could care about. And even then the characters in the movie are really more just archetypes than real characters.Dr Strange was much more inventive and intelligent. Especially the way he stopped the villain. Inception ranked 14 of Top 250 since 2010, Dr Strange 2016 nowhere, for a perfectly good reason. Because it's a non-grounded CBM, and Inception had the Nolan hype machine backing it. Simple genre bias and Nolan having friends in the Academy. You know, like how WW didn't get any Oscar Noms? Inception's whole plot falls apart upon actual analysis. Dicapro's character in particular was a morally bankrupt moron who brought all his misery on himself.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Feb 11, 2018 13:35:53 GMT
Saying you are not the target audience of homecoming is painful because its proof the movie was made in the same vein as Hannah Montana, its made for children. we are not the target audience, you are saying the truth and its painful since the earlier spiderman movies was not made for children at the core. It's not made for children. It's aimed at a younger audience than the Raimi movies but otherwise they're for anybody to enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 11, 2018 13:38:26 GMT
Saying you are not the target audience of homecoming is painful because its proof the movie was made in the same vein as Hannah Montana, its made for children. we are not the target audience, you are saying the truth and its painful since the earlier spiderman movies was not made for children at the core. It's not made for children. It's aimed at a younger audience than the Raimi movies but otherwise they're for anybody to enjoy. I'd say it's the same age group as the Raimi movies. They just bothered getting actors closer to the characters' ages instead of casting a bunch of 30 year olds, so fans of the Raimi movies watch and think "They're all too young looking, this must be for kids!" for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Feb 11, 2018 13:55:13 GMT
I'd say it's the same age group as the Raimi movies. They just bothered getting actors closer to the characters' ages instead of casting a bunch of 30 year olds, so fans of the Raimi movies watch and think "They're all too young looking, this must be for kids!" for some reason. The Raimi movies had more mature sub plots and character relationships between characters particularly Peter Parkers troubled relationship with his best friend Harry Osbourne or up and down relationship with Mary Jane. A lot different from Homecoming where he and his best friend Ned get on just fine and make Lego together. Plus the Raimi movies dealt with Parker's general employment and accommodation problems that he had in the comics and what adults can relate to. Also Toby Maguire was 27, James Franco was 24 and Kirsten Dunst was 20. Younger still when they were cast so none were in their 30's. Kirsten Dunst would have been younger than Tom Holland's in Homecoming actually.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 11, 2018 14:00:41 GMT
I'd say it's the same age group as the Raimi movies. They just bothered getting actors closer to the characters' ages instead of casting a bunch of 30 year olds, so fans of the Raimi movies watch and think "They're all too young looking, this must be for kids!" for some reason. The Raimi movies had more mature sub plots and character relationships between characters particularly Peter Parkers troubled relationship with his best friend Harry Osbourne or up and down relationship with Mary Jane. I'd have appreciated that more if Mary Jane wasn't so annoying, and Peter couldn't think up better excuses for why he was never around. As it is, a lot of the tension between them seemed contrived. Of course, a lot of this came from comics Gwen who could also be pretty annoying too. And I thought Peter thinking about wanting to be an Avenger was a decent enough subplot. Yeah, because they skipped over his teen years completely. I thought that was a bit of a waste. Well, you know what I mean. You'd never have been able to buy Maguire and Franco as high school students for an entire movie. Sure, I'm saying all this from safe hindsight knowing what CBMs would eventual evolve into with sequels already in mind and more money and experience. Back in 2002 all the stuff Raimi did was completely reasonable and enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Feb 11, 2018 14:34:35 GMT
Him wanting to be an Avenger wasn't bad but it was part of a kids fantasy, which was supposed to the point really because he did grow up by the end and turn it down.
The relationship with the Vulture was also good but aside from that Liz was just a ordinary school crush. Flash Thompson was a nuisance and he had a friend to play Lego with.
He's a younger Spider-man with appropriately aged problems which are aimed towards a like minded group.
It might change as the character ages but I wouldn't have said it was aimed towards the same age group as the original two movies where he had adult problems.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 11, 2018 14:57:24 GMT
Him wanting to be an Avenger wasn't bad but it was part of a kids fantasy, which was supposed to the point really because he did grow up by the end and turn it down. Yeah, a little character development. Which is what she's supposed to be. Peter had lots of temporary love interests in the comics, no need to do "the big romance" right off the bat when there's so much other stuff to do. Again, I don't blame Raimi. Back in 2002 the idea of a longer pre-planned character arc wasn't a normal thing. So him going straight for the romance is fine. Well, Flash was only a mere nuisance to Peter in the comics too. He even beat him up in a Boxing Ring once (Flash noticeably stopped bugging Peter much after that). And I didn't mind Peter having ONE friend. Give it time.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Apr 12, 2018 0:50:43 GMT
Many thanks for this, redpyramidthing —a well-written and eminently fair analysis. Obviously, we don’t agree on everything, but that’s all to the best, of course. This is the kind of post these threads should have but don’t. Much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Apr 12, 2018 1:07:22 GMT
I agreed with on the Thor films with the exception of Ragnarok.
Ragnarok, in my opinion, was the only good Thor film.
He works better as a goofy character. He's uninteresting as a serious character.
|
|
redpyramidthing
Freshman
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
@redpyramidthing
Posts: 82
Likes: 55
|
Post by redpyramidthing on Apr 12, 2018 14:52:39 GMT
Thank you Nalkarj. Of course I don't always agree with you as well, but that's to be expected. Having said that, you're usually the voice of reason and I find myself more in line with your opinions than anybody's else on this forum, so yours is a very appreciated compliment.
|
|
redpyramidthing
Freshman
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
@redpyramidthing
Posts: 82
Likes: 55
|
Post by redpyramidthing on Apr 12, 2018 14:56:15 GMT
I agreed with on the Thor films with the exception of Ragnarok. Ragnarok, in my opinion, was the only good Thor film. He works better as a goofy character. He's uninteresting as a serious character. Agree to disagree . I just can't stand Ragnarok and I will always consider it a wasted opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Apr 12, 2018 15:15:02 GMT
I agreed with on the Thor films with the exception of Ragnarok. Ragnarok, in my opinion, was the only good Thor film. He works better as a goofy character. He's uninteresting as a serious character. Agree to disagree . I just can't stand Ragnarok and I will always consider it a wasted opportunity. A wasted opportunity to finally put the epic Ragnarok lore amd end-fight into picture instead of turning it into American Ragnarok - The Hoot and Holler of the Marvel Gods?
Amen.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 12, 2018 15:42:20 GMT
Agree to disagree . I just can't stand Ragnarok and I will always consider it a wasted opportunity. A wasted opportunity to finally put the epic Ragnarok lore amd end-fight into picture People who think Ragnarok was supposed to be some end-it-all Apocalypse make me shake my head.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Apr 12, 2018 16:36:09 GMT
Thank you Nalkarj . Of course I don't always agree with you as well, but that's to be expected. Having said that, you're usually the voice of reason and I find myself more in line with your opinions than anybody's else on this forum, so yours is a very appreciated compliment. That’s really nice, redpyramidthing; to be frank, I’m not sure that I deserve your kind words! Thank you so very much; I do aim to be a voice of reason and hope that we’ll all be able to effect more thoughtful, considerate, and decent discussion on these boards.
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Apr 12, 2018 17:35:50 GMT
I only like Winter Soldier and Black Panther they are the most serious. Glad somebody else sees Shitnerok for the crap film it is. On top of being a kid movie they got rid of Darcy,the best character in the Thor Movies.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 12, 2018 18:08:05 GMT
I only like Winter Soldier and Black Panther they are the most serious. Stay away from Ghostbusters, Star Wars, Star Trek, Dr Who, Back to the Future and most other classics. You'll go insane.
|
|
|
Post by Daisy on Apr 12, 2018 20:24:41 GMT
I only like Winter Soldier and Black Panther they are the most serious. ... Darcy,the best character in the Thor Movies. Does not compute.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Apr 12, 2018 20:35:32 GMT
summers8 you do realize Paramount has not been doing too well in recent years, especially with their major releases. They have made many questionable corporate decisions that have done more harm than good - They waited too long for a sequel to 09's Star Trek and it made less profit than its predecessor and its follow up Beyond lost even more money. They spent a ridiculous amount of money on the last Transformers movie with intentions to create a cinematic universe with the intent of releasing a film a year like Star Wars but The Last Knight massively underperformed and intended plans going forward with the series have been scrapped(Only Bumblebee was allowed to be green-lit because it was already too far into development would be made for peanuts compared to the others). A Quiet Place is their biggest hit in a long while - its actually expected to break 100 mil this weekend( not bad at all for a low budget horror vehicle).
|
|