|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 10, 2018 10:09:00 GMT
ew.com/movies/2018/10/06/dark-phoenix-thor/''It’s a movie that goes into space and is cosmic, very much inspired actually by what [Taika] did with Thor — even though the tone is totally different — but just the ability to make a character movie that still feels grounded, and fun, but is in whole other universes''.
Hm,l I wonder why thatguy left out this part that us the most important lol. what made thor 3 a bad movie.also, the tone is not just different but totally different.
MCU fans please we never said we hated MCU thor movies for the cosmic part, the cosmic element of thor was always good. the problem was with the story telling, disneyism, and the tone. something the director of dark phoenix has said its nothing like thor. Nice try MCU fans but once again lying and half truth is still your stick.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 10, 2018 10:12:31 GMT
“I’m sorry for X-Men 3,” said Kinberg, who co-wrote the earlier film. “We tried to tell the Dark Phoenix story and we didn’t do it properly. So, with this Dark Phoenix story there is no ‘cure’ plot, there is no other plot. It is the Dark Phoenix story, as told in comics, as told in the cartoons. Sophie is the center of the film, that’s why she’s the one person that’s in the teaser poster. The entire movie revolves around her.
Told in cartoons too. don't need to mention the tone of XMEN TAS.
|
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Oct 10, 2018 15:05:38 GMT
ew.com/movies/2018/10/06/dark-phoenix-thor/''It’s a movie that goes into space and is cosmic, very much inspired actually by what [Taika] did with Thor — even though the tone is totally different — but just the ability to make a character movie that still feels grounded, and fun, but is in whole other universes''.
Hm,l I wonder why thatguy left out this part that us the most important lol. what made thor 3 a bad movie.also, the tone is not just different but totally different.
MCU fans please we never said we hated MCU thor movies for the cosmic part, the cosmic element of thor was always good. the problem was with the story telling, disneyism, and the tone. something the director of dark phoenix has said its nothing like thor. Nice try MCU fans but once again lying and half truth is still your stick.
This reminds me of the old boards, when Wormhole used to get so spurned by someone's post, he would have to create a brand new thread or a series of new threads in a fit of rage instead of just replying to the person's post and letting that be it. Calm down Wormhole. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 10, 2018 15:11:59 GMT
Duh? Would have never thought to compare these two tonally.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Oct 10, 2018 16:51:24 GMT
I get that the tone is different, but he took inspiration for the story to include space? One would think that he would've gotten that inspiration from the comic book arc. What exactly does he mean? I assume he is talking about the visuals in Thor Ragnarok? He isn't talking about tone. He couldn't take inspiration for a character study because Ragnarok wasn't that type of movie. He can't be talking about the grounded nature of Ragnarok. We all know Ragnarok isn't grounded. He has to be talking about the visuals in the movie. If that's the case then the movie's visuals are going to crash directly into the grounded character study tone of the movie. I mean, it has to be the bright colorful nature of the visuals in space and on Sakaar, right?
At first I assumed he was talking about the other Thor movies but he was talking about what Taika has done. So he has to be talking Ragnarok Taika intentionally flooded the visuals in space and on Sakaar to be hyper colorful. Those hyper colorful visuals help reinforce the tone of the movie. Just think of how bad Ragnarok's tone would be if they kept all the jokes, light heated fun, and easy going nature and combined that with visuals borrowed from BvS. If he is talking about the visuals it would just be as jarring as the above example. (except in the opposite direction) People who don't like the MCU has stated for years that the bright colors of the MCU is for children. This may comeback and bite the people who said that.
Finally, as I was typing this I figured one more explanation of his quote. He could be talking about the Scope of Ragnarok, but then I dismissed it. Even though it takes place on another world with aliens and ends on Asgard, I personally wouldn't call the scope of the movie anything special. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. The scope of the movie would be the last thing I would take away from Ragnarok.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 10, 2018 19:01:16 GMT
Duh? Would have never thought to compare these two tonally. True.
look at how mcu fans rushed to say it is inspired by thor and missed the important part that matters.
do I have a problem with black panther getting inspired by an xmen movie? no. but I had a problem with them failing to have the depth of xmen movies.
marvel cosmic from comics will likely be similar in movies, however the tone and story telling ...um. not so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 10, 2018 19:39:37 GMT
I get that the tone is different, but he took inspiration for the story to include space? One would think that he would've gotten that inspiration from the comic book arc. What exactly does he mean? I assume he is talking about the visuals in Thor Ragnarok? He isn't talking about tone. He couldn't take inspiration for a character study because Ragnarok wasn't that type of movie. He can't be talking about the grounded nature of Ragnarok. We all know Ragnarok isn't grounded. He has to be talking about the visuals in the movie. If that's the case then the movie's visuals are going to crash directly into the grounded character study tone of the movie. I mean, it has to be the bright colorful nature of the visuals in space and on Sakaar, right? At first I assumed he was talking about the other Thor movies but he was talking about what Taika has done. So he has to be talking Ragnarok Taika intentionally flooded the visuals in space and on Sakaar to be hyper colorful. Those hyper colorful visuals help reinforce the tone of the movie. Just think of how bad Ragnarok's tone would be if they kept all the jokes, light heated fun, and easy going nature and combined that with visuals borrowed from BvS. If he is talking about the visuals it would just be as jarring as the above example. (except in the opposite direction) People who don't like the MCU has stated for years that the bright colors of the MCU is for children. This may comeback and bite the people who said that. Finally, as I was typing this I figured one more explanation of his quote. He could be talking about the Scope of Ragnarok, but then I dismissed it. Even though it takes place on another world with aliens and ends on Asgard, I personally wouldn't call the scope of the movie anything special. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. The scope of the movie would be the last thing I would take away from Ragnarok. I hate to say this but when it came to cosmic from marvel comics. Phoenix, dr strange, thor are all identical. thor and strange even made cameos during the Phoenix saga in TAS as a reference to the cosmic side of marvel.
They should on film all kind of look alike since there is one source. marvel comics, but where they differ now in movies is the tone. thor went full cartoon comedy. phoenix is trying to stay as grounded as it can and not all that disneyish, hence the totally different tone, ironic that thor 3 should have had the same tone as dark phoenix, as I said, there is one oringal source and it is marvel comics instead thor 3 was disney comedy cgi trash that had nothing to do with the comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 10, 2018 20:23:12 GMT
I get that the tone is different, but he took inspiration for the story to include space? One would think that he would've gotten that inspiration from the comic book arc. What exactly does he mean? I assume he is talking about the visuals in Thor Ragnarok? He isn't talking about tone. He couldn't take inspiration for a character study because Ragnarok wasn't that type of movie. He can't be talking about the grounded nature of Ragnarok. We all know Ragnarok isn't grounded. He has to be talking about the visuals in the movie. If that's the case then the movie's visuals are going to crash directly into the grounded character study tone of the movie. I mean, it has to be the bright colorful nature of the visuals in space and on Sakaar, right? At first I assumed he was talking about the other Thor movies but he was talking about what Taika has done. So he has to be talking Ragnarok Taika intentionally flooded the visuals in space and on Sakaar to be hyper colorful. Those hyper colorful visuals help reinforce the tone of the movie. Just think of how bad Ragnarok's tone would be if they kept all the jokes, light heated fun, and easy going nature and combined that with visuals borrowed from BvS. If he is talking about the visuals it would just be as jarring as the above example. (except in the opposite direction) People who don't like the MCU has stated for years that the bright colors of the MCU is for children. This may comeback and bite the people who said that. Finally, as I was typing this I figured one more explanation of his quote. He could be talking about the Scope of Ragnarok, but then I dismissed it. Even though it takes place on another world with aliens and ends on Asgard, I personally wouldn't call the scope of the movie anything special. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. The scope of the movie would be the last thing I would take away from Ragnarok. Dark Phoenix was never a space opera. |
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Oct 10, 2018 20:40:45 GMT
I get that the tone is different, but he took inspiration for the story to include space? One would think that he would've gotten that inspiration from the comic book arc. What exactly does he mean? I assume he is talking about the visuals in Thor Ragnarok? He isn't talking about tone. He couldn't take inspiration for a character study because Ragnarok wasn't that type of movie. He can't be talking about the grounded nature of Ragnarok. We all know Ragnarok isn't grounded. He has to be talking about the visuals in the movie. If that's the case then the movie's visuals are going to crash directly into the grounded character study tone of the movie. I mean, it has to be the bright colorful nature of the visuals in space and on Sakaar, right? At first I assumed he was talking about the other Thor movies but he was talking about what Taika has done. So he has to be talking Ragnarok Taika intentionally flooded the visuals in space and on Sakaar to be hyper colorful. Those hyper colorful visuals help reinforce the tone of the movie. Just think of how bad Ragnarok's tone would be if they kept all the jokes, light heated fun, and easy going nature and combined that with visuals borrowed from BvS. If he is talking about the visuals it would just be as jarring as the above example. (except in the opposite direction) People who don't like the MCU has stated for years that the bright colors of the MCU is for children. This may comeback and bite the people who said that. Finally, as I was typing this I figured one more explanation of his quote. He could be talking about the Scope of Ragnarok, but then I dismissed it. Even though it takes place on another world with aliens and ends on Asgard, I personally wouldn't call the scope of the movie anything special. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. The scope of the movie would be the last thing I would take away from Ragnarok. Dark Phoenix was never a space opera. I wasn't implying it was. I was speaking generally about Jeans arc from Jean to Phoenix to Dark Phoenix. Seeing how the movies have once again only given us a little bit of time with Phoenix I assume part of Dark Phoenix will have more time as her Phoenix. The way Fox has handled in the past even that assumption might be wrong. I would like it if we had a whole movie between the Phoenix and Dark Phoenix but it seems like Fox has a hardon for Dark Phoenix and couldn't care less about Phoenix. |
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Oct 10, 2018 20:46:32 GMT
I get that the tone is different, but he took inspiration for the story to include space? One would think that he would've gotten that inspiration from the comic book arc. What exactly does he mean? I assume he is talking about the visuals in Thor Ragnarok? He isn't talking about tone. He couldn't take inspiration for a character study because Ragnarok wasn't that type of movie. He can't be talking about the grounded nature of Ragnarok. We all know Ragnarok isn't grounded. He has to be talking about the visuals in the movie. If that's the case then the movie's visuals are going to crash directly into the grounded character study tone of the movie. I mean, it has to be the bright colorful nature of the visuals in space and on Sakaar, right? At first I assumed he was talking about the other Thor movies but he was talking about what Taika has done. So he has to be talking Ragnarok Taika intentionally flooded the visuals in space and on Sakaar to be hyper colorful. Those hyper colorful visuals help reinforce the tone of the movie. Just think of how bad Ragnarok's tone would be if they kept all the jokes, light heated fun, and easy going nature and combined that with visuals borrowed from BvS. If he is talking about the visuals it would just be as jarring as the above example. (except in the opposite direction) People who don't like the MCU has stated for years that the bright colors of the MCU is for children. This may comeback and bite the people who said that. Finally, as I was typing this I figured one more explanation of his quote. He could be talking about the Scope of Ragnarok, but then I dismissed it. Even though it takes place on another world with aliens and ends on Asgard, I personally wouldn't call the scope of the movie anything special. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. The scope of the movie would be the last thing I would take away from Ragnarok. I hate to say this but when it came to cosmic from marvel comics. Phoenix, dr strange, thor are all identical. thor and strange even made cameos during the Phoenix saga in TAS as a reference to the cosmic side of marvel.
They should on film all kind of look alike since there is one source. marvel comics, but where they differ now in movies is the tone. thor went full cartoon comedy. phoenix is trying to stay as grounded as it can and not all that disneyish, hence the totally different tone, ironic that thor 3 should have had the same tone as dark phoenix, as I said, there is one oringal source and it is marvel comics instead thor 3 was disney comedy cgi trash that had nothing to do with the comics.
If Kinberg did take his inspiration from the visuals of space and Sakaar then get ready for a weird clashing of visuals and tone. The hyper color saturation of Ragnarok fit the tone of that story. I think it will be a mistake if Kinberg used the same technique to show the cosmic side of the X-Universe. I know it's cliche and a bad pun but Dark Phoenix needs to be dark in tone (as in handling a more depressing, gritty plot) and also it's visuals needs to be not completely dark or washed out, but slightly muted. Until Jean Phoenixes out. That way the fire cgi will pop more. I hope I'm wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 10, 2018 21:43:38 GMT
I hate to say this but when it came to cosmic from marvel comics. Phoenix, dr strange, thor are all identical. thor and strange even made cameos during the Phoenix saga in TAS as a reference to the cosmic side of marvel.
They should on film all kind of look alike since there is one source. marvel comics, but where they differ now in movies is the tone. thor went full cartoon comedy. phoenix is trying to stay as grounded as it can and not all that disneyish, hence the totally different tone, ironic that thor 3 should have had the same tone as dark phoenix, as I said, there is one oringal source and it is marvel comics instead thor 3 was disney comedy cgi trash that had nothing to do with the comics.
If Kinberg did take his inspiration from the visuals of space and Sakaar then get ready for a weird clashing of visuals and tone. The hyper color saturation of Ragnarok fit the tone of that story. I think it will be a mistake if Kinberg used the same technique to show the cosmic side of the X-Universe. I know it's cliche and a bad pun but Dark Phoenix needs to be dark in tone (as in handling a more depressing, gritty plot) and also it's visuals needs to be not completely dark or washed out, but slightly muted. Until Jean Phoenixes out. That way the fire cgi will pop more. I hope I'm wrong. Kind of agree, reason I am sonewhat glad he said, still grounded. |
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Oct 10, 2018 23:21:31 GMT
If Kinberg did take his inspiration from the visuals of space and Sakaar then get ready for a weird clashing of visuals and tone. The hyper color saturation of Ragnarok fit the tone of that story. I think it will be a mistake if Kinberg used the same technique to show the cosmic side of the X-Universe. I know it's cliche and a bad pun but Dark Phoenix needs to be dark in tone (as in handling a more depressing, gritty plot) and also it's visuals needs to be not completely dark or washed out, but slightly muted. Until Jean Phoenixes out. That way the fire cgi will pop more. I hope I'm wrong. Kind of agree, reason I am sonewhat glad he said, still grounded. I get that he said the tone was grounded you don't have to highlight it. I even said in the first post of mine: I just don't see how you can keep something grounded in tone if the visuals you are inspired by are the exact opposite of grounded. I know inspired doesn't mean copy directly, but some of it has to seep in or what's the point. I'm nervous because this is Kinberg directorial debut. He already sounds like he is getting bogged down and over his head with the post production and reshoots. I know reshoots are part of the business. Most of the time it's just to film changes due to the notes from early screenings or the studio. Sometimes it's because you have more time to make it better. Also it could mean something horribly didn't work, like at all. I don't want to be a doom and gloom type of guy, but if you had to have reshoots to completely change the 3rd act something majorly wrong happened. At least Kinsberg wrote the script originally so him rewriting the 3rd act won't change the flow/style. I digress. Getting back to the inspiration from hyper colored, unnatural saturation visuals and matching them with grounded tone. The best way I can explain my trepidation is through a hypothetical: Say I wanted to paint something. I look through my art books to find some inspiration. I pick up Chuck Close. I flip through his book and really like one painting and decide I will use it for inspiration. I choose this:
 Yes that is a painting. Chuck Close is a famous artist known for his hyper photorealism. He sometimes uses colors, but he is known for the stark black and white portraits. Here's the rub. In this hypothetical I am good at abstract art therefore that's the only style I want to paint. I am good with and known for use of color and my large sloppy paint strokes.
Do you see how incompatible my situation is? Can you see how it relates to Kinberg's situation? I kind of flipped the script in my hypothetical. Kinberg wanting to use a grounded tone would correlate with me as the artist famous for photorealism. And Taika visual style would correlate better with the artist getting inspired by abstract art. I chose to flip it because I love Chuck Close's portraits and I didn't want to have to slog through a good example of abstract art to show. I don't really like abstract art.
With all of this I just don't see how in either situation you can integrate the two opposing forces. |
|
