|
|
Post by bud47 on Apr 1, 2019 22:41:04 GMT
These aren't overly complicated films and that's now how the scene was conveyed. I've watched the movie several times and never noticed the "Training Grenades" label on the box.
You may not have noticed the box labeled "Training Grenades", but the director who wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers was the only trainee in 17 years who was observant enough to notice that the flagpole could be lowered wants the audience to think that just a few minutes later Steve Rogers wasn't observant enough to notice the box labeled "Training Grenades" and wasn't observant enough to see the Colonel take the grenade from the box labeled "Training Grenades" and toss it at his own trainees?
That's just bad, inconsistent, contrived writing! Then it would have immediately followed up with a close-up on box and the words "Training Grenades" and Steve casually walking over to Peggy all skinny and sexy and asking that fine dame out on a date after asking her how impressed she was. Did that happen in the film? No? Then you're imagining things, like always.
|
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Apr 1, 2019 22:48:38 GMT
May I suggest we just ignore the twat. God we spend too much time arguing with this child. And no doubt will continue. But really why should we bother until he can provide answers to: How a sail boat made it from the Agean to the London at night, during war time in one night?
How The Sahara was a desert during the time of the Roman Empire?
Why they stole Namor's origin story for Aquaman?Maybe we should just copy and paste these to every reply to him...see how he likes the continued copy & paste repetition. You reply to him because you want to convince yourself that he’s wrong, because it’s difficult to acknowledge that your heroes are severely flawed. You’re in denial. Your attempts at shit stirring are up there with your attempts at being funny
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 1, 2019 23:16:37 GMT
I didn't go to astounding length. You created more back story than the writer for the movie in the scenario you came up with. You could make a spin off movie based on it. The movie itself gave the audience what they needed to know, he was son of the King's brother who knew about Wakanda from his father, had his Royal Ring and had the mark of a Wakandan. Therefore he was of royal blood and had the right to challenge. All simple enough but you went to such a extreme length to try and and find a plot hole in it. DNA testing? You realise this is a superhero action movie right? It's not Dr. Phil. Same with this new one you've come out with regarding Captain America. Steve Rogers despite being a scrawny fledgling is actually more brave then anyone and that's why he jumped on the grenade to protect people and why the scientist ended up choosing him. Again straight forward enough but no now there's this conspiracy where Steve knew the grenade was fake the entire time and only did it to fool people into thinking he's a good person but really he's just conspiring to get closer to Peggy Carter. We both know what you're doing with this kind of thing, I just don't know why other people keep falling for it.
|
|
raiderjedi
Sophomore
@raiderjedi
Posts: 452
Likes: 339
 
|
Post by raiderjedi on Apr 1, 2019 23:36:09 GMT
These aren't overly complicated films and that's now how the scene was conveyed. I've watched the movie several times and never noticed the "Training Grenades" label on the box.
You may not have noticed the box labeled "Training Grenades", but the director who wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers was the only trainee in 17 years who was observant enough to notice that the flagpole could be lowered wants the audience to think that just a few minutes later Steve Rogers wasn't observant enough to notice the box labeled "Training Grenades" and wasn't observant enough to see the Colonel take the grenade from the box labeled "Training Grenades" and toss it at his own trainees?
That's just bad, inconsistent, contrived writing! How did a sail boat make it from the Aegean to London at night, during war time in one night? How was the Sahara was a desert during the time of the Roman Empire? Why did DC steal Namor's origin story for Aquaman? Why did DC steal the the plot from Ant-Man & The Wasp for Aquaman? Why did Superman call his mother "Martha"?
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 2, 2019 0:17:45 GMT
DNA testing? You realise this is a superhero action movie right? This is the same cinematic universe that gave us a fake Mandarin. So without a DNA test to prove that was the real Killmonger, he could've been just as fake as Mandarin. And like I said, why would a supposedly scientifically advanced country like Wakanda not ask for scientific proof of identity like a DNA test for someone whom nobody in the country has ever seen or even knew about and who is claiming the throne of the country? That's just bad writing! Steve Rogers despite being a scrawny fledgling is actually more brave then anyone and that's why he jumped on the grenade to protect people and why the scientist ended up choosing him. Again straight forward enough It's not straightforward at all. So the Director wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers is so superior and intelligent and more observant than other trainees that he was the first trainee in 17 years to observe that the flagpole could be lowered simply by removing a lever from the bottom, then a few minutes later the Director wants the audience to think that same Steve Rogers who is supposedly so superior and intelligent and more observant than other trainees didn't notice the Colonel taking a grenade out of a box labeled "Training Grenades" and actually thought that the grenade that the Colonel threw at his own trainees at an army training camp was a live grenade? That's just inconsistent and bad writing!
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 2, 2019 0:26:12 GMT
May I suggest we just ignore the twat. God we spend too much time arguing with this child. And no doubt will continue. But really why should we bother until he can provide answers to: How a sail boat made it from the Agean to the London at night, during war time in one night?
How The Sahara was a desert during the time of the Roman Empire?
Why they stole Namor's origin story for Aquaman?Maybe we should just copy and paste these to every reply to him...see how he likes the continued copy & paste repetition. This is the MCU board and this thread is about an MCU character. Why are you always trying to turn every thread into an MCU vs DC argument?
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 2, 2019 0:26:31 GMT
And the first time you watched those trainees try to climb up the flagpole to get the flag, did you notice that the flagpole could be lowered by removing the lever at the bottom?
You may not have noticed the box labeled "Training Grenades", but the director who wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers was the only trainee in 17 years who was observant enough to notice that the flagpole could be lowered wants the audience to think that just a few minutes later Steve Rogers wasn't observant enough to notice the box labeled "Training Grenades" and wasn't observant enough to see the Colonel take the grenade from the box labeled "Training Grenades" and toss it at his own trainees?
That's just bad, inconsistent, contrived writing! How did a sail boat make it from the Aegean to London at night, during war time in one night? How was the Sahara was a desert during the time of the Roman Empire? Why did DC steal Namor's origin story for Aquaman? Why did DC steal the the plot from Ant-Man & The Wasp for Aquaman? Why did Superman call his mother "Martha"? This is the MCU board and this thread is about an MCU character. Why are you always trying to turn every thread into an MCU vs DC argument?
|
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Apr 2, 2019 4:35:22 GMT
DNA testing? You realise this is a superhero action movie right? This is the same cinematic universe that gave us a fake Mandarin. So without a DNA test to prove that was the real Killmonger, he could've been just as fake as Mandarin. And like I said, why would a supposedly scientifically advanced country like Wakanda not ask for scientific proof of identity like a DNA test for someone whom nobody in the country has ever seen or even knew about and who is claiming the throne of the country? That's just bad writing! Steve Rogers despite being a scrawny fledgling is actually more brave then anyone and that's why he jumped on the grenade to protect people and why the scientist ended up choosing him. Again straight forward enough It's not straightforward at all. So the Director wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers is so superior and intelligent and more observant than other trainees that he was the first trainee in 17 years to observe that the flagpole could be lowered simply by removing a lever from the bottom, then a few minutes later the Director wants the audience to think that same Steve Rogers who is supposedly so superior and intelligent and more observant than other trainees didn't notice the Colonel taking a grenade out of a box labeled "Training Grenades" and actually thought that the grenade that the Colonel threw at his own trainees at an army training camp was a live grenade? That's just inconsistent and bad writing! Are you fucking kidding me? A fake Killmonger? Stop trying to find plotholes where they aren't any.
|
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 2, 2019 8:48:43 GMT
You're looking for things that aren't there. His reaction in that scene was purely gut instinct. It showed his natural tendency for bravery and selflessness and that's what it was meant to convey. To see it as anything else is looking at it with hate goggles, trying to invent things to nitpick and complain about. Trying to impress Peggy? Seriously? This is a guy who grew up being ignored and stepped on by women all of his life. He knew his limitations and had little to no experience in that area. Trying to impress a woman he knew he had no chance with was the last thing on his mind in that scene, especially when he couldn't even do a proper push-up in front of her next to guys who were much more physically impressive. The lengths some of you will go to, to tear these movies down is astounding. If you want to fault these movie for their weaknesses, at least come up with something that's actually in the film. No bud, I'm looking at the writing of the grenade scene as a whole, not just the ''training grenade'' freeze frame and, its not as convincing as it should be. The message is Rogers displays genuine courage and bravery on instinct as even he cannot be 100% sure its a fake or a real frag, fine. But the circumstances around it is weak, given that they were testing soldiers all day long and Rogers would have assumed anything thrown at him (literally) would have been likely a test. Compare it with another MCU film, the scene where Thanos has Gamora in Infinity War and asks Peter Quill to shoot her. After hesitation, Quill finally has the courage to pull the trigger but it fires bubbles as Thanos changes reality, as Thanos knew all along no one in that hold up was in any real danger just like Tommy Lee Jones. Thats a more convincing and better written scenario than Rogers jumping on the grenade in Cap 1. Quill couldnt possibly know that Thanos would change the bullets to bubbles. Quill was 100% sure he was about to kill Gamora as Thanos had just seemingly killed Drax, The Collector and Mantis -the stakes were real. Well you may turn your brain off at these movies like most people and love them without proper insight as typical fanboys do, but they should be judged at a much higher standard than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 2, 2019 10:49:17 GMT
It's not straightforward at all. So the Director wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers is so superior and intelligent... No, the director wanted the audience to know that Steve was inferior but was able to use his head to obtain the flag when others wouldn't and was brave enough to jump on the grenade when others wouldn't. That's it, nothing confusing or complicated, no fan fiction theories, no bizarre ulterior motives, just that he was smart and brave. Very straightforward. Like I said though, I get what it is that you're doing here.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Apr 2, 2019 11:45:27 GMT
Jesus H Christ, it's amazing how some of you fanboys keep getting it wrong.
The flag pole scene wasn't about the power of observation, it was about the ability to think outside the box. The means to lower the flagpole was as clear as day, but it was assumed to be a pole climbing exercise by the other recruits. Only Rogers had the wherewithall to look at the task with an open mind and come to the correct solution ... one that was embarrassingly obvious, after the fact ... hiding in plain sight.
The hand grenade scene showed Rogers willingness to sacrifice himself for others. Rogers reacted instantly, instinctively, when he saw the threat to everyone around him. It was a scenerio where there was no time to think, no time to ponder the possibility that it might be a training grenade.
The claim that Steve Rogers promotion to Captain meant that someone else lost their promotion has already been destroyed by the knucklehead who argued that there had to be a fixed limit to the number of Captains, otherwise everyone would have been promoted to Captain. That argument is so profoundly stupid that it proves the opposite.
A DNA test for Killmonger? Didn't Killmonger have one of those glowy lip tattoos that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt who he was? A high tech Wakandan glowy lip tattoo, linked to an individuals genetic code and impossible to duplicate or forge. Do we really want MCU movies catering to an audience so stupid they couldn't figure that out on their own? That's what the DCEU is for!
Come on guys, do we really need another Always Wrong?
BTW, was Wonder Woman a coward, indifferent, or just plain lazy for sitting out WW2 while true heroes like Steve Rogers was risking his life to save the world?
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 2, 2019 14:32:28 GMT
It's not straightforward at all. So the Director wants the audience to think that Steve Rogers is so superior and intelligent... No, the director wanted the audience to know that Steve was inferior but was able to use his head to obtain the flag when others wouldn't and was brave enough to jump on the grenade when others wouldn't. If that was the director's intent, then he did a poor job. Because if Rogers was intelligent enough to be the first trainee in 17 years to be able to get the flag simply by lowering the flagpole, then how in the world could Rogers be stupid enough to believe that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade? Either Rogers knew it was a fake grenade all along, or the writing was just really bad and inconsistent.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 2, 2019 14:37:16 GMT
Jesus H Christ, it's amazing how some of you fanboys keep getting it wrong. The flag pole scene wasn't about the power of observation, it was about the ability to think outside the box. The means to lower the flagpole was as clear as day, but it was assumed to be a pole climbing exercise by the other recruits. Only Rogers had the wherewithall to look at the task with an open mind and come to the correct solution ... one that was embarrassingly obvious, after the fact ... hiding in plain sight. So Rogers was able to think outside the box when lowering the flagpole, but just a few minutes later, Rogers got a case of stupidity and actually thought that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade? Like I said before, either Rogers knew it was a fake grenade all along or the writing was really bad and inconsistent. The hand grenade scene showed Rogers willingness to sacrifice himself for others. Rogers knew the grenade was fake all along so where is the sacrifice in jumping on a fake grenade? OK, maybe he could've sprained an ankle or pulled a hamstring jumping on that fake grenade. Wow! That's quite a sacrifice!
|
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Apr 2, 2019 15:06:35 GMT
You're looking for things that aren't there. His reaction in that scene was purely gut instinct. It showed his natural tendency for bravery and selflessness and that's what it was meant to convey. To see it as anything else is looking at it with hate goggles, trying to invent things to nitpick and complain about. Trying to impress Peggy? Seriously? This is a guy who grew up being ignored and stepped on by women all of his life. He knew his limitations and had little to no experience in that area. Trying to impress a woman he knew he had no chance with was the last thing on his mind in that scene, especially when he couldn't even do a proper push-up in front of her next to guys who were much more physically impressive. The lengths some of you will go to, to tear these movies down is astounding. If you want to fault these movie for their weaknesses, at least come up with something that's actually in the film. No bud, I'm looking at the writing of the grenade scene as a whole, not just the ''training grenade'' freeze frame and, its not as convincing as it should be. The message is Rogers displays genuine courage and bravery on instinct as even he cannot be 100% sure its a fake or a real frag, fine. But the circumstances around it is weak, given that they were testing soldiers all day long and Rogers would have assumed anything thrown at him (literally) would have been likely a test. Compare it with another MCU film, the scene where Thanos has Gamora in Infinity War and asks Peter Quill to shoot her. After hesitation, Quill finally has the courage to pull the trigger but it fires bubbles as Thanos changes reality, as Thanos knew all along no one in that hold up was in any real danger just like Tommy Lee Jones. Thats a more convincing and better written scenario than Rogers jumping on the grenade in Cap 1. Quill couldnt possibly know that Thanos would change the bullets to bubbles. Quill was 100% sure he was about to kill Gamora as Thanos had just seemingly killed Drax, The Collector and Mantis -the stakes were real. Well you may turn your brain off at these movies like most people and love them without proper insight as typical fanboys do, but they should be judged at a much higher standard than that. His reaction was pure instinct and genuine. He didn't realize that it was fake until afterwards, when he looked around and asked "Is this a test?". It was meant to showcase his bravery and selflessness and to further prove that he was the right choice to be Captain America. That's how it was written and that's how it was presented. There's no need to pick the scene apart any further than that. It's not complicated and it's not meant to be. You're just over-analyzing meaningless details and imagining scenarios which aren't presented in the film in order to tear it down. Proper insight? How much insight does a film like this require? It's a comic book superhero film that's meant to entertain and that's what it does. It doesn't require you to turn your brain off, just allow a little suspension of disbelief. Apparently, some people can't do that when it comes to these films, especially when they're predisposed to disliking them to begin with and determined to do nothing but look for flaws. It's obvious the MCU doesn't meet your high standards. So again, do yourself a favor and stop watching films you know you're going to hate. You know it's going to happen with Endgame too. But you just can't help yourself...
|
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Apr 2, 2019 15:20:38 GMT
Jesus H Christ, it's amazing how some of you fanboys keep getting it wrong. The flag pole scene wasn't about the power of observation, it was about the ability to think outside the box. The means to lower the flagpole was as clear as day, but it was assumed to be a pole climbing exercise by the other recruits. Only Rogers had the wherewithall to look at the task with an open mind and come to the correct solution ... one that was embarrassingly obvious, after the fact ... hiding in plain sight. So Rogers was able to think outside the box when lowering the flagpole, but just a few minutes later, Rogers got a case of stupidity and actually thought that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade? Like I said before, either Rogers knew it was a fake grenade all along or the writing was really bad and inconsistent. The hand grenade scene showed Rogers willingness to sacrifice himself for others. Rogers knew the grenade was fake all along so where is the sacrifice in jumping on a fake grenade? OK, maybe he could've sprained an ankle or pulled a hamstring jumping on that fake grenade. Wow! That's quite a sacrifice! I challenge you to actually answer how Steve knew it was a dummy grenade when even Peggy was about to make a move for it?! |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 2, 2019 15:35:00 GMT
how in the world could Rogers be stupid enough to believe that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades"... He didn't know, just as the others who ran away from it also didn't know. He reacted on instinct and jumped on it. An efficient way of getting the point across that he's brave so to move the plot along but you know all this already.
|
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 2, 2019 15:37:03 GMT
His reaction was pure instinct and genuine. He didn't realize that it was fake until afterwards, when he looked around and asked "Is this a test?". It was meant to showcase his bravery and selflessness and to further prove that he was the right choice to be Captain America. That's how it was written and that's how it was presented. There's no need to pick the scene apart any further than that. It's not complicated and it's not meant to be. You're just over-analyzing meaningless details and imagining scenarios which aren't presented in the film in order to tear it down. Proper insight? How much insight does a film like this require? It's a comic book superhero film that's meant to entertain and that's what it does. It doesn't require you to turn your brain off, just allow a little suspension of disbelief. Apparently, some people can't do that when it comes to these films, especially when they're predisposed to disliking them to begin with and determined to do nothing but look for flaws. It's obvious the MCU doesn't meet your high standards. So again, do yourself a favor and stop watching films you know you're going to hate. You know it's going to happen with Endgame too. But you just can't help yourself... I know it was pure instinct, Im saying it could have been presented better. And im not over-analzying I just opened this thread yesterday since it was getting a lot of traffic and wanted to find out what the fuss was about, so I watched the scene again and pedantic or not, DC fan has a somewhat of a point. And I like The First Avenger. Proper insight needed so fanboys dont become hypocrites. You say suspension of disbelief, well you have people who poke holes in Dark Knight Rises endlessly about its plot holes but then will ignore the same ones in their own favourite movies like Civil War with the camera being just in the right place for Bucky to kill Starks parents. They need to be kept in check. As for Endgame, I will judge it fairly. Looks like its going to attempt a timetravel story correction like DOFP. Now that is extremely high standards to aspire to! Lets see if they can pull it off and maybe even surpass it.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 2, 2019 16:13:35 GMT
So Rogers was able to think outside the box when lowering the flagpole, but just a few minutes later, Rogers got a case of stupidity and actually thought that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade? Like I said before, either Rogers knew it was a fake grenade all along or the writing was really bad and inconsistent. Rogers knew the grenade was fake all along so where is the sacrifice in jumping on a fake grenade? OK, maybe he could've sprained an ankle or pulled a hamstring jumping on that fake grenade. Wow! That's quite a sacrifice! I challenge you to actually answer how Steve knew it was a dummy grenade when even Peggy was about to make a move for it?! There wasn't any previous indication that Peggy had superior intelligence. But they made it a point to emphasize that Rogers had superior intelligence that he was the first trainee in 17 years to get the flag down simply by lowering the flagpole. Then a few minutes later, they made Rogers get a case of stupidity by thinking that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade. Basically, the scene of Rogers jumping on the grenade as an act of bravery only works if they didn't have the earlier scene just a few minutes earlier of Rogers outsmarting all the other trainees and being the first trainee in 17 years to get the flag down simply by lowering the flagpole. By having the flagpole scene, the scene of Rogers jumping on the grenade as a act of bravery doesn't work because how could anyone who outsmarted EVERY trainee in the past 17 years be so stupid to think that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade?
Either Rogers knew the grenade was a fake, or that's just bad and inconsistent writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Apr 2, 2019 16:14:18 GMT
His reaction was pure instinct and genuine. He didn't realize that it was fake until afterwards, when he looked around and asked "Is this a test?". It was meant to showcase his bravery and selflessness and to further prove that he was the right choice to be Captain America. That's how it was written and that's how it was presented. There's no need to pick the scene apart any further than that. It's not complicated and it's not meant to be. You're just over-analyzing meaningless details and imagining scenarios which aren't presented in the film in order to tear it down. Proper insight? How much insight does a film like this require? It's a comic book superhero film that's meant to entertain and that's what it does. It doesn't require you to turn your brain off, just allow a little suspension of disbelief. Apparently, some people can't do that when it comes to these films, especially when they're predisposed to disliking them to begin with and determined to do nothing but look for flaws. It's obvious the MCU doesn't meet your high standards. So again, do yourself a favor and stop watching films you know you're going to hate. You know it's going to happen with Endgame too. But you just can't help yourself... I know it was pure instinct, Im saying it could have been presented better. And im not over-analzying I just opened this thread yesterday since it was getting a lot of traffic and wanted to find out what the fuss was about, so I watched the scene again and pedantic or not, DC fan has a somewhat of a point. And I like The First Avenger. Proper insight needed so fanboys dont become hypocrites. You say suspension of disbelief, well you have people who poke holes in Dark Knight Rises endlessly about its plot holes but then will ignore the same ones in their own favourite movies like Civil War with the camera being just in the right place for Bucky to kill Starks parents. They need to be kept in check. As for Endgame, I will judge it fairly. Looks like its going to attempt a timetravel story correction like DOFP. Now that is extremely high standards to aspire to! Lets see if they can pull it off and maybe even surpass it. DOFP, which you hold so highly, requires a lot of suspension of disbelief as well, like most comic book films do. movieplotholes.com/x-men-days-of-future-pastHigh standards? I guess the level at which you're willing to scrutinize and pick apart a film for flaws changes depending on which film franchise you prefer.
|
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Apr 2, 2019 16:18:32 GMT
I challenge you to actually answer how Steve knew it was a dummy grenade when even Peggy was about to make a move for it?! There wasn't any previous indication that Peggy had superior intelligence. But they made it a point to emphasize that Rogers had superior intelligence that he was the first trainee in 17 years to get the flag down simply by lowering the flagpole. Then a few minutes later, they made Rogers get a case of stupidity by thinking that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade. Basically, the scene of Rogers jumping on the grenade as an act of bravery only works if they didn't have the earlier scene just a few minutes earlier of Rogers outsmarting all the other trainees and being the first trainee in 17 years to get the flag down simply by lowering the flagpole. By having the flagpole scene, the scene of Rogers jumping on the grenade as a act of bravery doesn't work because how could anyone who outsmarted EVERY trainee in the past 17 years be so stupid to think that a grenade taken from a box labeled "Training Grenades" and tossed by the Colonel at his own trainees not in the middle of a battlefield but in the middle of an army training camp was a real grenade?
Either Rogers knew the grenade was a fake, or that's just bad and inconsistent writing. Or they're just using different scenes on purpose to showcase Rogers' various and specific qualities.
|
|
