|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Apr 5, 2019 18:17:02 GMT
One of the many reasons for which Ragnarok is way better than Thor 1 and 2 Ragnerok is the worst Thor and one of the worst thor movies. I d give it a razzie Because having Darcy is more important than paying homage to the artistic style of Jack Kirby?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Apr 5, 2019 20:10:45 GMT
One of the many reasons for which Ragnarok is way better than Thor 1 and 2 . I d give it a razzie The Department of Redundancy Department thanks you for this post.
|
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Apr 6, 2019 0:53:50 GMT
Ragnerok is the worst Thor and one of the worst thor movies. I d give it a razzie Because having Darcy is more important than paying homage to the artistic style of Jack Kirby? Ragnerok is an insult to Kirby or anybody in the industry. Its just like like Batman and Robin but yet you praise Ragnerok
|
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Apr 6, 2019 4:41:55 GMT
Because having Darcy is more important than paying homage to the artistic style of Jack Kirby? Ragnerok is an insult to Kirby or anybody in the industry. Its just like like Batman and Robin but yet you praise Ragnerok Thanks for the laugh, Thor: Ragnarok is the closest any film has come to replicating the style and look of Jack Kirby's work, I challenge you( as well as DC-Fan) to name a better comic book movie that pays better respect to Kirby's artistic style, Now, here are ACTUAL cinematic insults to Jack Kirby's work Fantastic Four '94 Fantastic Four '05 Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer Fantastic Four '15 Nick Fury, Agent of SHIELD(Starring the Hof) Hulk '03 Captain America '79 Captain America II: Death Too Soon Captain America '90 X-Men: The Last Stand X-Men Origins: Wolverine As for your Batman & Robin comparison - dude it's getting old, the shock value of even thinking of comparing an acclaimed product to a widely disliked product is no longer there, troll harder. IF ANYTHING you are an insult to all comic fans, an insult to movie fans, AND an insult to trolls.
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Apr 6, 2019 7:29:28 GMT
They got rid of Darcy because quality is important. One of the many reasons for which Ragnarok is way better than Thor 1 and 2 The odd camera angles in the first movie many seem to hate are Branagh's tribute to the comicbook origin.
|
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Apr 6, 2019 16:13:16 GMT
One of the many reasons for which Ragnarok is way better than Thor 1 and 2 The odd camera angles in the first movie many seem to hate are Branagh's tribute to the comicbook origin. Yeah, I know, I didn't mind these |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Apr 6, 2019 18:25:15 GMT
LOL it has a billion dollars that says it does work. No. That billions just say its popular. Not good.
|
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Apr 6, 2019 18:43:12 GMT
LOL it has a billion dollars that says it does work. No. That billions just say its popular. Not good. And did well critically, even despite a troll campaign. It's popular because it is good. Besides, it's a movie, it's subjective. People don't pay money to see things they expect to hate, or do hate based on trailers etc. It makes money because people like it and people like it because it is in their opinion good.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Apr 6, 2019 18:50:55 GMT
No. That billions just say its popular. Not good. And did well critically, even despite a troll campaign. It's popular because it is good. Besides, it's a movie, it's subjective. People don't pay money to see things they expect to hate, or do hate based on trailers etc. It makes money because people like it and people like it because it is in their opinion good.
You say tomato and I say tomahto You say potato and I say potahto tomato, tomahto, potato, potahto Let's call the whole thing off
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Apr 7, 2019 4:50:30 GMT
The odd camera angles in the first movie many seem to hate are Branagh's tribute to the comicbook origin. Yeah, I know, I didn't mind these Thor isn't an origin for Thor. Maybe Loki. Thor is a redemption tale. When I saw Greatest Showman I realized that is why I loved it so much-I love redemption tales. Thor was already Thor, but he was distracted from what he had been taught by his dreams of proving himself to all from his father. He was distracted from being a good ruler to making his name. Stark on the other hand doesn't learn. He is uncontrolled. Like the line in Jurassic Park about being so caught up in could the do it, they don't stop to ask if they should. Stark is all CAN he do it. He doesn't worry about the morality of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Apr 7, 2019 4:51:40 GMT
LOL it has a billion dollars that says it does work. No. That billions just say its popular. Not good. It is resonating with people.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
 
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 7, 2019 4:58:38 GMT
No. That billions just say its popular. Not good. It is resonating with people. It's about to pass "Black Panther" in overseas revenue.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 7, 2019 5:19:12 GMT
Yeah, I know, I didn't mind these Stark is all CAN he do it. He doesn't worry about the morality of it. He worries about the morality--and danger--of not doing it.
If it can be done, eventually someone will do it. Some contests the prize for second is worse than a set of steak knives....
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Apr 8, 2019 0:55:44 GMT
Stark is all CAN he do it. He doesn't worry about the morality of it. He worries about the morality--and danger--of not doing it.
If it can be done, eventually someone will do it. Some contests the prize for second is worse than a set of steak knives....
No. He is all paranoia. He is all about him. I believe it was Whedon around the time of Avengers who said Stark is all about Stark. People are his to play with or ignore. Loki is Thor's brother. Stark knows this, yet he tells Thor not to take Stark's stuff. No one gave a fuck about Coulson outside of Tony. Coulson dying made it personal to him because Coulson was his SHIELD agent. Thor was in it for Loki. Cap was in it because he's a soldier & the cause of protecting others. Hawkeye & Widow are SHIELD. Banner was the only other variable & he was there for Tony. Coulson was nothing to him. Ultron was about Tony not wanting to lose his new family so he was trying to remove them fron danger by creating replacements. As Wanda pointed out, Ultron was just like Tony-unable to see the difference between saving the world or destroying it. He existed for years selling weapons because that suited him. Most of the other Avengers are heroes by choice. Tony fell into it.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 8, 2019 1:43:25 GMT
He worries about the morality--and danger--of not doing it.
If it can be done, eventually someone will do it. Some contests the prize for second is worse than a set of steak knives....
No. He is all paranoia. He is all about him. I believe it was Whedon around the time of Avengers who said Stark is all about Stark. People are his to play with or ignore. Loki is Thor's brother. Stark knows this, yet he tells Thor not to take Stark's stuff. No one gave a fuck about Coulson outside of Tony. Coulson dying made it personal to him because Coulson was his SHIELD agent. Thor was in it for Loki. Cap was in it because he's a soldier & the cause of protecting others. Hawkeye & Widow are SHIELD. Banner was the only other variable & he was there for Tony. Coulson was nothing to him. Ultron was about Tony not wanting to lose his new family so he was trying to remove them fron danger by creating replacements. As Wanda pointed out, Ultron was just like Tony-unable to see the difference between saving the world or destroying it. He existed for years selling weapons because that suited him. Most of the other Avengers are heroes by choice. Tony fell into it. Stark is what he is and makes for a fascinating character, but I think they made it clear that what motivated him after Loki's invasion was essentially the same thing that caused Fury to greenlight the Phase 2 project in the first place: Earth was too vulnerable and they were hopelessly outclassed. He initially exposed Fury's experiments but came to agree with him in essence. Incidentally he did make the 'sacrifice play' in the end in Avengers, so either Cap was wrong about him or he changed. Ultron was an attempt to go 'phase three' and 'put a suit of armor around the world' and underlined the dangers when security is your primary goal, but Stark is not Ultron, he does have a moral compass and is no absolutist.
I think these questions and characters are interesting and there's no inherently 'right' answers. Imagine that little Monica Rambeau grew up and wanted to follow in her mother's and Auntie Carol's footsteps, what if the Avengers or Wakandan Kingsguard aren't enough for the next Alien invasion, do you think her life and the lives of the people she's protecting are better off with Hammertech or might everyone be more secure if she had SI behind her? Making weapons isn't an inherently evil endeavor, and you're far better off getting to some discoveries before certain enemies do, 'second place' might be a mushroom cloud or a world cracked asunder...
|
|
