|
Post by coldenhaulfield on May 1, 2019 17:02:13 GMT
A troll would constantly post negativity for the sake of starting an argument because they're miserable. His criticisms don't even make sense. He says there's no reason for the two Caps to fight each other and Tony's conversation with his dad is just an Easter egg. Both statements are false and his entire argument is hypocritical. The action is somehow unnecessary to the plot and so are the character moments? I don't want you to ban him or stop him from posting, I know how to use the block feature. But it's disingenuous to argue his behavior isn't trollish. Their behavior is ignored – and as you pointed out, defended – so often around here that it's a very fair to question the motives of the mods and admin here. I mean, why does this place even exist? You certainly can't have a conversation here. Trolls are everywhere, but they own this board, the DC, and Star Wars ones. That shouldn't be, but nobody here with any authority to do anything about it gives a shit. "Oh, mang. I have all these awesome original amazing thoughts about movies and stuff that nobody's stopping me from sharing, but instead I choose to instigate these meta-bitchfests that further contribute to the exact 'problems' I'm incessantly complaining about nonstop. If only people whose opinions and sense of humor I disliked were unilaterally banned from posting altogether I could feel like I've enough of a safe space to share my unrivaled genius; here's a sample of my incredibly original, intellectually scintillating unique ideas that I complain endlessly about not being able to have 'real' discussions about: the prequels sucked, pizza is overrated, and Spider-Mang 2 is better than Spider-Mang 3. Damn those Ackbars for inoffensively bothering nobody anywhere except me!!!!!!1" -- every Kuato post ETA: innit?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on May 1, 2019 17:03:11 GMT
Popularity doesn't make something better I think its obvious a joke like Rhodeys is out of place given the context of the subject matter. And people in general are enamoured by MCU so will wont criticise the jokes too much. Disney star wars on the other hand.. An an asshat like you bitching on the internet doesn't make something worse. It was your argument that TWS is popular because it is like X-Men That is contradicted by the fact that the other MCU movies are way more popular than most of the X-Men. You see popularity matters to you when it agrees with you. Just like critics and box office only matter when they conform to your ideas. You are a typical pathetic little troll.
Shouldn't he get a strike for this? Hauntedknight87ETA: scabab
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on May 1, 2019 17:06:00 GMT
An an asshat like you bitching on the internet doesn't make something worse. It was your argument that TWS is popular because it is like X-Men That is contradicted by the fact that the other MCU movies are way more popular than most of the X-Men. You see popularity matters to you when it agrees with you. Just like critics and box office only matter when they conform to your ideas. You are a typical pathetic little troll.
Shouldn't he get a strike for this? Hauntedknight87
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on May 1, 2019 17:10:27 GMT
I already provided my complaints about Thor and Hulk. The rest of the humor in the film was fine. In a 3 hours film, you should be thankful there wasn't more. It was needed to break up the tension and in my opinion, it was mostly balanced (Thor and Hulk aside). This isn't Shakespeare. It's relateable and entertaining, which most people enjoy. You know, those boneheads you keep looking down on with your superior film knowledge. Antman, Stark, Racoon and on occasions Thor are fine for comic relief. Don't need to have the whole cast doing quips and cheesy 1 liners especially during heavy scenes. This is why Mcu is unbalanced, nearly every character is a wannabe comedian. Endgame is the last mcu movie i will see in theatres. Wanted to see how the saga ended[/quote] No i havent hated it since the start. Phase 1 + Winter soldier/Thor 2 are my favourites. Basically the time before Disney dumbed down the franchise, just like star wars. My old imdb board posts will show that. Its an obligation to see how the series ended. Nope im done with mcu movies. Bring on dark phoenix
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on May 1, 2019 17:11:17 GMT
The Russo recently said that they spent 3 years developing this film and the time travel aspect. It has multiple layers and possibly multiple realities, some of which will be revealed in follow-up films and the Disney+ shows. Multiple scientific theories and explanations were provided in the film. It was more complex, which drives thought and conversation, which isn't a bad thing. There will be lasting effects from this going forward. 3 years lol. Then tell me why they thought it was a great idea to have branched timelines where the "past doesnt affect the future". In that case, it is theoretically possible for any number heroes or villains in the 2019 timeline to go back in time, collect infinity stones from multiple timelines and travel back to 2019. You can end up with a situation where you have 100 individual infinity gauntlets in 2019 lmao. Does that sound logical to u. Such great ingenuity and planning No, because the villains didn't have the means for time travel.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on May 1, 2019 17:17:12 GMT
No, because the villains didn't have the means for time travel. They do, all they need is pym particles and the quantum GPS device, which they could easily steal from Avengers HQ. Once a villain - or hero gone rogue- gains those 2 items they can time travel with ease. Go back to 2012, steal the tesseract, return to 2019. Go back to 2011,steal tesseract, return to 2019. Go back to 2010, steal tesseract, return to 2019. Now individual has 3 tesseracts in 2019. Incredible power in their hands. Extrapolate this to all the gems and you can get an army of multiple infinity gauntlet wielders
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on May 1, 2019 18:04:42 GMT
before you start criticizing the time travel elements, keep in mind it's not real and every film that deals with it does it's own thing with it, whether it makes sense or not. There's a lot to nitpick about how DoFP handles time travel that I'd argue moreso than Endgame. Of course its not real, but writing of timetravel takes skill which Russos showed they have not. Sorry but DOFPs timetravel writing is more cleaner and il show you why Endgames is so sloppy in another thread I'd say DoFP biggest nitpick is Kitty Pryde all of a sudden achieving the ability to phase thru time with someone else. I know it's in the comics, but there was really no setup to those powers in the other films. At least in the Ant-Man films, the quantum realm and it's abilities are explored, even if they don't make sense. Time travel never does, but the Russos brother did try and subvert the time travel cliche of messing with your past affects your future. Again, doesn't necessarily have to make sense, but they are setting up their own rules instead, which every time travel film does. If you really wanna get technical about it, then at the end of T2, John Connor should have disappeared, and Sarah would be poofed back to waitressing.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on May 1, 2019 18:41:07 GMT
Similarities doesn't equal rip-off. The fact that you used that specific phrasing already shows that you're approaching this topic with very clear bias. I expected better from you. I always knew you were a bit anti-MCU but I never figure you for a troll. Threads like these I would have expected from summers8 or DC-Fan, not from you. Hear me out. It is a rip off because Endgame is an original story. Theres no comics story in the infinity saga that resembles Endgame, so they had to ripoff/copy others ideas to come up with a plot. Now ThatGuy on this very board used to argue with summers8 that DOFP ripped off Terminator 2. I understand where Thatguy comes from but the fact is the comic story of DOFP predates T2, so cant be a ripoff. Take the word rip off as negatively or positively as you want, but Endgame does "borrow" heavily, if that word suits you, off the DOFP concept story Again... The way they made the movie is closer to Terminator 2 than the source story. I think Singer has this thing where he doesn't know how to make a type of movie and goes to other movies for "inspiration", but he goes to far and just copies a lot of it. The same goes for X-men and X2 being A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back. Me calling it a rip-off was mostly just to get at summers8 because it makes him all huffy.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on May 1, 2019 18:44:02 GMT
You know I am right. The parralels are all there, its a blatant ripoff using Thor as the Xavier broken man archetype. You just cant answer.
Tell me, why are journalists praising Thors supposed ''ptsd'' when all it is reduced to jokes and fat gags. Where was the praise for Xaviers ptsd performance?
And why can Starks metal glove hold the whole infinity gems when weve seen in previous MCU movies like GOTG that any 1 ordinary person who tries to touch just 1 infinity stone will get immediatly annhilated as happened in gotg 1 in the Collectors lab?
I'll do you one better. How the hell does Jane Foster survive ingesting an Infinity Stone? Who cares? All I know is that Endgame is superior to DOFP, and all of the usual online sources agree with me. By all means, keep complaining. It's definitely affecting our enjoyment of the films as well as their critical and financial success. Wasn't she dying? They had to take that out of her before she died from it.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on May 1, 2019 19:19:10 GMT
Of course its not real, but writing of timetravel takes skill which Russos showed they have not. Sorry but DOFPs timetravel writing is more cleaner and il show you why Endgames is so sloppy in another thread I'd say DoFP biggest nitpick is Kitty Pryde all of a sudden achieving the ability to phase thru time with someone else. I know it's in the comics, but there was really no setup to those powers in the other films. At least in the Ant-Man films, the quantum realm and it's abilities are explored, even if they don't make sense. Time travel never does, but the Russos brother did try and subvert the time travel cliche of messing with your past affects your future. Again, doesn't necessarily have to make sense, but they are setting up their own rules instead, which every time travel film does. If you really wanna get technical about it, then at the end of T2, John Connor should have disappeared, and Sarah would be poofed back to waitressing. Wasn't it Franklin Richards who grew up to have mega mental powers that sent Kate's mind back to Kitty's teenage body in the comics? It's been so long since I read it I don't recall, but I'm pretty sure Franklin Richards was involved somehow.
You just caused me to think of something though, it's not unreasonable to propose (for pseudo-scientific funtime purposes--which is all any of this is) Kitty's phasing power works by manipulation of mass at the quantum level, which due to the curious behavior of photons and quarks under general relativity causes some to wonder if time travel is possible. Therefore Kitty developing the ability to send minds through time is no more absurd than Scott Lang figuring that if you can slow time you can go back in time, blithely skipping over the almost certain reality that there's no there there and that's two very different concepts.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on May 1, 2019 20:04:55 GMT
Wasn't it Franklin Richards who grew up to have mega mental powers that sent Kate's mind back to Kitty's teenage body in the comics? It's been so long since I read it I don't recall, but I'm pretty sure Franklin Richards was involved somehow. Rachel sends kitty pryde back in time. Franklin Richards is just 1 of the few surviving heros in the future [/div]
[/quote] Scott Langs theory suggests that because hes really small, comparable to Planck scale, that his body can behave under quantum rules, where time behaves differently. Kittys phasing through matter ability must allow her to control the atoms in her body to become quantized to phase through macro-matter. So not a stretch to believe that she could quantize the consciousness and manipulate its time vector
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on May 1, 2019 21:02:42 GMT
Wasn't it Franklin Richards who grew up to have mega mental powers that sent Kate's mind back to Kitty's teenage body in the comics? It's been so long since I read it I don't recall, but I'm pretty sure Franklin Richards was involved somehow. Rachel sends kitty pryde back in time. Franklin Richards is just 1 of the few surviving heros in the future [/div]
Ah, that's what it was, Rachel's first appearance, right after Jean Grey's death. Franklin was her husband instead, or something.
Yes, the behavior of quarks and photons amongst other things suggests that general relativity must give way to quantum mechanics at that level.
Scott's cringeworthy hypothesis was that slowing time was akin to going back in time, the first is hardly groundbreaking, that's what would happen relatively as you approach the speed of light, jumping from that to the pretense there's a 'back' in time to go to is what amused me, though that assumption is required in both scenarios. Your technobabble of 'time vectors' is better than the way they tried to explain it in Endgame.
If we accept that this is possible, you wouldn't have to add the step of establishing an identifiable 'consciousness,' you could just send the physical brain 'back' and that's what seemed to be suggested by having to use Wolverine as his healing powers were required and they're physical in nature, not metaphysical.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on May 1, 2019 21:38:26 GMT
Kutorises just got owned! Wow, did DC-fan ask you take his place while he sleeps under the bridge?
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on May 1, 2019 21:50:48 GMT
Kutorises just got owned! Wow, did DC-fan ask you take his place while he sleeps under the bridge? Maybe we should send a letter to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry to see if they recently put 2 trolls named DC-Fan and summers8 in their dungeon.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on May 1, 2019 22:02:59 GMT
You are a typical pathetic little troll. Be nice. I'll tell Santa if you're not.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on May 2, 2019 17:38:23 GMT
Of the things I disagree with(which are pretty much everything) I especially disagree with Stark's sacrifice, it was well earned, made sense story wise and fit into his whole arc(which spans all the way back to the first Iron Man).
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on May 2, 2019 18:09:58 GMT
Of the things I disagree with(which are pretty much everything) I especially disagree with Stark's sacrifice, it was well earned, made sense story wise and fit into his whole arc(which spans all the way back to the first Iron Man). It could have been written better, and not just his death scene with the gaunlet in hand (he wouldn't have been able to hold the power stones energy) What could have been written better is the time travel in relation to Tony. Instead of Russos taking the safe option of deploying branched timelines, where the past doesnt affect the future, they should have made it like DOFP (or most other timetravel movies) where the past DOES affect the future. In that case, a great decision would have to have been made by Tony Stark. Does he decide to go back in time to save trillions, including his fallen Avengers like Peter Parker OR does he decide not to because if he did he would lose his daughter who was born after the snap. That would have been a much more interesting arc for Tony. As it is, its played safe because he can save his daughter and save the world. The daughter in Endgame is just a sympathetic plot device to make us feel more for Stark.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on May 2, 2019 18:42:49 GMT
Their behavior is ignored – and as you pointed out, defended – so often around here that it's a very fair to question the motives of the mods and admin here. I mean, why does this place even exist? You certainly can't have a conversation here. Trolls are everywhere, but they own this board, the DC, and Star Wars ones. That shouldn't be, but nobody here with any authority to do anything about it gives a shit. "Oh, mang. I have all these awesome original amazing thoughts about movies and stuff that nobody's stopping me from sharing, but instead I choose to instigate these meta-bitchfests that further contribute to the exact 'problems' I'm incessantly complaining about nonstop. If only people whose opinions and sense of humor I disliked were unilaterally banned from posting altogether I could feel like I've enough of a safe space to share my unrivaled genius; here's a sample of my incredibly original, intellectually scintillating unique ideas that I complain endlessly about not being able to have 'real' discussions about: the prequels sucked, pizza is overrated, and Spider-Mang 2 is better than Spider-Mang 3. Damn those Ackbars for inoffensively bothering nobody anywhere except me!!!!!!1" -- every Kuato post ETA: innit? Oh, hey... I don't really read your posts. I don't have you on ignore, I just make a concentrated effort to not read what you write. You're wasting your time talking to me. I'm not into your style of "conversation".
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 2, 2019 19:27:56 GMT
Of the things I disagree with(which are pretty much everything) I especially disagree with Stark's sacrifice, it was well earned, made sense story wise and fit into his whole arc(which spans all the way back to the first Iron Man). It could have been written better, and not just his death scene with the gaunlet in hand (he wouldn't have been able to hold the power stones energy) What could have been written better is the time travel in relation to Tony. Instead of Russos taking the safe option of deploying branched timelines, where the past doesnt affect the future, they should have made it like DOFP (or most other timetravel movies) where the past DOES affect the future. In that case, a great decision would have to have been made by Tony Stark. Does he decide to go back in time to save trillions, including his fallen Avengers like Peter Parker OR does he decide not to because if he did he would lose his daughter who was born after the snap. That would have been a much more interesting arc for Tony. As it is, its played safe because he can save his daughter and save the world. The daughter in Endgame is just a sympathetic plot device to make us feel more for Stark. You're right, the safe move is killing off your most popular character. As nonsensical as the time travel science is in this film, they did it for a reason. They're setting up potential time travel capers in the future now that they have access to Kang. The storytelling potential is virtually unlimited and they didn't want to box themselves in. It's the same reason we now have a five year gap between our time and theirs. There's room to shift the films' order in the next phase as opposed to their chronological release dates. Another reason the time jump had to stay is to add stakes to the film. If they were never gone, what did anyone really lose? How emotional is the return if the characters (and the world) don't know they ever left? Tony's future daughter would be fine because they saved the future he already knows comes to pass. The way Endgame sets it up, the past and the current timeline are still at stake. With Thanos showing up, the heroes could not only fail to bring everyone back, but lose everyone who made it the first time. It's kind of a mess but the more I discuss it on these boards, the more I understand why they wrote it the way they did. I don't love their take on time travel but I'll accept it the same way I accept the science in Ant-Man or the same way you accept Magneto reprogramming the Sentinels in DOFP. (He's the master of magnetism, not electronics.)
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on May 2, 2019 19:40:19 GMT
I don't have a problem with Tony death. Infact it was a perfect way for him to go out.
He made a sacrifice play.
|
|