|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 8, 2017 14:25:28 GMT
IM2 and 3 aren't close to shit. Catwoman is shit. BVS is shit. Batman & Robin is shit. I'd refer you to the ratings for the two movies you're calling shit, and just realize they actually do pretty well. The best films ever? No, but they're fine. oh, you're bringing up ratings? cool. So...how do you feel that WW is better than all of MCU. i'm not saying that, the ratings are. LOL!!! ArArArchStanton brings up ratings. Wonder Woman has a better rating than every MCU movie except Iron Man. So by ArArArchStanton's own criteria, Wonder Woman is not only better than The First Avenger but also better than almost the entire MCU.
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Jun 8, 2017 14:25:57 GMT
Well, like i said, if those movies would have been made only for people that love, care or even give a fuck about the comics, they would all be flops The MCU pulls it off often enough. Yes, it's very succesful. But 90% of the people that pay to see the movies in theaters don't give a fuck about the comics
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Jun 8, 2017 14:27:35 GMT
For me IM 2 and 3 are shit, and IM 1 is just good. No, i won't define issues with them because i know how it will be with you: Me: Kat Dennings is useless and annoying as fuck You:I have no problem with Kat Dennings,she's fine And so on... That's exactly how conversations go with this guy. He doesn't seem to get that there is a difference of opinion of things and it would seem...from what I see...he just likes to argue with people.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Jun 8, 2017 14:32:07 GMT
Yes, it's very succesful. But 90% of the people that pay to see the movies in theaters don't give a fuck about the comics Id argue its close to 99%. Formersamhmd lives in a fantasy world in which he thinks just because a movie sticks close to its source material, it will be successful. He cited Deadpool as an example, being the best received X-Men Film financially and thats down to it sticking closer to the comics than any other X-film. Nonsense. Deadpool was well received because it was fresh, funny (in a non-goofy Marvel way) and well directed. He also had the cheek to call it a more MCU style movie which shows his innate bias.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 8, 2017 14:47:02 GMT
Yes, it's very succesful. But 90% of the people that pay to see the movies in theaters don't give a fuck about the comics Id argue its close to 99%. Formersamhmd lives in a fantasy world in which he thinks just because a movie sticks close to its source material, it will be successful. He cited Deadpool as an example, being the best received X-Men Film financially and thats down to it sticking closer to the comics than any other X-film. Nonsense. Deadpool was well received because it was fresh, funny (in a non-goofy Marvel way) and well directed. He also had the cheek to call it a more MCU style movie which shows his innate bias. Well, it's closer to how the MCU does things than how FOX does things.
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Jun 8, 2017 15:11:11 GMT
Yes, it's very succesful. But 90% of the people that pay to see the movies in theaters don't give a fuck about the comics Id argue its close to 99%. Formersamhmd lives in a fantasy world in which he thinks just because a movie sticks close to its source material, it will be successful. He cited Deadpool as an example, being the best received X-Men Film financially and thats down to it sticking closer to the comics than any other X-film. Nonsense. Deadpool was well received because it was fresh, funny (in a non-goofy Marvel way) and well directed. He also had the cheek to call it a more MCU style movie which shows his innate bias. Yeah,I know. Deadpool is like MCU( even if we won't see an R-rated MCU movie) WW is like MCU,etc. And of course,since it's not part of the MCU, Logan is overrated
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jun 8, 2017 15:28:15 GMT
No need to use exclamation points, we are reading not hearing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2017 15:31:54 GMT
I only mildly liked The 1st Avenger . IMO WW is better than that film AND both Thor films.
The reason? Much more heart. Better balance of comedy/drama/action. The director for WW really knocked it out of the park with it.
Also, one of the biggest criticisms of The 1st Avenger , is that they wasted Red Skull. he had all the potential to be the most evil/most badass villain in all of the MCU and they made him go out like a bitch. smdh.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 8, 2017 15:43:10 GMT
Lots of pans here calling pots black. I think it's fair to say the WW is better than CATFA and some other MCU origin movies but it's not quite up to par with MCU's upper tier of movies.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 8, 2017 16:01:49 GMT
Well, rating say it's better than all of MCU. And one last thing: you say i have a herd mentality by not liking IM2 or 3 but you call BVS without even seeing it. Sounds legit An no, i'm not gonna argue with you in favor of WW or against MCU because all you'll say is:I have no problem with the flaws you listed, they're perfect. i already know your answers, so why bother? Small example : i told you that i like the cinematography in WW better but you replied: I don't see it as being better No, it's that I watched MOS and knew the problems there by myself, and read detailed breakdowns indicating the same issues magnified in BVS. I'm not going to sit through it just to say I saw it when I had no respect for MOS and the same issues persist. I call that doing my homework.
And I'm not asking for the ratings, I'm asking you to justify how WW is better. I haven't heard anybody give an answer to that yet, they just keep pointing to ratings. For instance, let's say the cinematography is better in WW. Does that make the film better overall? Is that it? I mean if you're going to say the film is better, surely there must be a number of factors making it so, and that First Avenger has significantly less by comparison.
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Jun 8, 2017 17:13:23 GMT
Well, rating say it's better than all of MCU. And one last thing: you say i have a herd mentality by not liking IM2 or 3 but you call BVS without even seeing it. Sounds legit An no, i'm not gonna argue with you in favor of WW or against MCU because all you'll say is:I have no problem with the flaws you listed, they're perfect. i already know your answers, so why bother? Small example : i told you that i like the cinematography in WW better but you replied: I don't see it as being better No, it's that I watched MOS and knew the problems there by myself, and read detailed breakdowns indicating the same issues magnified in BVS. I'm not going to sit through it just to say I saw it when I had no respect for MOS and the same issues persist. I call that doing my homework.
And I'm not asking for the ratings, I'm asking you to justify how WW is better. I haven't heard anybody give an answer to that yet, they just keep pointing to ratings. For instance, let's say the cinematography is better in WW. Does that make the film better overall? Is that it? I mean if you're going to say the film is better, surely there must be a number of factors making it so, and that First Avenger has significantly less by comparison.
So yeah,you don't have an opinion on BVS,just what the others thought of it. At least I unfortunately saw Antman.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 8, 2017 17:37:11 GMT
For Arch, here are things WW did better than CATFA:
1. Better, more developed romantic story 2. Better fight scenes 3. Better insight on how protagonist gained their skill in fighting 4. Better end fight sequence 5. Better representation of the horrors of war
Now, there are also things that CATFA did better (like pacing and more consistent power levels), but I just wanted to point out that WW did indeed do things better in some areas.
|
|
barcode
Sophomore
@barcode
Posts: 194
Likes: 108
|
Post by barcode on Jun 8, 2017 20:43:21 GMT
The movie is far better than First Avenger. Just like TDK >> Avengers
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 8, 2017 21:40:26 GMT
The movie is far better than First Avenger. Just like TDK >> Avengers Dark Knight's overrated.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 8, 2017 21:40:28 GMT
So yeah,you don't have an opinion on BVS,just what the others thought of it. At least I unfortunately saw Antman. Ant Man was great, and I've seen plenty of clips of BVS in a number of scenes. Honestly it's never seemed interesting enough to want to watch it. The whole Batman fighting Superman thing was never that appealing. In fairness Marvel had Silver Surfer fight Spiderman once, and that also seemed pretty silly. I would never want that in a film. It's just a boring fight. Was anybody surprised that kryptonite got involved? It's just a tired writing crutch. And how many times can they put Lex in a film. Aren't there any other Superman villains? I just wasn't interested.
But I am interested in addressing the actual film and getting your thoughts on several issues from Wonder Woman, such as
- Was there a reason that Ares made his traditional armor out of scrap metal at the end, or was it just fan service? He didn't need the armor right? It never helped him did it?
- Was there actually a point in keeping Diana's origin from her forever? Why did her "mom" say she must never know. I get that there's a thin reason that she wanted to protect her, but she knew full well that Zeus himself put her there specifically for that reason. So she's just kind of being annoying not to tell her and prepare her for what Zeus himself intended her to do. Or did I miss something?
- Nobody seemed all that impressed with her. She jumped to the top of a bell tower and imploded it on contact and she literally only got a few handshakes for it. I don't think anybody bought the Zeus made her out of clay story for a second, but I think I would have at least asked her for more details about that story once I saw her do that.
- If Ares was that powerful, and that influential, why did he even introduce himself to Diana? Why not move on and keep sowing war to the point she can't keep up. She'd never figure it out. She didn't even suspect him, she thought she'd killed him actually, and furthermore she was in a state of complete doubt about humanity. She thought mankind was hopeless. She was basically on his side at that point. He had her broken. And then he revealed himself, restoring her motivation. I know they needed a final battle, but this didn't seemlike a clever tactical move. I didn't buy that he needed her help for anything, and the more I think about it, she didn't win. She didn't figure out anything. He basically sunk the eight ball and then scratched.
- I also thought the final battle lost of bit of weight by virtue of not knowing what Ares' powers were. So he's got Loki like ghost ability, but then never really uses that and instead has Phoenix level telekenetic powers. Now that was awesome, and then he's got some force lightening as well. The thing was he seemed completely immortal, and you don't really feel he has any vulnerability, so when she hits him with his own lightening I kinda said "oh, i guess that killed him." I think the reason is, the sword would have felt like the obvious pay off weapon you were waiting for her to use on him, but then they pull that swerve that she herself is the weapon. I actually really liked that twist. But then if she's the weapon, how does she kill him? Can she just tickle him to death because she's the weapon or does she have to absorb his force lightening to kill him? IDK it just sort of happened without any real foreshadowing or explanation. If he hadn't have used force lightening what would she have done?
- One other kind of curious thing was her power growth. I've compared this film to being the love child of First Avenger and Thor 1, and I think that even applies to her power level throughout the film. She's basically Steve Rogers for most of the movie, and then she hulks up (pun intended), and morphs into Thor. That's all well and good, but none of it seems to surprise her in the slightest. She isn't in awe of what she did, or impressed, or curious, or anything. She just lifts a tank and tosses it casually to the side and says "tank lifting, sure, whatevs." I felt similarly when she started digging into the stone wall of the tower near the beginning. Did she know she could do this? How was she not crushing her amazon opponents in battle is she did. And if she did, why again was the secret of who she was such a big deal. She already knew the clay story right? What's the difference if she knew the rest? Clearly she must have known she was far different than her non bare hand rock crushing friends right?
I'm not aware of similar types of oversights in First Avenger which is why I say it's better, but I'd be happy to discuss it.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 8, 2017 22:36:52 GMT
The movie is far better than First Avenger. Just like TDK >> Avengers Dark Knight's overrated. It is, but so are your mental faculties. So...
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 9, 2017 1:06:07 GMT
It is, but so are your mental faculties. So... Calm down Francis, you're going to give yourself skin failure.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jun 9, 2017 1:14:17 GMT
Lots of pans here calling pots black. I think it's fair to say the WW is better than CATFA and some other MCU origin movies but it's not quite up to par with MCU's upper tier of movies. It's rated higher than all of them. Which means you are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 9, 2017 1:47:57 GMT
Lots of pans here calling pots black. I think it's fair to say the WW is better than CATFA and some other MCU origin movies but it's not quite up to par with MCU's upper tier of movies. It's rated higher than all of them. Which means you are wrong. So NOW all of a sudden RT's ratings mean something? After years of DC fan's whining about how "biased" they are?
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jun 9, 2017 1:52:09 GMT
It's rated higher than all of them. Which means you are wrong. So NOW all of a sudden RT's ratings mean something? After years of DC fan's whining about how "biased" they are? Not sure what you mean, but I am referring to the metacritic scores, and I am also not "DC-Fan"
|
|