|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 7, 2017 1:57:53 GMT
I haven’t seen people taking as big an issue with the actor they got to play Ares as they did when Superman pulled a deus ex machina to conveniently fix all his problems. Then either the people you talk to are stupid or you're lying. I’ve heard people expressing disappointment at what Ares ended up looking like in the movie, but the fact that Ares was a middle-aged British guy with a mustache wasn’t nearly as problematic as the climax of a film that completely robs any sense of conflict and again, is a dues ex machina. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 2:00:08 GMT
Then either the people you talk to are stupid or you're lying. I’ve heard people expressing disappointment at what Ares ended up looking like in the movie, but the fact that Ares was a middle-aged British guy with a mustache wasn’t nearly as problematic as the climax of a film that completely robs any sense of conflict and again, is a dues ex machina. No, the casting of Ares completely ruins the film. David Thewlis should have been nothing more than a disguise form. The real form should have been played by Eric Bana. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 7, 2017 2:19:17 GMT
I’ve heard people expressing disappointment at what Ares ended up looking like in the movie, but the fact that Ares was a middle-aged British guy with a mustache wasn’t nearly as problematic as the climax of a film that completely robs any sense of conflict and again, is a dues ex machina. No, the casting of Ares completely ruins the film. David Thewlis should have been nothing more than a disguise form. The real form should have been played by Eric Bana. It doesn’t completely ruin the film. It’s a mild disappointment at the most. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Oct 7, 2017 2:20:47 GMT
Not when that's what they are. Wouldn’t it be easier to just acknowledge that people like WW, instead of coming up with all these excuses for why it did so well? No, blood would start dripping out of his ears. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 2:20:57 GMT
No, the casting of Ares completely ruins the film. David Thewlis should have been nothing more than a disguise form. The real form should have been played by Eric Bana. It doesn’t completely ruin the film. It’s a mild disappointment at the most. Like I said, you have kid gloves on because its the Wonder Woman. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 7, 2017 2:36:29 GMT
It doesn’t completely ruin the film. It’s a mild disappointment at the most. Like I said, you have kid gloves on because its the Wonder Woman. No, I really don’t. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Oct 7, 2017 3:54:49 GMT
I have to say, I honestly can't see where the rewatchability is. Not all that much happens, the ending is really generic, the beginning is long. The only series I would call memorable is the battle sequence in the middle. It's a good film, not great, but decent enough, but in all seriousness it's pretty thin. So I'm asking where is the rewatch value? I’d say the rewatchability has to do with the fact that it is a film that is easy to follow, has a very memorable second act, and some charming characters. Yeah but I don't see how that lasts, and what I mean is compare it to films like Guardians or Winter Soldier, or completely different films like Alien or The Good The Bad and The Ugly, and every single scene is worth watching so you never want to stop watching it. They are the kind of films that you can pick up on things 4 or 5 or 10 viewings later in the way they're filmed, little details, editing techniques, all sorts of things.
But then WW is just a very simplistic stripped down, not a whole lot happening basic story. It's not bad at all, but there's really no meat on that bone. Diana doesn't have a Bucky dynamic, there's nothing to Ares or the other villains, and I just don't know what there is to get out of it on multiple viewings. It's pretty much just what you see is what you get. And that's fine. I want to be sure you know I feel it's a decent film, but it's not some multilayered work of art either.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 7, 2017 9:52:28 GMT
Nice try, but the two are nowhere near equivalent. Why not? They’re both Summer blockbusters part of established franchises that usually caters more towards males. People knew WW was always going to be about a woman, with Ghostbusters the fanbase wanted only the old guys to come back and didn't want new characters. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 7, 2017 9:55:00 GMT
Yes, I'm using that argument, because its the truth. Those other films were complete garbage. Like I said, Wonder Woman was halfway decent and a female led superhero film was in high-demand. It benefited from artificial boosters. Yes, they did have kid gloves on. Donner's Superman had nowhere near the problems Wonder Woman did. So the whole spinning the world around to save his girlfriend’s life bit isn’t something that is heavily criticized as a major problem with the film? That IS a problem, but Donner's Superman is forgivable for being one of the first major Superhero movies so if they hadn't ironed out all the kinks it's more forgivable because...hey, it was 40 years ago. If you want real issues, go watch Superman II. He's hardly a hero in that one. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 7, 2017 11:50:57 GMT
Why not? They’re both Summer blockbusters part of established franchises that usually caters more towards males. People knew WW was always going to be about a woman, with Ghostbusters the fanbase wanted only the old guys to come back and didn't want new characters. People knew the Ghostbusters reboot was always going to be always going to be about women too. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 7, 2017 11:53:08 GMT
People knew WW was always going to be about a woman, with Ghostbusters the fanbase wanted only the old guys to come back and didn't want new characters. People knew the Ghostbusters reboot was always going to be always going to be about women too. Yes, but the new Ghostbusters (which I actually didn't mind) was seen as co-opting of a beloved franchise that were about other characters. Not merely a new movie about someone who had ALWAYS been female.
Then there were Feig's comments beforehand where he dismissed people as sexist (admittedly, the fan reaction was pretty disgusting) and the involvement of Amy Pascal (who people see as a Hack).
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 7, 2017 12:17:40 GMT
People knew the Ghostbusters reboot was always going to be always going to be about women too. Yes, but the new Ghostbusters (which I actually didn't mind) was seen as co-opting of a beloved franchise that were about other characters. Not merely a new movie about someone who had ALWAYS been female.
Then there were Feig's comments beforehand where he dismissed people as sexist (admittedly, the fan reaction was pretty disgusting) and the involvement of Amy Pascal (who people see as a Hack).
As far as franchises that have always been about women are concerned, you have Ghost in the Shell, which flopped despite starring a female action hero. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2017 16:55:35 GMT
Yes, but the new Ghostbusters (which I actually didn't mind) was seen as co-opting of a beloved franchise that were about other characters. Not merely a new movie about someone who had ALWAYS been female.
Then there were Feig's comments beforehand where he dismissed people as sexist (admittedly, the fan reaction was pretty disgusting) and the involvement of Amy Pascal (who people see as a Hack).
As far as franchises that have always been about women are concerned, you have Ghost in the Shell, which flopped despite starring a female action hero. flopped because it white-washed the cast and butchered the story of a beloved anime film. Are you unable to discern multi factors? Dead God, you're as bad as mellomoviereview. You just look at the numbers, but you never actually try to figure out WHY something happened. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 7, 2017 17:23:19 GMT
As far as franchises that have always been about women are concerned, you have Ghost in the Shell, which flopped despite starring a female action hero. flopped because it white-washed the cast and butchered the story of a beloved anime film. Are you unable to discern multi factors? Dead God, you're as bad as mellomoviereview. You just look at the numbers, but you never actually try to figure out WHY something happened. To be fair: reasonable people have given up asking for the WHY when facing you. That's only fair, after all you are the creepy online bully playing with plastic ponies who likes to dress up in SailorMoon costumes. Not even God wants to know why...! And you believe Shakespeare never wrote an original thing, or that alien germ have been proven to exist, or that Superman is an Aye Rand character and like Moses. Who wants to know why?  |
|
Peter B. Parker
Sophomore
Watch the hands, not the mouth
@babygroot
Posts: 853
Likes: 411
 
|
Post by Peter B. Parker on Oct 7, 2017 17:53:05 GMT
Just under 3 weeks to go until Ragnarok comes out (for me at least), and then the day after that I get Inhumans. I'm starting to get even more excited for both.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Oct 7, 2017 18:07:39 GMT
Ghost in the Shell flopped because it white-washed the cast and butchered the story of a beloved anime film. Are you unable to discern multi factors? Dead God, you're as bad as mellomoviereview. You just look at the numbers, but you never actually try to figure out WHY something happened. To be fair: reasonable people have given up asking for the WHY when facing you. That's only fair, after all you are the creepy online bully playing with plastic ponies who likes to dress up in SailorMoon costumes. Not even God wants to know why...! And you believe Shakespeare never wrote an original thing, or that alien germ have been proven to exist, or that Superman is an Aye Rand character and like Moses. Who wants to know why?  |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 7, 2017 20:22:14 GMT
As far as franchises that have always been about women are concerned, you have Ghost in the Shell, which flopped despite starring a female action hero. flopped because it white-washed the cast and butchered the story of a beloved anime film. Are you unable to discern multi factors? Dead God, you're as bad as mellomoviereview. You just look at the numbers, but you never actually try to figure out WHY something happened. Since when did I question why GitS flopped? |
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 15, 2017 17:32:01 GMT
Bump
|
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Nov 15, 2017 17:36:11 GMT
Justice League will get a 72% Fresh. Thor: Ragnorok will surprisingly get a 68% on RT. LOL, fail! |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 15, 2017 17:36:59 GMT
Huh, looks like Marvel did it again. I'm remembering how GOTG and Ant-Man were being predicted as the flops that would bring down the MCU and now Ragnarok getting slaughtered by JL...but once again Marvel is standing tall.
Admittedly, JL hasn't even come out yet for total consumption. So perhaps I'm being hasty.
|
|
