Originally Posted by FAX:
I agree. Both of them were. The last one with Norton had potential, but the story structure was fragmented and the action sequences played on the screen like a video game. For the most part, critics liked it ... who knows why?
The "superhero fights villain with exact same powers" apex that Marvel has relied upon so often was sad, IMO. Lots of smashing. Acting out. Smashing in. If that's what you like, ok. And damn ... Tim Blake Nelson was miscast (or decided to overact in true Nicolas Cage style ... just 'cause he could). Tyler was ok, I suppose. But Tim Roth was wasted in that role (either give him something solid to work with or find somebody else).
Personally, I think it's a good thing that movies are subjectively experienced. That's why I'm cool with saying that movie was a disappointment for me. Mainly because it had all the potential in the world to be much, much better. That was a movie that reeked of predetermined studio formula.
FAX
I like Ruffalo much better playing the part. It’s too bad we probably won’t get a new stand alone Hulk film with him as the lead. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mulliganman:
I like Ruffalo much better playing the part. It’s too bad we probably won’t get a new stand alone Hulk film with him as the lead.
I really wish we could have kept Norton but he fucked that deal up himself.
Ruffalo has done a better job than I thought he would... [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't such a blatant Girl Power "Get more females to watch comic book movies" schtick. They're making Ms. Marvel into something she never was, and it feels like they're doing it just for SJW reasons.
They did this 10 years ago in the comix.
She is THE SJW/Feminist Marvel character. It's all she's about in the comix for a decade now.
It would be like hiring David Duke to voice Kermit the Frog and then acting all shocked when he suddenly talks about wanting to lynch all the blue Muppets... [Reply]
I thought it was just ok...nothing I left the theater overly excited about. The character just doesnt seem all that exciting to me. Wonder Woman was significantly better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy:
I thought it was just ok...nothing I left the theater overly excited about. The character just doesnt seem all that exciting to me. Wonder Woman was significantly better.
I liked them both for sure. I thought Larsen was pretty good but I'd agree that Gadot was a little better.
Seemed like they could have done a little bit more on her time on the other planet. I dunno. [Reply]
Originally Posted by vailpass:
Oh hell people are enjoying things! Not my gig either but nothing wrong with it. Would be more appealing if she showed her super hero tits.
Maybe it was because she actually laughed and was humorous more than I expected and because she could shoot fireballs out her hands, but I thought she was pretty attractive.
Originally Posted by O.city:
Maybe it was because she actually laughed and was humorous more than I expected and because she could shoot fireballs out her hands, but I thought she was pretty attractive.
I'm a fan of hers, have been for a while.
I liked her more as the movie went on. That obviously has to do with her being very robotic and controlled when she was Kree and then her turning more human towards the end of the movie.
She wasn't as bad as I thought she would be. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
I liked her more as the movie went on. That obviously has to do with her being very robotic and controlled when she was Kree and then her turning more human towards the end of the movie.
She wasn't as bad as I thought she would be.
I thought so too.
I was surprised as to how much I actually did enjoy the movie considering what i'd heard going in.
Guess that just goes to show.....I dunno whatever that goes to show. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Maybe it was because she actually laughed and was humorous more than I expected and because she could shoot fireballs out her hands, but I thought she was pretty attractive.
