I think what's happening here with the MCU is the cinematic equivalent of the boiling frog. The films and shows have been coming at us so fast with rapidly diminishing quality we've all forgotten how good the MCU was back in phase 2.
-
-
Tom Holland is rumoured to have now signed on for Spider-Man: Homecoming 4 and the film will supposedly release before The Avengers: Secret Wars.
Holland will also be a primary lead in The Avengers: The Kang DynastyComment
-
Will his Peter Parker/Spidey finally face-off against Tom Hardy's Eddie Brock/Venom as was hinted at in the mid-credits of No Way Home?Originally posted by Neon Ignition View PostComment
-
That seems to be one of the most unknown elements so far. The symbiote element being left behind could be used to set up a new Eddie Brock as there are rumours that Hardy plans to bow out with Venom 3 but at the same time everything seems to perfectly tee'd up to have the likes of his Venom etc appear in the upcoming Avenger films that it would be a waste and there's no way Marvel put that it without a plan. Given the whole multiverse plot of Phase 4-6 that's the one thing that's really missing in their approach - MCU characters keep touching on the multiverse but there's a vacuum of characters to draw on to showcase it in a large scale culmination as everyone still comes from the default one. That's unless they rely on using Venom/Amazing Spider-Man/Spider-Man/X-Men/Deadpool characters at last. No Way Home would suggest they should.Comment
-
Watched Thor: Love & Thunder again this week, and my opinion of it didn't improve.
The movie has what I'm certain are actual errors in it. There's a scene in the shadow monster/New Asgard sequence where this a weird jump cut between two clips where there's just no continuity. It goes from Thor watching something going on in the distance to being in the square, surrounded by people. Plus there are other things, like the colour of some pieces of Thor's armour changes from shot to shot. That's putting aside that the costumes just generally seem to have a really weird sheen to them (I think they were going for campy so it was intentional, but weird).
It's fascinating how it really feels like a "Nailed It" meme of Thor: Ragnarok. I'm one of the people who thinks Ragnarok is among the best MCU movies (possibly the best); great action romp, great cast, genuinely hilarious in parts. Love & Thunder clearly has a lot of the same ingredients but it shows how even the same chef on day-2 can try and make the same cake and just totally undercook it.
The whole thing with Jane Foster dying of cancer - that's a very serious story, and it's paired up with a Thor who is acting really weird, like he's constantly drunk throughout the movie and is totally missing the plot. Thor was always a meathead in the movies but there's a line of ridiculousness where it rips me out of the film; I don't know where the line is, exactly, but Thor has crossed it.
This is all paired up with something; I dislike Bale's interpretation of the villain. But similarly, I also think it's a shame that villain concept is now used up, because I absolutely love the idea - that in a world where literal gods exist, a holy man turns apostate and goes out to kill all the gods after learning that they're a bunch of uncaring arseholes. That's a really compelling villain arc, which could've almost started off as it's own hero movie, and had him transition into a villain later.
It's not entirely without worth. The scene with the kids getting powered up like Thor was great fun, and when it comes down to it, I know that as a kid I would've absolutely loved that idea and these movies are family movies.
But certainly the rewatch doesn't help the film. On my MCU tier list it's very much rock-bottom, a position it shares with Thor 2.Comment
-
The reason is Taika Waititi.
He had some creative input on Ragnarok but he didn't write any of it. But for some reason Disney thought it'd be a good idea to give him complete freedom on Love and Thunder and he went away and wrote it. And no one stepped in and said no to him.
Love and Thunder is like a 12 year old wrote it based on only what he'd over heard about Thor in the playground.Comment
-
This feels right. And it's such a shame because I'm with Asura on Ragnarok. Maybe it's as you say - on one, he was a collaborator and the other he was everything.Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke View PostComment
-
I hate, hate to make a defence given how clearly polarised the film made Ragnarok fans but I'm going to say that I can't imagine that's the case. More freedom, likely, but I can't imagine at all that the MCU machine permitted him wide reaching control of the film. I can imagine that Love and Thunder on paper was Waititi being rehired under the instruction of what story to tell, how it should go, the beats etc, the tone he needed to aim for etc and I can imagine that the aim was broadly just 'Make another Ragnarok but with even more humour - people loved that!'
The trouble begins with Love and Thunder being conceptually bad. One of the reasons I've struggled with Ragnarok is that I feel it hugely undersells its event as well. It took Endgame to contextualise Ragnarok better for me to run with it more but broadly it's easier to digest too as Ragnarok itself is just a threat for the film, it's something that doesn't take up much time.
Gorr and Jane are dark subject matters that run through the film from beginning to end. If Marvel wanted another Ragnarok Waititi crazy fun filled adventure they lined up the worst possible storyline for that and I can't imagine that was initially on Waititi given how forward planned and highly curated plans for the MCU are. Don't get me wrong, I imagine there's a ton of other factors like how they can only edit the filmed footage into what they can etc.
Thor meeting Zeus, travelling realms in a goat boat etc, all deliverable. Thor 5 should have been a Waititi-less tonal come down focused on Jane and the already introduced murdered Gods, something to bring it closer to Thor 1 for closure.Comment
-
-
I've watched Thor 2 a few times and it's not as bad as it's reputation suggests. It's not great, but it's a decent adventure with some good performances and fights and stuff. Loki is especially great. The only thing that makes it slightly worse than Thor 1 is Anthony Hopkins did a little bit less showing off in 2 than he was allowed to do in 1. Otherwise it's the same same film as 2. And 2 pisses all over Thor 4.Comment
-
"Venom 3," "Shang-Chi 2" Filming Talk - Dark Horizons
Early steps toward setting up filming plans for Shang-Chi 2 and Eternals 2 are startingComment
-
"Ant-Man 4" Will Have To 'Go Smaller' - Dark Horizons
Early work on Ant-Man 4 has begun and director Peyton Reed seems likely to return againComment
-
Hugh Jackman Has 'Dual Role' In "Deadpool 3" - Dark Horizons
Jackman says he will have a dual role in Deadpool 3 which is taken as possibly multiple multiverse Wolverine's but I'd guess is more likely to be him playing himself as wellComment
-
Sydney Sweeney Is Sony's Spider-Woman? - Dark Horizons
An old rumour resurfaces most likely related to Madame WebbComment
-
Nic Cage On Superman, Marvel Movies & More - Dark Horizons
Asked about superhero films in general Nicholas Cage is asked if he would do an MCU film to which he gives the T-Short worthy response - "I don't need to be in the MCU, I'm Nic Cage"Comment
Comment