Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon-Strike VI: Marvel Cinematic Universe

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by Asura View Post
    But why didn't they do that to the Death Star DT?!? WHY?!?!
    I have to admit, one of my biggest regrets yesterday (and it truly haunted me all day), is that I didn’t write “take it to the Star Trek thread, nerd”. That would have been so much better.

    Let’s not derail it here but maybe the answer is in something that has been bothering me about Star Wars lately - why are the ships and stuff so big? How large is the weapon on the Death Star? Does it really need to be housed in a moon-sized structure? Why are Star Destroyers so large? Anyway, where I was going with that is that perhaps size plays a role - the size of ship needed to do any permanent damage to the Death Star using this method and the proximity required could be prohibitive. Let’s not forget that it is established that the Death Star is very well protected against anything except small fighters. We can assume there are reasons for that...

    ...is what I would write if I was totally a NERD.

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by Dogg Thang View Post
      something that has been bothering me about Star Wars lately - why are the ships and stuff so big? How large is the weapon on the Death Star? Does it really need to be housed in a moon-sized structure? Why are Star Destroyers so large? Anyway, where I was going with that is that perhaps size plays a role - the size of ship needed to do any permanent damage to the Death Star using this method and the proximity required could be prohibitive. Let’s not forget that it is established that the Death Star is very well protected against anything except small fighters.
      Take it to the Star Trek thread, nerd

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Superman Falls View Post
        Yeah, the nanosuit was so thoughtlessly employed in the film, no established build up so it just felt stupid from the off. Doesn't help that the suits look worse as the films progress too.
        I can't say I liked the spiderman or Black Panther suits either. Both featured magic digital cowls that appeared and vanished at will. And spidermans digital extra arms that sprang from his back from nowhere.

        Comment


          #34
          Movie 04 - Thor
          We reach the point where Marvel themselves had their eyes squarely on Avengers and on building up the roster. Though we're now four films in this was only their second attempt at launching a hero and along with the following film it aimed to make relevant a character that was a bit of a laughing stock dustbin tier choice. Looking back it's interesting that Portman is largely used as the central character to anchor some name recognition and serious consideration to the film, her now being exorcised from the MCU after their falling out. Thor doesn't just have to make the character relevant, it also has to introduce all manner of non-Earth based aspects in a credible way. It's staggering just how damaging to the idea of the MCU this film could have been. Not enough credit goes to Branagh for this contribution to the canon even if ironically the device of making it Earth based in part with the fish out of water Thor makes it easier to acclimatise the audience. We also get the first glimpses of Hawkeye, how Shield operates with Coulson and the films direct consequences set up Avengers.



          Was Thor well implemented into the MCU or simply the beginning of a bumpy road for the character?

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke View Post
            I can't say I liked the spiderman or Black Panther suits either. Both featured magic digital cowls that appeared and vanished at will. And spidermans digital extra arms that sprang from his back from nowhere.
            Yeah, if it's magic, that's fine, but if it's tech-based, it has to be slightly grounded to retain that level of feasibility.

            There must be a technical term for this sort of thing?
            Getting hung up on a little thing in a fantastical story.
            The exhaust port on the Death Star.
            Hiding in a fridge in a nuclear explosion.
            People used as batteries for an AI overlord.
            One guy not getting drenched in ghostly marshmallow.

            That kind of thing.

            Comment


              #36
              I was thinking Hulk (2003) was the first time I could remember a Stan Lee cameo, although he's also in Daredevil from the same year.
              Is that his first Marvel cameo?

              Did you know he was originally in Blade (1998) as a cop discovering a body, but it got cut?
              Likewise, he got cut from Kick-Ass (2010)

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by QualityChimp View Post
                I was thinking Hulk (2003) was the first time I could remember a Stan Lee cameo, although he's also in Daredevil from the same year.
                Is that his first Marvel cameo?
                No idea what his first was but I reckon they started pretty early:

                Comment


                  #38
                  Ah yeah, of course.

                  I guess I was mentally thinking of when the new wave of movies started coming out.
                  That "Trial of The Incredible Hulk" (1989) actually was his first cameo, apparently and X-Men (2000) was his second. Spider-Man was third.

                  Stan Lee has made numerous appearances in Marvel films and shows, dating back to 1989, and all the way to this year's "Venom."


                  I remember being at university, browsing an early incarnation of the internet ("Hey, try this new search engine, Google!") at the original Spider-Man Hype website where they anxiously anticipated a Spider-Man film possibly being made using the scriptment that James Cameron wrote.
                  That idea was finally ditched as all the parallel universe ideas would cost too much in CGI!
                  Eventually Spider-Man came out and the floodgates opened and the site is now "Superhero Hype" to cover all the comicbook films coming out.

                  Personally, I'm really pleased Marvel has found its stride after nearly going bankrupt in 1993 to being an absolute juggernaut of cinema.


                  I imagine at Marvel HQ there's a dartboard with the face of the guy who sold all those rights off to The X-Men, Hulk, Spider-Man and son on...

                  Comment


                    #39
                    You'd think there'd be some way for Disney to buy the distribution rights back from Universal given they're effectively worthless to both companies if Marvel insists on not making any more films without them. Universal might be mindful of their potential worth but to them in reality they will never earn anything from them at all. Disney might think they're okay without making Hulk films too so aren't missing out but as it's an open ended deal and they don't know what the future may bring for the franchise it just seems like now is a good time to nab them back whilst they're presumably not that valuable to either party for piece of mind.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Part of the deals Marvel made was that if films aren't made with that character after a certain time, the rights revert to Marvel.

                      That explains the horrific Fantastic Four film made primarily to retain the rights and Daredevil returning to Marvel to maek the Netflix series after Fox dropped him after the poor response to Electra.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        Originally posted by Superman Falls View Post
                        You'd think there'd be some way for Disney to buy the distribution rights back from Universal given they're effectively worthless to both companies if Marvel insists on not making any more films without them. Universal might be mindful of their potential worth but to them in reality they will never earn anything from them at all. Disney might think they're okay without making Hulk films too so aren't missing out but as it's an open ended deal and they don't know what the future may bring for the franchise it just seems like now is a good time to nab them back whilst they're presumably not that valuable to either party for piece of mind.
                        I'm willing to bet these discussions have been had and are probably ongoing. As you say, Universal aren't getting anything from it as long as Marvel don't make a Hulk movie so they have to have a price that they'll sell the deal for. But as much as Marvel I'm sure would love clean character rights, they don't exactly need a Hulk movie. It will come down to what price they'd both agree to.

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Movie 05 - Captain America: The First Avenger
                          If there was an MCU entry likely to risk the ship more than Thor it was its immediate follow up, Captain America. The character was hard to even conceive of working at all before this entry landed and pitched Steve Rogers as the WWII era underdog who made a simple promise - to be a good man. The film also shoulders world building burdens that the MCU would depend on later beyond explaining how Cap ends up in the next film. We see the full background of the all important Tesseract, Red Skulls path to Infinity War, Zola and Hydra's history, the origins of the Winter Soldier and the beginning of the timeline for Peggy Carter. Though the sequel to this film is considered the better film, First Avenger bears a lot of weight despite its breezy tone. It's a unique entry as well, there are only two period set MCU movies and arguably this one - from Joe Johnson - is the only one to deliver on the era's tone.



                          That did Captain America: First Avenger get right and wrong in its establishing of MCU canon?

                          Comment


                            #43
                            Ugh, with my house move I missed the discussion about Thor.

                            I just wanted to say that Thor, for me, was the big watershed moment for the MCU, for a couple of reasons.

                            Firstly, it started to border on the "space opera" part of the Marvel universe, which for me was always the weakest part of the Marvel franchise (I always disliked the X-Men TV episodes where space stuff was involved; it was always just a bit naff).

                            Secondly, though, it's because I really felt Thor would never work in film. The premise of it is so "comic book" in nature, and the way it ties in Norse mythology with something so, well, exuberant in nature...

                            Seeing Thor, and really enjoying it, made me realise that Marvel really had hit onto a formula. If they could make Thor that good, like even if they'd made it just reasonable that would've been an achievement, they were unstoppable. They could probably adapt practically any of their core properties and make it work.

                            Comment


                              #44
                              I watched Thor for the first time last year.
                              I'd tried to watch it, but the speech was really quiet and the lightning really loud, so it was unwatchable if I wanted to hear the plot and not wake the kids.

                              It was weird seeing it out of sequence, it explained some bits I was confused about and the cliffhanger credit Easter eggs fell flat on already resolved stories!

                              It was alright.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Originally posted by QualityChimp View Post
                                It was alright.
                                That's the thing, though. Track down the screen tests from when they originally had Tom Hiddlestone as Thor. It looks awful. That's kinda what I was expecting, so it was a very pleasant surprise. I mean, a Thor movie? Directed by Kenneth Brannagh? Good? Next you'll be telling me the US will elect-oh.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X