feralorca82 said:Remember that movie *The Incredible Hulk Returns* where Thor showed up? Maybe he didn't fit in there either? Sorry, but he fit perfectly. Think this one will fit? I have my doubts.
And just because you personally don't like the "idea," that's just a matter of taste. Nothing more. 🙂
It's an aesthetic question, really. In a superhero flick like *Batman & Robin*, anything goes! But if the movie is leaning more toward a gritty, sci-fi techno thriller vibe, then no, it doesn't work. Exactly—I'm personally not a fan of the idea of having the God of Thunder and Iron Man sharing the same screen in one movie. I don't doubt most people would be totally fine with it...
feralorca82 said:Doesn't matter when we're talking fiction. If it worked in the comics, it'll work on screen (assuming they don't butcher Thor). Besides, I don't see why the God of Thunder and his hammer couldn't fit right into the Avengers. Kenneth Branagh is directing, so I doubt it'll be total garbage.
If Storm from the X-Men can manipulate the weather and summon storms, then I don't see why Thor can't swallow lightning and spit it back out. At the end of the day, what Storm does and what Thor does is basically the same thing—it's all just power from Mjolnir. The only catch is that Mjolnir only grants that strength to one specific worthy person (in this case, Dr. Donald Blake).
And regarding pure magic, separate from all this, Doctor Strange fits perfectly fine into the Marvel Universe.😉
Storm is a mutant. Banner turns into the Hulk because of gamma radiation. Captain America is a lab experiment. Iron Man has a high-tech robotic suit powered by a reactor. And Thor? He's a god of thunder. So, who exactly is the outsider in this group? 😁
Listen, sure, it's obvious they all exist in the same comic book universe, but as a movie? Iron Man felt like a mashup of Transformers and James Bond. That's where I struggle—gods and magic just don't quite mesh with that vibe.
Steven Wilson83 said:First, I should mention that I have been a massive Iron Man enthusiast since I was quite young. Generally speaking, I am a fan of the entire Marvel cinematic lineup. I have watched everything except for the Blade trilogy and Man-Thing. My collection at home is quite extensive on DVD; my absolute favorites remain Iron Man and X-Men.
I have revisited the first Iron Man film numerous times, and in my estimation, it stands as one of the superior entries in the franchise. While I haven't sat down to watch Iron Man 2 just yet, I have spent a considerable amount of time studying the trailers, looking at stills—I currently have Whiplash set as my desktop wallpaper 😁—and reading every bit of news available. From what I can gather, the film looks exceptional, primarily due to the caliber of the cast (though I suspect you all know the lineup by heart already, haha). To put it simply, even without having seen it, I am convinced the film is excellent. __________________________________________________ ________________ AVENGERS
I thought it might be useful to consolidate everything we have learned thus far. Specifically: - Iron Man 1 - We see Captain America's shield resting on a table in Tony's workshop. You can view the clip here to verify: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIVeuYqjMlk
- Iron Man 1 - At the very end, following the credits, Nick Fury visits Tony at his residence and invites him to join the "Avengers."
- The Incredible Hulk - In a deleted opening scene where Bruce heads to the Arctic to hunt, we see Captain America's body and his shield encased within the shattering ice. Here is the footage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBKlH...eature=related
- The Incredible Hulk - During the film, General Ross mentions to Emil Blonsky that there was a super-soldier program during World War II. That is presumably how Captain America came to be.
- The Incredible Hulk - At the conclusion of the film, Tony informs General Ross that the "team" is coming together.
- Iron Man 2 - Tony uses Captain America's shield as a makeshift support for something he is working on.
- Iron Man 2 - At the end of the movie, Agent Coulson reports to Nick Fury that they have located Thor's hammer, Mjolnir.
1. How do you imagine they will bridge the gap between high-tech worlds like Iron Man's, the raw power of the Hulk, the mythology of Thor, and the rest? 2. Is it possible we might see appearances from Spider-Man or perhaps characters from the X-Men? 3. Furthermore, how is it that Captain America's shield ended up with Tony? Shouldn't the Captain still have it in his possession?
If I have misremembered any details or if anyone has additional insights to offer, please feel free to share them. 🙂
Look, Iron Man is pure high-tech science, whereas Thor is squarely in the realm of magic and ancient gods. I mean, sure, it works in a comic book—paper can handle just about anything you throw at it—but realistically? It’s a total mismatch. It’s going to be a complete mess.
Check out this sequence where Scarlett takes down ten guards in a row. It’s basically the same pattern repeated ten times—one guard lunges, Scarlett executes this incredibly smooth move involving a wide leg sweep, handles him with total grace, and then pops back up into a low crouch. And every single one of those ten times, she snaps her head up and breaks the "fourth wall"—just staring straight into the lens with that high-fashion, model-esque intensity. The only thing missing is her letting out a little "grrr- meow."
Meanwhile, you’ve got the teenagers in the audience just standing there with their hands shoved deep in their pockets.
There’s a little extra scene tucked away at the very end of the credits. Honestly, in my opinion, it’s hardly worth sitting through—it lasts maybe sixty seconds, but you have to endure the entire credit roll first, which drags on for at least five songs from the soundtrack. It feels incredibly long.
To save everyone the trouble of hunting for it, here’s the breakdown:
SPOILER
We see the desert outside of New York City. A car is driving through the wasteland, then it pulls over. A man in a suit steps out. This guy works for S L Jackson—he pops up for about three minutes during the actual movie—and he is completely irrelevant to the main plot. During the film, he tells Stark that he’s been reassigned to New York City.
The guy climbs up onto a small ridge, maybe 50 feet high. He looks down, and about 500 feet away in a little valley, there’s this circular crater, roughly 150 feet across. There are about ten workers standing around the edge of the crater.
The guy pulls out his phone and makes a call. He says: "Sir... we found him!"
The camera starts zooming out from him toward the crater, and for a split second, you catch a glimpse of some solid, probably metallic object sitting in the middle of that hole. I couldn't quite tell what it was since they didn't show it clearly, but it looked a bit like Thor's hammer to me. Or perhaps just some piece of machinery.
Iron Man 2 is actually pretty solid. 👍 I'd give it a 3.5 out of 5.
Maybe the first one just hit harder because the whole premise was so straightforward—I mean, it knew what it was doing. In the sequel, there’s this feeling that they crammed in way too many characters from other Marvel comics just to pad the runtime—not really to move the plot along, but more like they were just checking boxes to set up future franchises.
People who have already caught Robin Hood are tearing it apart. Basically, the consensus seems to be that the story and the whole vibe don't actually feel like Robin Hood at all—it feels more like some weird mashup of Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven, just without the high-octane action. Everyone’s saying Crowe is basically playing Maximus again, and that the whole thing is just a slog—like Scott was just filming through some haze or something.
If you want the full breakdown, there are plenty of spoiler-heavy reviews over on AICN.
As far back as I can remember, my idea of Robin Hood was straight out of those old children's books—just R Hood and his band of merry men living it up in the woods, drinking stolen wine, singing their heads off, and basically turning everything into one big, non-stop party. And honestly, Robin Hood himself? He was easily the biggest joker of the whole bunch.
"edge of darkness" is actually pretty solid. It’s got this calm, measured way of telling the story—not just mindless action for the sake of it—and the lead isn't some invincible superhero type, which feels right for Mel Gibson. Honestly, it feels like something that would have been made back in the 70s.
But man, that British guy was the best part of the whole thing... I can't for the life of me remember his name.
Picture this: a high-tension scene playing out in a dead-silent movie theater. Suddenly, some guy's phone starts blaring—it’s obnoxious. And everyone just assumes he’s the one in charge now, like he’s supposed to "suggest" how the plot should unfold. All at once, the entire audience starts shouting their own demands at him. "Do this!" "No, do that!" He picks one direction, sure, but the rest of the crowd? They aren't buying it. They’re pissed. People start hurling insults his way—total vitriol. Then, as soon as the credits roll and he steps out into the lobby, a mob of disgruntled viewers is just waiting for him to catch them off guard... and things get physical. 😂
We could honestly just turn all these movie theaters into live stages—it would be much better if the audience could actually yell at the actors in real-time, kind of like that vibe you get in a production of Hamlet.
Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans is easily one of the top five films I’ve seen over the last year or two—hands down. It’s honestly a crying shame that nobody picked this up for a proper theatrical release or even put it out on home video.
Nicolas Cage is a total genius when he gets handed roles that actually fit his vibe—this one being a perfect example.
Just finished watching the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. Honestly, the concept alone—and Robert Englund’s performance—is pure genius. It’s easily one of the standout teen horror flicks from the 80s. But looking back at it today... I don't know, it feels a bit thin. Probably because if they were making a movie like this nowadays, it would need to be at least thirty minutes longer just to feel fully fleshed out.
It’s honestly pretty wild watching a movie that feels completely modern—like, you could swear it was shot just last year—yet there isn't a single CD player, smartphone, computer, or even an internet connection to be found in the entire world of the film. It creates this strange, disconnected vibe—almost like stepping into a parallel version of America where the tech just... never happened.
Remakes actually make sense from a purely commercial standpoint—I mean, let's be real—and the core idea here is strong enough that the movie is definitely going to be worth watching.
In the Fall of Italy, there’s this one scene where Italy finally surrenders, and the locals just start tossing Italians off the waterfront into the ocean—killing them with oars while singing: "Kuli-kuli, bane-bane, we're throwing all the Italians into the sea, they'll be swimming all the way to Rome—to hell with them!"
Then you've got this one farmer smashing an Italian's head against a flour-covered breadboard, so clouds of white powder just go puff-puff-puff into the air.
And then there's the Occupation segment—26 images showing a massacre on a bus. I mean, seriously. You've got nails driven into heads, decapitations, breasts being sliced, eyes being gouged out. It's pure trash horror. 😁
Personally, my favorite scene is when a 19-year-old Ena Begović is wading through the ocean in this thin nightgown—once she steps out of the water, there’s absolutely nothing left to the imagination. I’m pretty sure that was in "Fall of Italy." The movie featured these Royalist guys—basically pirates. They were all bearded and looked like actual buccaneers, and their flag was basically just the Jolly Roger. Then the main character, this partisan commander (who is busy hooking up with Ena), catches them, shaves them bald, and lets them go. Naturally, they end up murdering someone right after.
Die Hard is the absolute best. Coming in just a step below are Die Hard with a Vengeance and Die Hard 2—they're both solid, but I'd say the third one edges out the second by a hair. Now, Die Hard 4.0 is alright, but it feels a bit too much like it's trying too hard—it lacks that specific charm found in the first three—and honestly, that plane scene is way too over the top for a Die Hard film.
The Two Towers is easily the best one. It wanders away from the book just enough to build this incredible tension—you're actually left wondering what’s going to happen next.
The first movie holds its own against the second, mostly because it does such a stellar job capturing the vibe and setting the stage from the first book. Plus, it’s the original.
The third one? Total disaster. It’s the only Lord of the Rings film where I actually started feeling physical pain in my seat halfway through—right around the time we dealt with Sheloba—and there was still over half an hour left to go. It felt incredibly rushed, honestly. They really should have split that third film into two separate movies.