Pretty pointless. There’s zero world-building here. It feels like whoever wrote this has never actually played the game; I have no idea what this world is supposed to be or who these characters are. The movie just assumes you're already up to speed, dropping you into a mediocre plot that goes nowhere. It’s just one task after another—steal this, then do that to get this, then do that to get that—just to pad out the runtime. It’s nowhere near the level of the Guardians. No wonder it flopped. Honestly, just skip it.
I only caught the first one back in the eighties, and my memory of it is pretty hazy, but this one was alright. It’s an easy watch for a couple of hours.
bluebison8 said:Spider-Woman is actually a distinct character with her own unique powers—she’s pretty cool. Then there's Ironheart. She's a young woman who scavenged some older Iron Man tech to build her own suit before Tony Stark eventually noticed her and granted her access to his advanced technology. So, by that logic, that character isn't original at all.
Before becoming a Marvel comic character, Ironheart was essentially the Japanese adult movie version of Iron Man.
wiredcyclist18 said:Like someone already pointed out, you're drinking way too much of that incel YouTuber Kool-Aid. Just admit you're bothered by seeing women in positions of power. Sorry, but neither I nor probably 70% of Marvel fans WANT to sit through twenty movies featuring the exact same hero. They retired Iron Man, now Spider-Man's taking over. They retired Captain America, now we've got Falcon and Winter Soldier. It's time to retire Thor too, and he'll be succeeded by THE MIGHTY THOR—and strangely enough, I don't see any "-woman" attached to that name...
Oh, and by the way, you guys clearly haven't heard that Valkyrie has been confirmed as bisexual and they're actually going to touch on that in the movie... I honestly can't wait to watch your little incel meltdowns hit the internet this July.☕☕☕
The Mighty Thor—so she stole the name too, then. 😛
We already know about Valkyrie. The actress has mentioned it before.
It looks nice enough, but that’s about it. The character development is a total disaster. It feels completely scattered, and then Poirot just dictates how everything went down at the end. A mess. 🤦
Why has everything been running so sluggishly the last few days? It’s been spotty before, but this is a new low. Either this forum gets back to working properly, or we might as well just shut it down.
I don't really get the hate for this movie. It was actually pretty solid. I thought the way they wove in those historical events was quite clever. Honestly, it's a much better experience than the sequel.
Mark Gray3 said:Costs have absolutely skyrocketed since then. Nowadays, a $100 million production is considered mid-range by Hollywood standards. But all those technical elements handled by the crew—those haven't actually increased that much. Maybe just adjusted for inflation. It's the licensing rights and the massive salaries for the big names that have truly exploded.
When you factor in inflation, $100 million today is basically the same as $70 million back in 2004. So, if they were making The Village today, it would probably sit right around that $100 million mark.
