Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
CAPTAIN MARVEL (Anna Boden & Ryan Fleck, 2019)
(02-26-2019, 06:54 PM)mike j Wrote: Read the comments. It's absolutely the work of sexist trolls. And it's a Marvel movie. It's going to be huge.

Man, I cannot get a pop culture read on this movie.  It wouldn't surprise me if it ended up in anemic Ant-Man and the Wasp territory, and it equally wouldn't surprise me if it didn't steamroll to one billion WW before Infinity War even releases.  I guess taking the mid-point, I should expect Thor: Ragnarok numbers?  

I also think that this film might be more vulnerable to piracy than any other in recent memory.  If a decent torrent hits early there may be a shit-ton of people who would have gone to see it simply because it won't be on blu-ray prior to Infinity War deciding to just watch it at home.
Reply
600 million worldwide is anemic? How?
Reply
(02-26-2019, 07:00 PM)mike j Wrote: 600 million worldwide is anemic? How?

By the standards of the MCU AMatW was one of the bottom grossing films.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hi...hero_films

If you adjust for inflation, I think AMatW is the second or third lowest grossing MCU entry.  Considering Ms. Marvel is apparently going to be a major phase four hero and the film is a direct tie-in to Infinity War, I have to think that Disney would consider 600 million WW profoundly "anemic."
Reply
Okay.
Reply
(02-26-2019, 06:51 PM)simbob Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 10:13 AM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: Audience scores on RT only at “will see it” but it’s at 31%, seems the sexist trolls are working hard to bring down the percentage.

It's an audience anticipation score. Are audiences really anticipating this movie? Doesn't seem like it having a low score is the work of male meanies, more the work of whoever is making these Captain Marvel trailers.

No, it really is male meanies in this case. Yes the trailers aren't great and if the films doesn't do so hot I can't blame internet trolls. But they did start fucking with the RT rating after she said she didn't care what white men thought of this movie because it wasn't for them. It was part of a larger conversation about minority critics.
“I call upon you to stop this musical now,” she said to the board. “You tear a community apart if you don’t.” -Prachi Ruina                                                            
Reply
No bias in Overlord's post whatsoever.
Originally Posted by ImmortanNick 

Saw Batman v Superman.
Now I know what it's like to see Nickelback in concert.

That's my review.
Reply
(02-26-2019, 07:25 PM)headless fett Wrote: No bias in Overlord's post whatsoever.

*sigh*

Okay, what the fuck are you talking about?

(02-26-2019, 07:24 PM)waaaaaaaalt Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 06:51 PM)simbob Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 10:13 AM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: Audience scores on RT only at “will see it” but it’s at 31%, seems the sexist trolls are working hard to bring down the percentage.

It's an audience anticipation score. Are audiences really anticipating this movie? Doesn't seem like it having a low score is the work of male meanies, more the work of whoever is making these Captain Marvel trailers.

No, it really is male meanies in this case. Yes the trailers aren't great and if the films doesn't do so hot I can't blame internet trolls. But they did start fucking with the RT rating after she said she didn't care what white men thought of this movie because it wasn't for them. It was part of a larger conversation about minority critics.

Where are you guys seeing this?

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/captain_marvel

I don't see any scores, at all.
Reply
(02-26-2019, 07:31 PM)Overlord Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 07:25 PM)headless fett Wrote: No bias in Overlord's post whatsoever.

*sigh*

Okay, what the fuck are you talking about?

(02-26-2019, 07:24 PM)waaaaaaaalt Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 06:51 PM)simbob Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 10:13 AM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: Audience scores on RT only at “will see it” but it’s at 31%, seems the sexist trolls are working hard to bring down the percentage.

It's an audience anticipation score. Are audiences really anticipating this movie? Doesn't seem like it having a low score is the work of male meanies, more the work of whoever is making these Captain Marvel trailers.

No, it really is male meanies in this case. Yes the trailers aren't great and if the films doesn't do so hot I can't blame internet trolls. But they did start fucking with the RT rating after she said she didn't care what white men thought of this movie because it wasn't for them. It was part of a larger conversation about minority critics.

Where are you guys seeing this?

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/captain_marvel

I don't see any scores, at all.

They took it down.
“I call upon you to stop this musical now,” she said to the board. “You tear a community apart if you don’t.” -Prachi Ruina                                                            
Reply
Fett talking about bias? If that ain't the pot and the fucking kettle. Jesus Christ..
Reply
(02-26-2019, 06:54 PM)mike j Wrote: Read the comments. It's absolutely the work of sexist trolls. And it's a Marvel movie. It's going to be huge.

It will do well, it is a Marvel movie after all, I doubt it will be huge...at least as far as huge movies go. It's probably doing something between Ant-Man and Doctor Strange, that range all but three first go MCU movies fall into. This movie isn't going to be the surprise hit Black Panther was, were aren't going to be seeing news stories about theatres being bought out so girls can see the first MCU lead female film; and it ain't exactly like there's been a drought of female driven action films this decade. The trailers are also not making this look anywhere near as good as Iron Man or Guardian of the Galaxy. This doesn't look particularly fun like most Marvel movies trailers, this isn't some big team-up movie like Avengers, there's nothing especially visually interesting about it like people talked about with Dr. Strange. Outside of a couple nice tv spots (which I'm not seeing on tv) this is a fairly bland looking movie selling itself on how important it is.

Can you even read the comments, I thought they removed all of them? I really don't see the big deal either way. People that don't want to see it went on there and gave it a bad anticipation score, (however that different score worked) I'm not really seeing how it's all that different from people doing the opposite outside of having some kind of moral stance on the why such and such person give it whatever rating. It's not even a review, it's a rating of anticipation that's only there before release. And even if it was a user review, who cares? Have you read some of the dumb user reviews movies get, be they positive or negative?
Reply
(02-26-2019, 04:38 PM)Overlord Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 02:04 PM)Judas Booth Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 12:51 PM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: They probably take satire like this as something sincere.





First time seeing this.  Thank you, I laughed pretty hard over this video.

This is goddamned hysterical.  Faux satire done perfectly.

(02-26-2019, 04:53 PM)Nooj Wrote: the other guy kinda looks like jordan schlansky

Gents, google “Cholmondley-Warner”.

Thank me later.

(02-26-2019, 04:38 PM)Overlord Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 02:04 PM)Judas Booth Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 12:51 PM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: They probably take satire like this as something sincere.





First time seeing this.  Thank you, I laughed pretty hard over this video.

This is goddamned hysterical.  Faux satire done perfectly.

(02-26-2019, 04:53 PM)Nooj Wrote: the other guy kinda looks like jordan schlansky

Gents, google “cholmondley-Warner” and “Alan partridge”.

Thank me later.
Reply
(02-26-2019, 07:24 PM)waaaaaaaalt Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 06:51 PM)simbob Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 10:13 AM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: Audience scores on RT only at “will see it” but it’s at 31%, seems the sexist trolls are working hard to bring down the percentage.

It's an audience anticipation score. Are audiences really anticipating this movie? Doesn't seem like it having a low score is the work of male meanies, more the work of whoever is making these Captain Marvel trailers.

No, it really is male meanies in this case. Yes the trailers aren't great and if the films doesn't do so hot I can't blame internet trolls. But they did start fucking with the RT rating after she said she didn't care what white men thought of this movie because it wasn't for them. It was part of a larger conversation about minority critics.

If the star (or whoever) of some movie said something that made you not anticipate seeing a movie, and you went on a site with a anticipation rating to rate it "not anticipating", that isn't really trolling. Trolling would more be like the spin this nonissue is getting from websites reporting about it, as the intention there only seems to be to spark outrage over nothing. Here's the story:

Person Said Thing, Some People Now Don't Want To See Person's Movie Because Of Thing Said...Also Some People Say They Want To See Movie Now Because Of People Saying They Don't Want To See It.

The only real story here is that a popular movie website that has shaped what movies people see to an alarming degree just killed a prerelease audience rating system because it made it appear like a big budget Disney movie wasn't anticipated.
Reply
(02-26-2019, 07:51 PM)fraid uh noman Wrote: Fett talking about bias? If that ain't the pot and the fucking kettle. Jesus Christ..

Actually bias means something else in this context, Fraid.  But do go on...
Originally Posted by ImmortanNick 

Saw Batman v Superman.
Now I know what it's like to see Nickelback in concert.

That's my review.
Reply
(02-26-2019, 11:33 AM)MichaelM Wrote: A very good and longtime (almost 40 years!) friend of mine articulated a sense of loss or having something taken when TFA came out. "Star Wars is for boys," he said, visibly upset about Rey being the protagonist.

My friend's a good guy and he's not a knee jerk conservative. But I think his reaction was indicative; he's unhappy with a female lead because it forces him to enjoy something beloved from a new perspective. It challenges him to re-evaluate a favorite story from someone else's perspective, one that might not paint him (or his group) in the best light.

And that's extremely threatening for a lot of folks. (I'm not arguing for them or their POV; I can understand it without agreeing with it or supporting it.)

SHE HAS A VAGINA

SHE’S BARELY EVEN HUMAN

HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO RELATE ANYMORE

Newsflash, dipshit:

[Image: lyMIkIZ.jpg]
Reply
I am significantly more concerned over the power Disney seemingly continues to exert over the supposedly "independent" movie review industry than I am about people being upset that trolls are upset over Larson's thoughtless remarks.
Reply
(02-27-2019, 05:11 PM)Overlord Wrote: I am significantly more concerned over the power Disney seemingly continues to exert over the supposedly "independent" movie review industry than I am about people being upset that trolls are upset over Larson's thoughtless remarks.

1) Her remarks seemed pretty well thought out to me. 
2) I agree with you about too much corporate influence on reviews.
Superlaser speaks for me from now on.

-Bart
Reply
(02-27-2019, 07:48 PM)superlaser Wrote:
(02-27-2019, 05:11 PM)Overlord Wrote: I am significantly more concerned over the power Disney seemingly continues to exert over the supposedly "independent" movie review industry than I am about people being upset that trolls are upset over Larson's thoughtless remarks.

1) Her remarks seemed pretty well thought out to me. 
2) I agree with you about too much corporate influence on reviews.

Her exact quote that caused the kerfuffle:  


Quote:I do not need a 40-year-old white dude to tell me what didn’t work for him about A Wrinkle in Time. It wasn’t made for him.

If you read it in context of the entire interview (Vanity Fair), it's obvious that she is concerned about diversity in a historically non-diverse field.  Which is fine.  But this particular quote is a thoughtless and counter-productive way to phrase what is an otherwise valid concern and viewpoint.

The easiest way to quickly realize exactly what's wrong with the phrasing of this quote is to simply interpolate a different film, ethnicity, and gender into it.  At that point it immediately becomes clear that her intended message got away from her.

But, it was an off the cuff interview and no one should reasonably think ill of her or hold it against her.  Her heart was in the right place, the verbiage just got mangled.  It happens to the best of us from time to time.  But, predictably in today's hot-button era, people got pissed and blew it out of proportion and ran with it.
Reply
THAT'S the quote? I thought she said something totally different (and still didn't care). The internet needs to just shut the fuck up.

At most I'd have politely and lightly disagreed with her about her A Wrinkle in Time quote simply because I believe every film is made for every person should they just open their minds and imaginations up to what it's offering. I'm a 37 year old white dude and I enjoyed it. But that's not trying to tell anyone how something should have been so maybe it's not relevant..
Reply
I... don’t see the problem? She’s saying *she* isn’t interested in that perspective. She’s also speaking from the perspective of someone who constantly has to deal with being harassed by those 40 year old white dudes telling her she doesn’t smile enough or is too ‘flat’ to play Captain Marvel. I think a certain amount of disdain there is understandable, if not warranted.
Superlaser speaks for me from now on.

-Bart
Reply
Everybody wants to be outraged about SOMETHING..
Reply
(02-27-2019, 08:16 PM)superlaser Wrote: I... don’t see the problem?  She’s saying *she* isn’t interested in that perspective. She’s also speaking from the perspective of someone who constantly has to deal with being harassed by those 40 year old white dudes telling her she doesn’t smile enough or is too ‘flat’ to play Captain Marvel. I think a certain amount of disdain there is understandable, if not warranted.

Just go through the exercise I suggested and it will immediately become clear what the problem is.  

For example, change it to:  

"I do not need a gay man to tell me about the problems he had with Braveheart, the movie wasn't made for him."  

Or:

"I do not need a transsexual to tell me about the problems they had with Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, the movie wasn't made for them."

Or:

I do not need a Native American/Indian to tell me about the problems they had with Disney's portrayals of them in Peter Pan or Pocahontas, the movie wasn't made for them."

Now do you see what the problem is?



(02-27-2019, 08:10 PM)fraid uh noman Wrote: THAT'S the quote? I thought she said something totally different (and still didn't care). The internet needs to just shut the fuck up.

At most I'd have politely and lightly disagreed with her about her A Wrinkle in Time quote simply because I believe every film is made for every person should they just open their minds and imaginations up to what it's offering. I'm a 37 year old white dude and I enjoyed it. But that's not trying to tell anyone how something should have been so maybe it's not relevant..

Fraid gets it entirely.  

Well done.
Reply
I know gay people that fucking LOVE Braveheart (I don't even care for it a great deal) so...I'd just presume to not try to think who ANY film is made for. It's not my call. You just can never tell.

But I get your point..

This is a tad off subject though....and forgive me if this went over my head....I haven't seen Ace Ventura in 20 years so maybe I took the part totally wrong but, what part of it has to do with trans people? Sean Young at the end? Was she a she? I thought "she" was just still a he....and the "bulge" was because he had his junk tucked back Buffalo Bill style. Was that not the case?

Or does "trans" cover more than people who are undergoing or have undergone gender reassignment? Does it cover transvestites as well? Because I always thought that they were two very different things and that one did not necessarily lead to the other or was indicative of a desire for the other?

Forgive me if this is unwoke as hell. I'm not trying to offend anyone and I hope I'm not..
Reply
Yes, but gay people haven’t been the overwhelmingly dominant paradigm of criticism of basically everything for almost all of modern history. Neither have women or blacks or Hispanics or Native Americans or anything else.

As a gay, white man in his mid 30s, can you guess which of those two classes has resulted in me being discriminated against or dismissed more often?

I take your point in a vacuum, but it’s also intentionally reductive to ignore the context.
Superlaser speaks for me from now on.

-Bart
Reply
(02-27-2019, 08:24 PM)fraid uh noman Wrote: I know gay people that fucking LOVE Braveheart (I don't even care for it a great deal) so...I'd just presume to not try to think who ANY film is made for. It's not my call. You just can never tell.

But I get your point..

This is a tad off subject though....and forgive me if this went over my head....I haven't seen Ace Ventura in 20 years so maybe I took the part totally wrong but, what part of it has to do with trans people? Sean Young at the end? Was she a she? I thought "she" was just still a he....and the "bulge" was because he had his junk tucked back Buffalo Bill style. Was that not the case?

Or does "trans" cover more than people who are undergoing or have undergone gender reassignment? Does it cover transvestites as well? Because I always thought that they were two very different things and that one did not necessarily lead to the other or was indicative of a desire for the other?

Forgive me if this is unwoke as hell. I'm not trying to offend anyone and I hope I'm not..

Whether the Finkle/Einhorn character is transsexual or a transvestite, I think you get the idea of what I was getting at.

(02-27-2019, 08:43 PM)superlase Wrote: I take your point in a vacuum, but it’s also intentionally reductive to ignore the context.

I said that context matters in my very first sentence!

Look, I know what Brie Larsen was getting at.  Everybody that reads the article knows what she was getting at.  And her underlying point is valid, but in a vacuum, a quote in which you dismiss a person's opinion because of their gender or the color of their skin isn't the message I think she was trying to convey.
Reply
No, I do. I was totally just asking about the movie. And I'll google whether trans covers transvestism too rather than clog up the thread with the explanation to that..
Reply
Every issue in the world is people willfully ignoring context.
Reply
It’s a very simple issue of punching up versus punching down. Changing the race/gender/orientation from one to another changes the whole context of the quote. It just isn’t as simple as a one-to-one swap like you want it to be.

And when there’s as much toxic response to her quote as there has been, the fence sitting middle ground response doesn’t always fly.
Superlaser speaks for me from now on.

-Bart
Reply
(02-27-2019, 08:43 PM)superlaser Wrote: Yes, but gay people haven’t been the overwhelmingly dominant paradigm of criticism of basically everything for almost all of modern history. Neither have women or blacks or Hispanics or Native Americans or anything else.

As a gay, white man in his mid 30s, can you guess which of those two classes has resulted in me being discriminated against or dismissed more often?

I take your point in a vacuum, but it’s also intentionally reductive to ignore the context.

Superlaser gets it.
Reply
(02-27-2019, 08:56 PM)superlaser Wrote: It’s a very simple issue of punching up versus punching down. Changing the race/gender/orientation from one to another changes the whole context of the quote. It just isn’t as simple as a one-to-one swap like you want it to be.

And when there’s as much toxic response to her quote as there has been, the fence sitting middle ground response doesn’t always fly.

Yes, context is crucial.

I haven't seen much of a toxic response other than 4chan trolls apparently ganging up on rotten tomatoes (it was taken down, so I never got to amuse myself by reading their rants).  I would never have even known about the interview if not for the discussion of the backlash.  I wonder what the ratio of discussion of "backlash" is versus actual "backlash?"  Maybe 10:1?

As to the movie itself, I am looking forward to seeing it despite the largely tepid (IMHO) commercials/trailers.  I certainly hope that it ties into Infinity War more organically than Ant-Man and the Wasp.  If the "tie-in" turns out to be a half-hearted series of scenes at the end I'm going to be pissed.
Reply
It MAY be more interwoven into Avengers 3 and 4 but....I'd prepare myself to get angry because that's pretty much exactly what I'm expecting. Because it's still gotta function as a stand alone movie so I doubt it'll be TOO complicated (especially considering it's the characters first outing). Unless they're starting to play some next level, 4D chess within this franchise/world. It'll probably play quite a bit like the first Captain America. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's gonna be fucking crazy and anyone who's not familiar with the previous films are screwed. But I think this one's gonna be good but play it pretty safe too..
Reply
(02-27-2019, 09:10 PM)fraid uh noman Wrote: It MAY be more interwoven into Avengers 3 and 4 but....I'd prepare myself to get angry because that's pretty much exactly what I'm expecting. Because it's still gotta function as a stand alone movie so I doubt it'll be TOO complicated (especially considering it's the characters first outing). Unless they're starting to play some next level, 4D chess within this franchise/world. It'll probably play quite a bit like the first Captain America. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's gonna be fucking crazy and anyone who's not familiar with the previous films are screwed. But I think this one's gonna be good but play it pretty safe too..

I hope you're wrong ... it just feels so weird to have the origin story of what has been billed as a pivotal character in Endgame be released a month or so prior.
Reply
I don’t think they’d do something that standalone. I’d guess there’ll be either significant Endgame tie-in or some sort of flashforward establishing Secret Invasion as the next overarching plot after Endgame.
Superlaser speaks for me from now on.

-Bart
Reply
I'm still trying to figure out someone calling Brie Larson "flat."
"Nooj's true feelings on any given subject are unknown and unknowable. He is the butterfly flapping its wings in Peking. He is chaos and destruction and you shall never see his true form." - Merriweather

My Steam ID: yizashigreyspear
Reply
(02-27-2019, 09:27 PM)MichaelM Wrote: I'm still trying to figure out someone calling Brie Larson "flat."

Her acting or her physique?

(02-27-2019, 09:26 PM)superlaser Wrote: I don’t think they’d do something that standalone. I’d guess there’ll be either significant Endgame tie-in or some sort of flashforward establishing Secret Invasion as the next overarching plot after Endgame.

That would be pretty compelling, frankly.  And unexpected!  Using Marvel to introduce some hint of the phase four villain would be clever.
Reply
I'm picturing it literally ending with her getting that message from Fury. And maybe the stinger is her happening across Stark and Nebula on her way to Earth. I never really expected much more than that. To me that's not a bad thing. If it goes the way you want, obviously I'd like that better...but I'm fine with the former as well.

But then....there's a lot we don't know about it. Who knows? Maybe it's narrative snakes all in and around the movies it's stuck between. Cameos we don't expect or have been kept secret. Alternate realities playing out and replaying like what Strange saw..
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)