Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Marvel Cinematic Universe - All Marvel Movie/TV discussion

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • meandi
    replied
    Originally posted by Samuel 'Plan View Post
    Ragnarok probably isn't helped by the fact that Hemsworth seems to have tried to reinvent himself as an improvisational comedian despite not especially being very funny.
    Double post within minutes, but fuck it- I’m drunk, and I just remembered this part...

    Hemsworth is actually quite hilarious in other roles... that really bad Ghostbusters movie that came out a few years ago was only barely watchable because of Hemsworth and his role as the dumb receptionist. (We’ll just forget about later in the movie when he was possessed and dancing and whatnot...) Anyway- my point is this... Hemsworth can be hilarious. Perhaps some of the jokes in Ragnarok fell short because of Watiti and his writing/directing and not so much because Hemsworth and his delivery of what he was fed.
    Last edited by meandi; 05-12-2020, 12:45 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • meandi
    replied
    Ragnarok showed he was getting comfortable with himself after all he had been through and he realized he needed some humor in his life. (Even after Jane leaving him and his mother dying and the visions he saw in AoU...) He realized that sometimes life sucks, but you get through it. And then Odin died. Mjolnir was destroyed. Asgard burned down. But he was able to get some of his peeps out and they were hopeful for a new life in a new place where they could keep on keeping on. And there was hope until Thanos showed up and killed Loki and Heimdal. Even through that, he persevered. Leaving to the made up word planet so he could get a Thanos killing weapon (which didn’t actually work), and then becoming all depressed and yelling at random kids over console games... other than CapAm and Stark, Thor has had the greatest of arcs and I’m kind of excited to see where he goes from here.

    Leave a comment:


  • comfortablynumb
    replied
    Originally posted by meandi View Post
    The thing with Ragnarok (once you get past the comedy bits) is that it shows just how powerful Thor really is, which is pretty crucial for Infinity War. It also sets up his arc for End Game, as well.
    Ragnarok was a great movie and I totally agree with the above comment. Him fighting on the bridge as Led Zeppelin played finally showcased his true powers and showed how badass he is. Great scene. The comedy bits gave him some much-needed personality too. He wasn’t ever boring but Ragnarok took the character to another level.

    Leave a comment:


  • meandi
    replied
    The thing with Ragnarok (once you get past the comedy bits) is that it shows just how powerful Thor really is, which is pretty crucial for Infinity War. It also sets up his arc for End Game, as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • Samuel 'Plan
    replied
    For me, GOTG2 and Ragnarok pursued laughs at the expense of everything else. Neither had much in the way of any real substantial plot, I'm pretty sure the former is unable to get through a single scene without trying to cram a punchline in and the latter watched like everyone had really gotten a bit bored of the whole superhero thing and decided to just say fuck it, we'll just piss about for two hours and slap an anachronistic soundtrack on the thing because, you know, that's what clever films do. I know a lot of people enjoyed the hell out of them and that's awesome, but I just found both of those movies particularly (and quite unbearably) obnoxious.

    Ragnarok probably isn't helped by the fact that Hemsworth seems to have tried to reinvent himself as an improvisational comedian despite not especially being very funny.

    Leave a comment:


  • Prime Time
    replied
    Ragnarok is the only one that didn't bore me at any point. All the others I have at least a stretch in where I'm thinking 'god, this is a bit crap really'. That said, I don't hate any of them - even Iron Man, which are my least favourites by a comfortable margin.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Cook
    replied
    Have to agree on Black Panther but Ragnarok and both GOTG films are incredibly fun. Both Ant-Man's are heavily reliant on your enjoyment of Paul Rudd, who I do like, but even then they still rank near the bottom for me

    Leave a comment:


  • Powder
    replied
    Really? Ragnarok is just fun.

    Leave a comment:


  • Samuel 'Plan
    replied
    Black Panther is a massively important film, but it is also immensely flawed no doubt. I've always enjoyed GOTG but not so much the Iron Man films. The only ones I really can't deal with though are Ant-Man 1, GOTG2 and Ragnarok.

    Leave a comment:


  • anonymous
    replied
    Watching them all over Lockdown and I’m shocked by how many weren’t as good as I remembered. Iron Mans 2 and 3 and GotG stood out as ones I’d loved that I fell out of love with. Black Panther felt overrated too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Powder
    replied
    I love this shit...

    https://m.ranker.com/list/avengers-e...ame-plot-holes

    Leave a comment:


  • meandi
    replied
    So... there’s been a bit of chatter of RDJ coming back into the MCU even after his death in End Game. (Sorry if I spoiled that for you... it’s been almost a year now; get over it.) I personally believe it would be a terrible idea from a storyline perspective, but it would be great for both Disney and RDJ’s bottom lines. How do you do it, though?

    In one of the Iron Man movies, somebody is calling Stark (Coulson maybe?), and Stark answers “You have reached the life model decoy of Tony Stark. Please leave a message.” <paraphrased> This could be explained that during End Game after Stark discovered the whole time travel thing... he just sent a LMD in his place during the time heist. It would be a total cop out and take away from the whole bit CapAm told him in the first Avengers movie about “not being the one to make the sacrifice”, but... it would be a plausible way/excuse to bring RDJ back to carry on what he essentially started.

    Leave a comment:


  • meandi
    replied
    When Thor had his vision about the stones, that was the first he had ever seen or heard of them. He mentions it to the rest of the team, and then later in the movie says he’s leaving to find out more about the stones and implies (or maybe explicitly states?) that he’ll return and tell them what he discovers. That takes at least two years as explained by Ragnarok and how Banner has been in a hulk form that long and doesn’t remember much. Doctor Strange explains what the stones are in Infinity War because he has extensive knowledge of them already, but Thor hasn’t been able to return to explain what he’s discovered yet like he said he would. It’s not really an inconsistency, I don’t think. A couple of added lines of dialogue during that scene when Strange is explaining would’ve helped straighten things out, though. Something like Bruce or Tony says “Thor mentioned these stones when he had that vision, but he’s been kind of busy the past few years, so we don’t know what he knows. Explain it to us Strange.”

    Leave a comment:


  • Powder
    replied
    OK....Age of Ultron is on and watching it again....

    More inconsistencies in the MCU.

    Directly after Vision is born, Thor said "I had a Vision....It's called the mind stone, it is one of the 6 Infinity Stones..." or something to that etent.

    He says this in front of Banner and Stark. So they heard of the Infinity Stones before, and they did not question Thor more about them. So then why is it in Infinity War, when Banner gets sent back to Earth, Dr. Strange has to explain what the 6 stones are to Banner and Stark?

    Leave a comment:


  • meandi
    replied
    I don’t think any of those would be considered plot holes. Continuity errors due to later movies adding new elements... sure. But at the time that movie came out, none of those contradicted the plot of the movie.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X