Agents of Shield - Season 4
- Thread starter MarsWeeps
- Start date
How the hell should I know? I haven't seen the movie yet. And neither have you. Why not try waiting for actual information before you rush to judgment? These issues will be addressed. The AoS producers have said that the reactions of these scientist characters to supernatural phenomena will be a significant part of the narrative. So just have some patience and wait for the story to be told.
I wonder if they are testing the waters for a Ghost Rider TV series. It would be funny if a Ghost Ruder TV series was a spin off of AOS.
Um, crazy idea: why not just actually watch the show and see how they handle it instead of trying to judge it based on a secondhand source?
I mean, it's a TV show. It's meant to be watched. You can't really evaluate it on the basis on a "recap." That would be like saying a book sucks because you didn't like the back cover copy.
And if you're not actually watching a show, why bother reading about it? Or caring about it?
I've never seen a single episode of GAME OF THRONES, because I don't happen to subscribe to that premium channel,so I don't have any opinion on it. But I'm not going to go on-line and hold forth on it based on a summary I read somewhere . ..
I cared because I watched 3 Seasons of the show. I was going to watch the episode, then decided to read the recap and saw my worst fears for the show realised, so I decided to drop the show. Its not worth watching something I know I'll hate. The very in depth recap showed that the episode has literally all the things I hoped it wouldn't do based on the info they'd released about the season up until then. Its not like I'd never watched AoS and then talked about. I liked and even loved a lot of AoS during its first three seasons, and I'm a big MCU fan so its relevant to my interests. Some terrible stuff is easy to ignore (Agent Carter was easy to forget about) but AoS, while having a rocky start, was a good show. Now its not, so its in a weird position of being something I liked but the quality has reached such a low point that I can't watch it anymore.
Also, I have definitely decided to not read books based on the back cover. Especially, for example, Star Trek books where its fairly obvious whether I'll be interested or not based on the description on the cover. I've saved a lot of time by looking at the back of a ST book (Oh, a Prime Directive story? SKIP. Gary Seven? SKIP. A USS Titan story? SKIP)
Yes, but you know very well that any recap, as thorough as it might be will never ever be complete. a recap is not a transcript. Details and nuances are lost. Details that are important to give context to any plot and character development.
Also AoS is a highly serialized show. And any episode recap will not take into account any further developments of the story.
You are basing your opinion deliberately on imcomplete information.
It is your choice to not watch it based on that, but can't possibly make a judgement on the actual content of the episode if you haven't seen it and expect to be taken serious here.
Also AoS is a highly serialized show. And any episode recap will not take into account any further developments of the story.
You are basing your opinion deliberately on imcomplete information.
It is your choice to not watch it based on that, but can't possibly make a judgement on the actual content of the episode if you haven't seen it and expect to be taken serious here.
Slipped my mind before, but I just now remembered how the episode started. Am I alone in thinking it was a tad unnecessary to do a montage that started with Daisy putting her knickers on? I mean I know the gearing up scene is a time honoured superhero thing...but I don't think they've ever done one with a male hero that involved underwear. Not even Superman and he wears those things on the outside! 
Also just occurred to me this is set in L.A. and they've just recently announced a new series based on 'Runaways'. I doubt it'll be addressed but I wonder what the justification would be for this kind of thing going on on the Pride's turf.
I didn't mean so much that they can make him a better agent, just repair the anatomical and cosmetic damage done to him so he can see his son without all the obvious cybernetics and facial scars. It seems they have the technology now and SHIELD are indirectly responsible for his being in that state in the first place so it seems the least they could do.
Also just occurred to me this is set in L.A. and they've just recently announced a new series based on 'Runaways'. I doubt it'll be addressed but I wonder what the justification would be for this kind of thing going on on the Pride's turf.
Perhaps they're one and the same! *dramatic chord*
I didn't mean so much that they can make him a better agent, just repair the anatomical and cosmetic damage done to him so he can see his son without all the obvious cybernetics and facial scars. It seems they have the technology now and SHIELD are indirectly responsible for his being in that state in the first place so it seems the least they could do.
There is no hyphen in Ghost Rider!
It's very simple:
Superman = one word
Wonder Woman = two word
Spider-Man = hyphenated
Can't imagine why people find this confusing.
Mr Spiderman, the Jewish Web Slinger!There is no hyphen in Ghost Rider!
It's very simple:
Superman = one word
Wonder Woman = two word
Spider-Man = hyphenated
Can't imagine why people find this confusing.
OK, I'm officially slow. I've only now figured out that Fitz's direct brain VR headset thing is meant to be an interface for Aida. Presumably at some point we'll have a character remote piloting their own LMD. Possible side effect: the brain feedback mapping will imprint on Aida, making her an AI by accident. Or someone is going to die with the headset on and their memories will end up stuck in an android body.
Yeah, that really bothered me as well. An obvious "Hey, we're at a later hour, so let's show some skin! Because why not?" moment. Her excessive eye shadow is unnecessary, too.Slipped my mind before, but I just now remembered how the episode started. Am I alone in thinking it was a tad unnecessary to do a montage that started with Daisy putting her knickers on? I mean I know the gearing up scene is a time honoured superhero thing...but I don't think they've ever done one with a male hero that involved underwear. Not even Superman and he wears those things on the outside!
Whatever you do, i hope that if you decide to drop the show permanently, that you don't come in here week after week and tell us how much the newest episode sucked because of the recap of said episode.
I didn't even notice Daisy putting her underwear on so I had to go back and see what people were talking about.
It's only a second or two, it was pretty tame and honestly, I thought it fit seamlessly into the rest of the montage/action.
It's only a second or two, it was pretty tame and honestly, I thought it fit seamlessly into the rest of the montage/action.
Oh sure it's tame, no question. I just didn't think it needed to be there. At all.
Just to be clear I have no problem with a bit of skin or even explicit nudity as a rule. However what makes me a bit uncomfortable in this instance is that I suspect the *only* reason it was there is because she's a woman, which isn't much of a justification. It was by definition a gratuitous shot.
The eye shadow did seem a little bit out of place and impractical. It made sense in last season's coda since she was in her civie disguise, but in her full Quake gear it does look a bit odd.
I've gotten in the habit of just skipping over his posts. I've found it's rarely worth the effort getting into a discussion.
Last edited:
I think the comments from TPTB since the schedule annoucement back in May, attempting to put a positive spin on the timeslot change by emphasizing a freedom to go darker and grittier-and sexier, is causing some over reaction. That scene could have been present at any point during the first 3 seasons at it's old time, and no one would have cared (much). Skye/Daisy was aways the designated hawt girl of the group, but we've seen the show getting it's sexy on before... Ward going shirtless multiple times, and his arc with May brought scenes of gratuitous hotel excursions.
Seems like because it was made an issue by the producers during the summer break, that we're zeroing in on a couple of scenes that we may have brushed off (whether it bothered us or not), had it been done earlier.
To me, it's indicative of a larger problem with society where people get into a tizzy over showing a little bit of skin, and nobody cares about Ghost Rider ripping out a dude's spine. Me, I'm cool with both.
Last edited:
I can't believe that people are getting in such a tizzy about Daisy putting her underwear on. I got a lot of pushback in the Daredevil Season 2 thread because I thought an honest-to-gosh sex scene was a bit gratuitous. It's not like they actually showed a full shot of her bare ass (unless I missed that)...something that you can find on basic cable these days.
OK, since when does asking if anyone else thought the half a second shot of a woman putting on her knickers was "a tad unnecessary" qualify as "getting in a tizzy over it"?
Or is this just the thing people do when they make out the other person is overreacting and thus absolving them from having to justify their own position? Asking for a friend.
Seriously though, it's not a big deal, it just felt oddly out of place in the context of the scene. Remember kids: "gratuitous" doesn't mean "vile thing that must be denounced and burned with fire". It just means "done without reason" or "unnecessary". I think that's a fair and decidedly not hyperbolic description of some random side-bum in a car chase scene.
Were any of those people pushing back the same people objecting here and for diametrically opposed reasons? If not then that's an entirely invalid counter argument and one that's really lacking in context to boot. Context matters.
Yeah, but that guy was a white supremacist, so who cares?
Anyway, I'd say an equally troubling problem in society is letting the objectification of women slide because the male gaziness gives them the tingly feeling in their joy department. I mean imagine if that shot showed Coulson suiting up and it included exactly the same shot of him pulling up his briefs. I challenge anyone to claim they would not have found that at least a bit off putting.
OK, *now* I am kinda getting in a tizzy. But I wasn't before this post so the point stands.
You know I'd kind respect it more if they were boxers or something even vaguely practical, given that the next shot of her is binding up her bruised fists Rocky style. But yeah, the lingerie just felt like a strange choice in this context. (there's that word again! )
Or is this just the thing people do when they make out the other person is overreacting and thus absolving them from having to justify their own position? Asking for a friend.
Seriously though, it's not a big deal, it just felt oddly out of place in the context of the scene. Remember kids: "gratuitous" doesn't mean "vile thing that must be denounced and burned with fire". It just means "done without reason" or "unnecessary". I think that's a fair and decidedly not hyperbolic description of some random side-bum in a car chase scene.
Were any of those people pushing back the same people objecting here and for diametrically opposed reasons? If not then that's an entirely invalid counter argument and one that's really lacking in context to boot. Context matters.
Yeah, but that guy was a white supremacist, so who cares?
Anyway, I'd say an equally troubling problem in society is letting the objectification of women slide because the male gaziness gives them the tingly feeling in their joy department. I mean imagine if that shot showed Coulson suiting up and it included exactly the same shot of him pulling up his briefs. I challenge anyone to claim they would not have found that at least a bit off putting.
OK, *now* I am kinda getting in a tizzy. But I wasn't before this post so the point stands.
There's suiting up for battle and there's a Victoria's Secret commercial. That bit leaned more toward the latter than the former, that's all.
You know I'd kind respect it more if they were boxers or something even vaguely practical, given that the next shot of her is binding up her bruised fists Rocky style. But yeah, the lingerie just felt like a strange choice in this context. (there's that word again!
)
Last edited:
Similar threads
