• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Captain Marvel - Grading & Discussion

Grade the movie...

  • Total voters
    122
Gov Kodos said:
It was in the prison when he was trying to talk Drax down from killing Gamora. He was doing a Jaws recount of various injuries from various women.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...
I never bothered to think it through before, but yeah, weirdly that "Kree girl" being Carol does kind a fit since why would literally any other "Kree" be anywhere near the Nova records prior to the peace treaty with Zandar? Also, I can easily see Carol trying to rip Peter's thorax out just from talking to him for 2 mins.
 
TREK_GOD_1 said:
I maintain that Pierce's character assessment of Fury was not based on anything happening overnight, and by the first time we see him in the post credits scene of Iron Man in 2008--presumably that's real world time--he already has a cold, darker edge. By the time he became director of SHIELD--with all of what its known about the agency throughout its history, he had to have a larger, grim outlook on the world...on top of all of the non-otherworldly threats he faced over the years, requiring an uncompromising, violent response/mindset. When an "oddity" comes to earth, and he eventually believes Danvers to have an extraterrestrial association, his reactions should been more "on point" instead of behaving as if he was going along for the ride as a newcomer to everything.
Click to expand...

Pierce’s assessment may need to be taken with a grain of salt considering who he really was, and though Fury has certainly gained a darker edge he’s still a very congenial fellow as shown in his interactions with the Avengers throughout the films, like in IRON MAN 2.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

There’s also 12 to 15 years in between CAPTAIN MARVEL and IRON MAN, which I wouldn’t brush off as “overnight”, especially when events like 9/11 took place, which we’ve seen change people’s perspective in ways both incremental and drastic.
 
Saul said:
I'd rather have seen her go on that journey of self discovery in the movie. In the same way that characters like Iron Man and Thor come out the other end of the film as changed. Part of the heroes journey, not just the discovery of inner power but discovering something about who they are.


Was wondering about that today. How many pre snap movies might there be? Spiderman far from home? Captain Marvel 2? Guardians of the Galaxy 3?
Click to expand...

The Nth Doctor said:
None of them are for certain.

Far From Home is probably pre-snap (at least, I hope it is for character development between Peter and May) but there are suggestions in the trailers that it's post-snap.

I think before the Twitter debacle, Gunn said Vol. 3 would be post-Avengers.

It's far too early to know for any other films, but with the possible exception of Captain Marvel, I fully expect all of them to be post-snap.
Click to expand...
We still don't even know for sure if The Snap will have even happened once Endgame is over, there've been rumors practically since production started that it will involve time travel.
 
Saul said:
I'd rather have seen her go on that journey of self discovery in the movie. In the same way that characters like Iron Man and Thor come out the other end of the film as changed. Part of the heroes journey, not just the discovery of inner power but discovering something about who they are.
Click to expand...

How changed was Steve Rogers in his first movie?
 
Anwar said:
How changed was Steve Rogers in his first movie?
Click to expand...
Steve started out as a "little man" who was bullied and hated it. He was prepared to dedicate his life to fighting bullies.

Post treatment, Steve became an amplified version of what he had always been. I would certainly describe his character progression as linear, but that doesn't make it a bad thing, it makes it true to life.

By the end of the movie, he has the strength and power to be whatever he wants. He has the girl of his dreams. He sacrifices it all not because he needs to prove himself or build his self-esteem. He sacrifices himself because it is the right thing to do. He is not motivated by overcompensating for growing up as a weak asthmatic. He is motivated by knowing how many people will die if he doesn't do what is necessary.

His survival is not something he expected, it was a complete accident. He has lost everything and everyone he cared about, but still carries the same sense of responsibility to the greater good. This isn't what was driving him at the start of the movie.
 
It was enjoyable if not stellar. I think it needed a bit more humour overall. Brie is an appealing lead, although I'm ambivalent about her being so powerful. I think that makes characters less interesting but we'll see. There is certainly plenty of room to explore her as a character .

I liked the nod to real world refugee crises and I loved the ordinariness of Fury's eye injury. Genius. The double act with Fury worked well overall.

I was confused by the cosmic cube appearance in the final scene since this means it has been in two places at once since the first Avengers movie?
 
I liked the move, it was cosmic in all aspects. I'm guessing with Brie's powers she'll be a deciding factor in the next Avengers movie. Samuel L. Jackson and Brie Larsen's chemistry was the highlight of the movie and I was amazed at how good the de-aging cg looked.
 
Pauln6 said:
I was confused by the cosmic cube appearance in the final scene since this means it has been in two places at once since the first Avengers movie?
Click to expand...
No, the Tesseract was retrieved by Howard Stark after WWII and then at some point decades later, he presumably lent it to Project Pegasus for Mar-Vell's use. It stayed in her space lab until Fury retrieved it in 1995, where it remained in S.H.I.E.L.D.'s possession until Loki stole it.
 
They probably could have made it a bit clearer that the post credits scene with Goose spitting out the Tesseract had jumped back in time to right after the main part of the movie. My mom thought it was after the Endgame scene, and it was a bit jarring to go back and forth in time like that.
 
The Nth Doctor said:
No, the Tesseract was retrieved by Howard Stark after WWII and then at some point decades later, he presumably lent it to Project Pegasus for Mar-Vell's use. It stayed in her space lab until Fury retrieved it in 1995, where it remained in S.H.I.E.L.D.'s possession until Loki stole it.
Click to expand...
Yes, the scene only makes sense if it's set earlier in the timeline. I suppose that must be the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Commander Richard
  • Sticky
  • Poll
Spoilers STAR TREK: SECTION 31 - Grading & Discussion
104 105 106
Replies
2K
Views
89K
cooleddie74
cooleddie74
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top