Kevin Bacon was Sebastian Shaw.
Is First Class multiverse canon now, or not?
Is First Class multiverse canon now, or not?
Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread
- Thread starter bbjeg
- Start date
*In your opinion....
Vital words really.I loved Ragnarok, and personally enjoyed Love And Thunder a lot. But it was quite flawed and you can tell a lot went missing on the cutting room floor. But I really loved Thor in his first solo outing, and in Infinity War/Endgame. Wouldn't mind revisiting that as well
I really liked Ragnarok but only kind of liked Love and Thunder; I felt like the latter just doubled down on the former's flaws instead of fixing them. I do hope we get one more movie to give Thor proper closure like Cap and Iron Man got, but I do think L&T ended with Thor in a good enough spot should Hemsworth decide ultimately to hang up his hammer.
I don't feel like tracking it down now, but I read an interview with James Gunn yesterday where he was talking about filming both the Holiday Special and Vol. 3 at the exact same time. They were actually switching on certain days, where one day they'd film one and the next it would be the other. He also admitted that Vol. 3 was pretty hard on him, so he always looked forward to Holiday Special days, because they were a lot more fun.
I can try to find the link tomorrow, I just don't feel like looking for it right now.
I can try to find the link tomorrow, I just don't feel like looking for it right now.
Eh, it had its flaws, but I thought it wasn't even close to the worst movie of Phase 4. It's much better than Eternals, it's much less bland than Black Widow, and it's much better written than Multiverse of Madness.
I guess you haven't been paying attention to Peter's story arc.
Yes, I have. Why would Peter not care about what happened to his grandfather or at least express some kind of curiosity over the place of his birth? And PLEASE stop insulting people when they express an opinion that is different from yours. Why do people do that? Why do they think it's necessary to insult someone because he or she has an opinion that is different from theirs? Even when it comes to entertainment.
I thought "The Eternals" had a few flaws like any other movie, but I still regard it as one of the two or three best productions of both Phases 3 and 4, let alone a lot better than several other MCU films.
Last edited:
Respectfully, I think it is because your posts tend to dwell on your negative opinions towards super-hero films and productions, and you repeat these views multiple times in various ways. People wonder why you're posting at all and it comes across as trolling--even if that may not be your intention. And, yes, personal insults are unnecessary at any time.
Last edited:
It's just unfunny joke, after unfunny joke, after unfunny joke with the barest amount of plot possible holding it together.
It was supposed to be Jane Foster's film but he didn't even include the scenes of her becoming Thor that were shot. Jamie Alexander got almost all of her scenes cut and I think has two line of dialogue left. Christian Bale has talked about how all of his more dramatic scenes were cut too. And then there's the three big name actors who ended up not appearing at all.
People complain about Disney not giving Marvel directors enough freedom and this pile of garbage is what happens when they're allowed do whatever they want.
Love and Thunder is to Ragnarok as Star Trek The Final Frontier is to Voyage Home.
Whereas I would say the reverse. I really don't get why Ragnarok is so well-liked. I mean, in addition to my previous criticisms, it introduced a character who was Thor's long-lost sister and did absolutely nothing with that relationship, a profound failure in the wake of the superb work the previous movies did with Loki. It also killed off almost everyone Thor cared about in a cursory manner with no real followup, and as a result, the scenes of Hela's devastation of Asgard had no emotional weight because there was no viewpoint character to anchor our emotions, except Karl Urban, whose entire character arc was conveyed exclusively through ambivalent facial expressions. There's no there there. It's by far the shallowest, most superficial, emotionally emptiest film Marvel has ever made. It's cotton candy -- mildly, cloyingly enjoyable in the moment but totally devoid of substance or nourishment.
Love and Thunder is far better at grounding itself in character and emotion, so that what happens has actual weight. While Hela was totally devoid of depth or dimension, Gorr was a rich and sympathetic villain in the vein of Loki or Zemo or Thanos. I loved the way the conflict between him and Thor was resolved.
I find the criticisms of the jokes to be the strangest part of panning Love and Thunder, because it's 100% true to the past humor of Watiti - including his use in Ragnarök and the Team Thor shorts. Watiti likes humor which is really awkward on purpose. A lot of Thor's jokes are explicitly not meant to land, because he uses them as a crutch to cover his own depression/lack of purpose.
I'm one of the people who loved Ragnarok but hated Love & Thunder, and I think the big difference is that Ragnarok wasn't written by Taika, and quite frankly I think he is just not a good person to write a movie that is supposed to have even a little bit of seriousness. He did a good job of directing a script that could have a bit of heart with the jokes, but when given the writing reigns its just basically a parody of what all the MCU haters claim the MCU is, an (attempted) laugh a minute that constantly undercuts any serious moment with bad comedy.
I don't think that L&T is the worst film of phase 4, thats Eternals and its not even a competition, but I do think its a bad film and I honestly hope that they either don't hire Taika Waititi again, or at least don't let him write anything again.
I don't think that L&T is the worst film of phase 4, thats Eternals and its not even a competition, but I do think its a bad film and I honestly hope that they either don't hire Taika Waititi again, or at least don't let him write anything again.
I've never seen "Love and Thunder". And although I somewhat liked "Ragnarok", I have to agree with your assessment of it.
That's your excuse? Or reason? Do you expect me to just accept this? Because I don't. What? I'm only supposed to post positive comments about a movie? Or automatically agree with the dominant opinion? Because I refuse to go with the crowd. And by the way, I had typed some positive comments about "The Eternals" in an earlier post.
I agree. People should have gone into the movie with the expectation that it would be a Waititi movie, because that is exactly what we got. Sure, the movie is flawed but I didn't really like MoM or NWH, so for me Love and Thunder was a refreshing change. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Except that I've seen two Thor "Waititi movies," and I disliked the first and liked the second. Yes, there was the same kind of humor in both, but as I've said, what didn't work for me about Ragnarok but did about L&T was the stuff besides the humor, the more serious elements, character engagement, and emotional weight that are needed to anchor the story and make it worth caring about. Waititi seemed to me to neglect those elements in his first Thor film, but struck a better balance in his second.
So there's more nuance to it than just saying "It's a Waititi movie." No director's body of work is completely uniform. In this case, it seems to me like there was a learning curve, that maybe as a comedy director he needed to learn to handle the non-comedy parts better.
They didn't say any of that, they simply guessed at the reason why someone might.
I agree that insulting someone because they said they don't like what you like is pretty stupid, but "You haven't been paying attention" must be one of the most lightweight insults ever.
I agree with all of that.