Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Temis the Vorta, Jul 3, 2012.
Indeed, but what are the chances that it will be done in Gerberesque style?
Well, they certainly already know what not to do.
Spoiler: Response to spoiler
I'm aware of the comic, but general audiences are going to associate it with a lame 80s film, if they're bothering to stick around for the post-credits scenes at all.
And the old film puts a curse on the film property that a new version will bear the responsibility of lifting. It's unlikely that a brief posts-credits scene will have much opportunity to distinguish this version of Howard from the Lucas version.
But really, I was mostly just joking.
After having seen the movie and having recently re-read the beginning of this thread, I hope those that posted their doubts back in 2012 will go and see the movie. Even more, I hope they enjoy it. I know there will be those who disagree, but I firmly believe this is one hell of a fun movie.
If I'm really bored, I may go to a matinee.
But then, maybe not
They tricked people into seeing it by *gasp* making a very good movie.
Ugh, I saw that article. I'm a fan of Cracked, but I think that was a really flimsy bit of writing. Somehow, the movie itself tricked you into seeing it. How can you be tricked into a movie by how it begins? Wouldn't you have had to already made the decision to buy the ticket for it to work? If the argument is that at this point, Marvel could slap their name on anything and people would see it, why wasn't that argument made for the other Marvel movies that came out? Not to mention that I believe that same logo (or a variation of it) also appears on the Sony movies. It's like saying the Paramount logo tricked me into seeing the Star Trek movies.
The article went on to mention other bits, which don't pertain to me, since all of them came after my decision to see the movie, which was as soon as it took for my brain to comprehend the news two years ago that they were making a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. Literally none of these reasons had any bearing on me deciding to go see it, as I posted two years ago.
The article seems to imply that I'm a brain-dead zombie for wanting to see it. Did they also trick me into liking it? Or, going back further, did they trick me into reading the comics that inspired it?
Maybe you'll enjoy it, Flying Spaghetti Monster, maybe you won't. As I said I enjoyed the Hell out of it. I'm not even saying people need to see it in the theaters. Wait for rental, if you want. But, at least give it a shot. Either way, please, don't let a poorly thought-out article sway your opinion.
Edited to Add: TL;DR-what Aldo said.
I may see it. Who knows. I'm beginning to think that these Marvel films are being assembled like a production line.
It just bugs me. Films, even blockbusters... used to have a vision behind them that started from a creative idea.
What bugs me is how Feige will saw that they are doing "different genres."
Winter Soldier is our political thriller, 70's style
Guardians is our space adventure!
Ant-Man is our heist film!
Dr. Strange is our Supernatural/ horror picture.
Feige, go suck it. They are all the same. They all end with the same big action piece at the end.
Beginning to think? That's exactly what they're doing! This is a huge blockbuster franchise, no different than the James Bond series. Yet people are perfectly happy going to see them every two or three years.
So it looks like Korath is a Kree after all and not a Sakaaran.
I thought Korath was a Klingon
I know, but you're right; Howard for the mass audience won't be Howard.
And it's not just Marvel....
Truth is Marvel do manage to make different genre comic book films but in the end they are action blockbusters and there seems to be a rule you can't end an action blockbuster any more without at least one city being destroyed.
Was going to see it with the roommate last night, but then we both took unexpected naps.
New plan is to see it on Sunday.
It doesn't make them any less fun to watch, and in the end, that's all that matters.
Not every movie has to be a hard-hitting expose on the human condition, for Christ's sake.
erm, here's an idea- don't watch it then.
You don't have to you know. I really don't understand you. I never really liked that show Heroes, but I didn't go into Heroes threads on here and complain and whine about it. You know what I did?... this is pretty shocking so you might wanna sit down...
Ok... I didn't like it... so I didn't watch it.
I know right, I'm weird. I didn't feel the need to spend my free time posting about it or keeping up with what was happening on it. I. Merely. Didn't. Watch. It. And got on with my life.
Then again what do I know.
I like the film, I'm defending the fact Marvel do make different genre films while pointing out I do understand the complaint about destroying cities, but that's not a Marvel film thing it's an action film thing.
How many cities have they actually destroyed in a Marvel movie? Iron Man was in midair, Iron Man 2 was in an enclosure, Iron Man 3 was an abandoned dockyard, Thor was a small New Mexico town, Thor 2 was a university, both Captain America movies were in midair. The Avengers is the only one that was in a major city, and even then there were scenes of them preventing civilian casualties. They're not exactly Michael Bay films.
Separate names with a comma.