Ant Man trailer


Movies

251 to 266 of 266 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Kind of hoping Marvel doesn't retread DC and Sony's formula of re-hashing Batman, Superman and Spider-Man movies every five years, rather than continuing to explore new properties like Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Black Panther, the Inhumans, etc.

Seeing Iron Man or Captain America's story retold every decade until the end of time, with a succession of new actors, doesn't particularly excite me.


Set wrote:

Kind of hoping Marvel doesn't retreat Marvel and Sony's formula of re-hashing Batman, Superman and Spider-Man movies every five years, rather than continuing to explore new properties like Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Black Panther, the Inhumans, etc.

Seeing Iron Man or Captain America's story retold every decade until the end of time, with a succession of new actors, doesn't particularly excite me.

Exactly. There are plenty of characters that if they just made actual good movies out of them instead of B listing it like they did in the 90s they could get audiences. Especially now that they have a track record and people want to see what is coming out of the studio.


thejeff wrote:
Caineach wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Caineach wrote:
You know, one thing I like about the movie verse is that if they want to keep them going they will need keep cycling new heroes in to prevent them from becoming static. Instead of having 50 years of the same hero who you lose connection to him through the authors, they will have to bring new characters in.

Or do what everyone else making superhero movies has done: Reboot the whole thing every few years.

Some shake up in the cast is good. Never seeing Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Banner, Thor, etc in the Avengers again while we move on to increasingly third string heroes isn't. Recast the headliners after letting them sit out a bit. Keep shuffling new characters in and out.

But don't give up on the original Avengers entirely. And don't reboot and start another Avengers series with all new origin movies of the same heroes.

Why? The biggest problem in comics IMO is that they don't phase characters out and just reboot them, forcing the same themes on a new generation. Let the characters die or retire.

Because it won't happen. Because you run out of popular characters. Maybe Marvel will be able to keep its audience for movies without any name characters. They've been doing a surprisingly good job so far. I doubt it, over the long run. And frankly, I don't want it. I don't want Cap to get 3 movies and a couple Avengers appearances and then never be seen again. Or replaced by Falc-Cap and then him replaced by someone else and on and on. I like the character. I like Steve Rogers. I like the WWII symbol of America out of time. I think he can support more stories than that.

OTOH, I strongly disagree that's the biggest problem in comics and it applies even less to movies, since you're only going to get a few movies out of any given actor. Not enough to make the characters stale.

I think Steve Rogers is one of the least interesting super heroes. He is almost as bad as Superman. And they took him and made one awesome movie with him as the center. I would much rather see what they do with characters that are interesting than with them trying to rehash him over and over.


Set wrote:

Kind of hoping Marvel doesn't retreat Marvel and Sony's formula of re-hashing Batman, Superman and Spider-Man movies every five years, rather than continuing to explore new properties like Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man, Dr. Strange, Black Panther, the Inhumans, etc.

Seeing Iron Man or Captain America's story retold every decade until the end of time, with a succession of new actors, doesn't particularly excite me.

Absolutely agreed. At least as far as rehashing origins and the like. I'd much rather they just recast and keep going. Especially for appearances in Avengers and other team movies.

And keep bringing out the new properties.


Caineach wrote:
I think Steve Rogers is one of the least interesting super heroes. He is almost as bad as Superman. And they took him and made one awesome movie with him as the center. I would much rather see what they do with characters that are interesting than with them trying to rehash him over and over.

Interesting is in the eye of the beholder.


thejeff wrote:
Caineach wrote:

I think Steve Rogers is one of the least interesting super heroes. He is almost as bad as Superman. And they took him and made one awesome movie with him as the center. I would much rather see what they do with characters that are interesting than with them trying to rehash him over and over.

Interesting is in the eye of the beholder.

I completely agree with thejeff on this.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, classic Rodgers (as opposed to the weird bigot in Ultimates) is interesting largely because of his 'straight laced simplicity'.

He's everything America wants to believe itself to be. Heroic, fair, kind, valorous, accepting, egalitarian, etc.

Then he runs into the reality of America. Which sometimes lives up to the ideal Rodgers embodies, but often falls horrifically short. Which is when he becomes Nomad.

We want to be Steve Rogers.
All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.


Krensky wrote:

Yeah, classic Rodgers (as opposed to the weird bigot in Ultimates) is interesting largely because of his 'straight laced simplicity'.

He's everything America wants to believe itself to be. Heroic, fair, kind, valorous, accepting, egalitarian, etc.

Then he runs into the reality of America. Which sometimes lives up to the ideal Rodgers embodies, but often falls horrifically short. Which is when he becomes Nomad.

We want to be Steve Rogers.
All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.

While most fall short, the whole idea of Steve Rodgers (Rogers? - I dunno) is that he holds himself to his ideals, regardless of what everyone else does. Ultimately in the MCU I expect that this will result in his demise. I expect to be grieving when that happens.


Krensky wrote:

We want to be Steve Rogers.

All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.

I think a lot of people are just Roscoes.


Krensky wrote:

Yeah, classic Rodgers (as opposed to the weird bigot in Ultimates) is interesting largely because of his 'straight laced simplicity'.

He's everything America wants to believe itself to be. Heroic, fair, kind, valorous, accepting, egalitarian, etc.

Then he runs into the reality of America. Which sometimes lives up to the ideal Rodgers embodies, but often falls horrifically short. Which is when he becomes Nomad.

We want to be Steve Rogers.
All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.

he was not a bigot. He was an actual product of his time period. Having grown up being exposed to a lot of white people like that when I moved to pa, it was interesting to read it in the comic.

Rogers isn't uninteresting per se, but he can be just as damaging to his cause as portier (sp) was in guess who's coming to dinner -a saint has much to admire, and even more to endear, but little to relate to.

The Exchange

Freehold DM wrote:
Krensky wrote:

Yeah, classic Rodgers (as opposed to the weird bigot in Ultimates) is interesting largely because of his 'straight laced simplicity'.

He's everything America wants to believe itself to be. Heroic, fair, kind, valorous, accepting, egalitarian, etc.

Then he runs into the reality of America. Which sometimes lives up to the ideal Rodgers embodies, but often falls horrifically short. Which is when he becomes Nomad.

We want to be Steve Rogers.
All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.

he was not a bigot. He was an actual product of his time period. Having grown up being exposed to a lot of white people like that when I moved to pa, it was interesting to read it in the comic.

Rogers isn't uninteresting per se, but he can be just as damaging to his cause as portier (sp) was in guess who's coming to dinner -a saint has much to admire, and even more to endear, but little to relate to.

Rogers is relatable as a "man out of his time" character, though, and his feeling of loneliness and just plain wrongness of the world around him is relatable.


Lord Snow wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Krensky wrote:

Yeah, classic Rodgers (as opposed to the weird bigot in Ultimates) is interesting largely because of his 'straight laced simplicity'.

He's everything America wants to believe itself to be. Heroic, fair, kind, valorous, accepting, egalitarian, etc.

Then he runs into the reality of America. Which sometimes lives up to the ideal Rodgers embodies, but often falls horrifically short. Which is when he becomes Nomad.

We want to be Steve Rogers.
All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.

he was not a bigot. He was an actual product of his time period. Having grown up being exposed to a lot of white people like that when I moved to pa, it was interesting to read it in the comic.

Rogers isn't uninteresting per se, but he can be just as damaging to his cause as portier (sp) was in guess who's coming to dinner -a saint has much to admire, and even more to endear, but little to relate to.

Rogers is relatable as a "man out of his time" character, though, and his feeling of loneliness and just plain wrongness of the world around him is relatable.

mmm. True.

The Exchange

Freehold DM wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Krensky wrote:

Yeah, classic Rodgers (as opposed to the weird bigot in Ultimates) is interesting largely because of his 'straight laced simplicity'.

He's everything America wants to believe itself to be. Heroic, fair, kind, valorous, accepting, egalitarian, etc.

Then he runs into the reality of America. Which sometimes lives up to the ideal Rodgers embodies, but often falls horrifically short. Which is when he becomes Nomad.

We want to be Steve Rogers.
All too often we're John Walker.
Sadly, we're William Burnside far too often.
And we still have to come to terms with Isaiah Bradley.

he was not a bigot. He was an actual product of his time period. Having grown up being exposed to a lot of white people like that when I moved to pa, it was interesting to read it in the comic.

Rogers isn't uninteresting per se, but he can be just as damaging to his cause as portier (sp) was in guess who's coming to dinner -a saint has much to admire, and even more to endear, but little to relate to.

Rogers is relatable as a "man out of his time" character, though, and his feeling of loneliness and just plain wrongness of the world around him is relatable.
mmm. True.

We... we agree on something? Oh my. Maybe there is hope after all :)


I think I remember Feige saying one time that they would shy away from reboots and, instead, go the Bond route with characters like Iron Man. That is, continue the character through actor changes and the like.


Set wrote:

From the Thor movies, I liked Kat Dennings jokes, and pre-crazy-in-his-underwear Stellan Skarsgard, and some combination of Loki, Heimdall, Sif and Frigga (in the second movie, particularly).

Anthony Hopkins and the role of Odin didn't go well together. I have no idea whose fault that was, but he seemed completely asleep at the wheel. And I still have no idea if Chris Hemsworth can act. I ain't seen it yet, if so. He and Natalie Portman spent far too much time, IMO, running over each other and / or staring gleepily into each others eyes.

Of Captain America, Iron Man and Thor, Thor is easily my favorite in the comics (being a big fan of magic and mythology), and yet I liked the Cap and IM movies better, perhaps because of the casting / writing.

I wouldn't mind seeing Balder, Brunnhilde (the Valkyrie), Amora (the Enchantress) and Skurge (the Executioner), more so than the Warriors Three, who always seemed to me like they should have been einherjar instead of actual 'gods.'

I think Anthony Hopkins kind of showed up for a paycheck for the Thor movies. He was perfectly serviceable, don't get me wrong, but I don't think he was "into it" at all. This was more like, "Okay, put me in the damn costume and I'll look this script over 15 min before. What, I'm the king of this... is this a planet or what? It doesn't matter. Okay, I'm angry in this scene. Fine. Let's go." He's perfectly professional, just not his cup of tea. Collect the paycheck and move on. Then he'll move on to some theatre or something he likes better. That's my guess :)

Liberty's Edge

Hopkins interviews suggest he was into doing the first one with Brannagh, but the second was more craft than art and he's not up for a third.

251 to 266 of 266 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Movies / Ant Man trailer All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Movies
Dune - Part 2