Agents of Shield


Television

1,401 to 1,450 of 4,975 << first < prev | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Comics are mostly one per month, although Marvel has also had periods where titles came out twice a months for short periods.

Also, like I said, Spidey has had dozens of titles. Wikipedia lists:

Main Continuity Titles

The Amazing Spider-Man, The Superior Foes of Spider-Man, Avenging Spider-Man, Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, Marvel Team-Up, Spider-Man/Peter Parker: Spider-Man, The Sensational Spider-Man, Marvel Knights Spider-Man, The Spectacular Spider-Man, (Amazing) Spider-Man Family, Spider-Man's Tangled Web, Spider-Man Unlimited, The Superior Spider-Man, Superior Spider-Man Team-Up, Untold Tales of Spider-Man, Web of Spider-Man, Webspinners: Tales of Spider-Man

Limited series

Spider-Man: Chapter One, Spider-Man: Blue, Spider-Man/Black Cat: The Evil that Men Do, Trouble, Venom vs. Carnage, Spider-Man: House of M, Spider-Man: With Great Power, Astonishing Spider-Man & Wolverine

Outside Continuity

Marvel Adventures Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2099, Spider-Man Noir, Spider-Man Noir: Eyes Without a Face, Spider-Man: India, Spider-Man: The Manga, Spidey Super Stories, Spider-Girl, Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane, Spider-Man: Reign, Spider-Man Unlimited, Ultimate Spider-Man, Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now that the season is over, I still can't believe that they used Brad Dourif for all of 2 minutes and it didn't lead to anything.

Sovereign Court

It probably will lead to something.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

i hope so: especially that Ward's been shown to hesitate to pull the trigger with his friends (and his dog)

Ward does not hesitate to kill goons on sight though (Fridge elevator; Victoria Hand's goons in the plane, etc.) - so I'm hoping Brad Dourif comes back against him to take his vengeance...


Kthulhu wrote:
SeeDarkly_X wrote:


Numbers can be interesting.
Here are some numbers:
1,274 - # of Appearances of Dr. Stephen Strange (Earth-616)
2,892 - # of Appearances of Iron Man (Anthony "Tony" Stark) (Earth-616)
3,006 - # of Appearances of Wolverine (James "Logan" Howlett)(Earth-616)
3,306 - # of Appearances of Captain America (Steven Rogers) (Earth-616)
4,001 - # of Appearances of Spider-Man (Peter Parker)(Earth-616)
Source of Data
I'm not sure how much I trust those numbers. They seem very low for some characters. Spidey, for example. Spidey was freaking EVERYWHERE during the 80s. He seemed to show up in every single Marvel title at least 2-3 times a year, above and beyond the dozens of Spider-Man titles. Wolverine was the same way throughout the 90s (and they barely scaled back Spidey during that time). And only 894 for SHIELD? That also seems pretty low.

The source is a wiki, so there is that... while it is remarkably thorough, there is any possibility that it is incomplete. Being incomplete, those numbers are a MINIMUM.

And in that context the number isn't about the number itself in relation to the appearance, but those numbers in context to the other numbers.
Some of which are on-going.


I think one of the reasons that Iron Man/Tony Stark as had such a long run is that the character is important to the Marvel Universe. It fills a niche or several niches. He is the business mogul, the tech inventor and tech based hero. He was a vehicle for serious stories about alcoholism, physical disability and mental disability. He also filled the role of the "human" element in a world full of mutants, super powered people, aliens and gods so he could be used to tell the story of human in a super-human world.

The character also benefited from being mainly part of ensemble casts. His character cold be at the forefront for a few issue or a year then relegated to the back of the frame for however long the writers wanted.

Thus in this case, Tony Stark has been widely used for many reasons beyond being a "popular" character which I would argue he was not, at least not compared to any of the other "big" marvel characters: Spiderman; X-men/wolverine; Hulk; Fantastic Four.

It makes sense to compare him to another member of an ensemble. X-men, a more popular comic brand than Avengers, has Cyclops. Cyclops has appeared in multiple x-titles. He is often the leader of his team. He has been integral to multiple plot lines. If someone had said lets make a Cyclops movie, most people would have responded "that doesn't seem like a great idea".

That is exactly what a lot of people said when Marvel announced Iron Man. The truth is that the rights to X-men, Spiderman and Fantastic Four had already been farmed out and Ironman/Avengers is what was left over.


Kthulhu wrote:

Comics are mostly one per month, although Marvel has also had periods where titles came out twice a months for short periods.

Also, like I said, Spidey has had dozens of titles. Wikipedia lists:

Main Continuity Titles
et. al.
Limited series
et.al
Outside Continuity
et. al

Even with dozens of titles and various limited series, the probability that there has been 4001 appearances of the 616 Peter Parker Spider Man is still pretty high.

52 years into 4001 appearances translates into roughly 76 average appearances per year! That's 6 per month on average!
(Both divisions rounded down per d20 rules :P )
And for a long time in the early years, he only appeared in his own title with the occasional guest appearance in others.

All of those "outside continuity" titles are not included in that number. Nor are the period of the Superior or the Ben Reilly Spider-men
or the 250+ alternate universe versions of Parker (of which House of M is included along with many "What if...?" books.)
All those add to the number, and of course, the general overall recognition of the character. You can scour the source I provided to add up all those additional appearances. I imagine, at a glance, they may add anywhere from 500 to 1000 additional appearances at best.
But the same can be said of Captain America, Iron Man, etc... so it's all relative. On their own, those figures are significant.

(To be fair, Spiderman also appeared in children's magazines like "The Electric Company" and had a regular comic strip in locally distributed newspapers nationwide for a considerable time as well.)

Again, I will not claim ANY wiki based source is "complete" or "totally free of inaccuracy." But I do feel confident that those numbers are reasonable.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6, Contributor

You don't keep a continuous comic run since the 60s by not being a popular hero.

The X-Men got their comic cancelled in that period. No kidding. Complete with Cyclops. Who never carried a solo title for any length of time, so is a pretty silly comparison with Iron Man.

There's no magic board at Marvel that says "We can't cancel Iron Man! It's tradition!". Like any other old property, he's got more room than less successful characters, but money is money.

You won't get much argument that Iron Man's a weaker brand than the Fantastic Four (though a more interesting one), the X-Men, and Spider-Man. He's a stronger brand than Doctor Strange (TV movie because of his counter-culture appeal), Daredevil, the Punisher, and Nick Fury, all of who got movies first, just not Marvel Cinematic Universe ones and not all of them theatrical. A weaker but more comparable brand to Captain America (couple of movies first) and the Incredible Hulk (long TV presence). Stronger than Thor, who was IMO the real gamble of the movies.

Don't buy into the narrative :) Papers love underdog and everybody got it wrong stories, even when it's not that true. I've seen more than one story claiming Star Wars bombed with the critics.


Ok, maybe someone more familiar with production can tell me if i'm crazy, but was sammuel l jackson even on the set of agents of shield? Everything seemed to be him handing something to someone, or someone handing something to him, and then you see only a part of him. Did his contract stipulate he had to be in and out before lunch?

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ok, maybe someone more familiar with production can tell me if i'm crazy, but was sammuel l jackson even on the set of agents of shield? Everything seemed to be him handing something to someone, or someone handing something to him, and then you see only a part of him. Did his contract stipulate he had to be in and out before lunch?

He was definitely on the set of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. He was integral to the "Beginning of the End" episode.


Watching the episode, I got the distinct impression that Garrett's scenes were not filmed at the same time as those with Coulson/Sam Jackson.


Lord Fyre wrote:


He was definitely on the set of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. He was integral to the "Beginning of the End" episode.

I saw the episode, it just didn't seem like he was even on the set. If its weird enough to pop out like that to my untrained, rather philistine sensibilities I was wondering if it was as jarring to anyone else or if the voices in my head

have chosen something humerously irrelevant to be paranoid about now :)

Spoiler:

The scientists in the ocean. They put a hand down. A black hand shoots down. The camera pans up and you see Jackson.

Close up on Simmons' face in the hyperbaric chamber, switch to fury, switch to Simmons.

A black hand reaches in from off screen to hand Colson the BFG. Switch to Jackson. Switch to colson. One really weird shot when they're onopposite halves of the screen.

Garret says something. Switch to furry.

MMCJawa wrote:
Watching the episode, I got the distinct impression that Garrett's scenes were not filmed at the same time as those with Coulson/Sam Jackson.

Thank you helpful ratite


Well... Only saw it once so far, but I know he was at least on set with Coulson. The stood shoulder to shoulder there staring down deathlok and Garrett (who may not have been there same day... who knows...) but I remember the banter of 'you didn't tell me he was THIS crazy' with him turning to look at Coulson...

Though with CGI, I suppose that could have been faked.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ok, maybe someone more familiar with production can tell me if i'm crazy, but was sammuel l jackson even on the set of agents of shield? Everything seemed to be him handing something to someone, or someone handing something to him, and then you see only a part of him. Did his contract stipulate he had to be in and out before lunch?

This is an honest question and not an attempt to be a smartass: does it matter?

For my enjoyment, it didn't. I was promised SLJ in the final episode and I was given SLJ. More of him than I expected actually. He was in nearly half the episode.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Russ Taylor wrote:

You don't keep a continuous comic run since the 60s by not being a popular hero.

The X-Men got their comic cancelled in that period. No kidding. Complete with Cyclops. Who never carried a solo title for any length of time, so is a pretty silly comparison with Iron Man.

There's no magic board at Marvel that says "We can't cancel Iron Man! It's tradition!". Like any other old property, he's got more room than less successful characters, but money is money.

You won't get much argument that Iron Man's a weaker brand than the Fantastic Four (though a more interesting one), the X-Men, and Spider-Man. He's a stronger brand than Doctor Strange (TV movie because of his counter-culture appeal), Daredevil, the Punisher, and Nick Fury, all of who got movies first, just not Marvel Cinematic Universe ones and not all of them theatrical. A weaker but more comparable brand to Captain America (couple of movies first) and the Incredible Hulk (long TV presence). Stronger than Thor, who was IMO the real gamble of the movies.

Don't buy into the narrative :) Papers love underdog and everybody got it wrong stories, even when it's not that true. I've seen more than one story claiming Star Wars bombed with the critics.

Wellllll.... X-men were never truly "cancelled." There was brief period where they stopped printing but resumed the run 5-6 months later, continuing the numeration but using the book to publish reprints up until they introduced the All-New All-Different cast. That was in the early 70's. However, looking into this carefully I learned that the X-men DID start as an every other month publication.

As far as how weak or strong a brand Iron Man is versus Fantastic Four?
Fantastic Four's 616 appearance count comes in at 1,623 to IM's 2,892... and to be honest, I could not tell you if any alteration of the core team is included in that count.
Both had awful movie versions made in the 60's or 70's.
Both have had various cartoons made over many years and of various quality.
In recent years, the 2 FF films are regarded in hindsight as generally as lacking in one way or another but were top of mind before the Iron Man films, which are the foundation of the entire MCU and made more with its first movie than both the FF films combined. And the upcoming FF film is already under a bit of scrutiny.
I think there IS some argument to be made about Iron Man being the stronger "brand."
But in the end again the strength of the "brand" isn't really what they seem concerned with.

For Marvel Studios, it seems to be more about the telling of a creative story with fascinating characters. Yes, "brand recognition" is important to them, but only to a point. It's certainly not the overriding principle guiding them and they don't allow their PR department to dictate what the creative people are doing in any significant way that effects the story.
Agents of SHIELD and GotG... heck even Ant Man... as "underdogs" they're great examples of how much trust Marvel has in the creative teams involved.
Simply no metric of "popularity" really measures the kind of successes they've had or will have.
Good work begets good results.


Skeld wrote:


This is an honest question and not an attempt to be a smartass: does it matter?

Not really.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6, Contributor

Issues 67-93 of the X-Men were reprints, 5 years worth. The original, classic X-Men tanked. Really. I had the impression it had a literal cancel rather than a lengthy undead limbo, though, sounds like I was just recalling the the first team and first major attempt to alter it (Havoc/Polaris) were both pretty dismal failures at the time. Whether 5 years of reprints is a true cancel or just an effective cancel I guess comes down to semantics :)

Amusingly, it does mean that Wolverine pretty much made the X-Men what they are today :) I was surprised when I learned that Storm, Nightcrawler, and Colossus were all of the first really successful X-Men (as in a dominant part of the Marvel U) lineup.


Russ Taylor wrote:
Issues 67-93 of the X-Men were reprints, 5 years worth.

Yep, that's effectively what I said. ;P

Russ Taylor wrote:
The original, classic X-Men tanked. Really.

Well, outside of the truly strange reprinting practice, I don't know that is necessarily the case. You could as easily say "so good they did it twice" depending on your attitude about it I suppose.

But it wasn't the last time they would do reprints of the title; the next time it would be under the "Classic X-men" banner at the same time they kept Uncanny running. It seemed to me, growing up, a great way to catch up on the back story of issues that weren't so easy to find.
So I don't know that "tanked" is true. Marvel seemed to have had a commitment to keeping the idea going. I don't know what the sales of the book were like, but we know they kept it going. That means something better than "tanked" in my estimation.
It might be interesting to dig into that history to find out the reasoning behind it, especially since it was such a unique occurrence in comic-book publishing.
Maybe I'll ask at a con someday. ^_^

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6, Contributor

I've never heard a report of the gap that didn't blame it on low sales. The same reason Havoc and Polaris got added.

Both DC and Marvel have a long history of reviving failed concepts, so there's no shock it was done with X-Men. Another example - the Daredevil most people know was a re-invention of the less anti-hero original approach, that reinvention was done as a last gasp before cancellation.


Russ Taylor wrote:
Amusingly, it does mean that Wolverine pretty much made the X-Men what they are today :) I was surprised when I learned that Storm, Nightcrawler, and Colossus were all of the first really successful X-Men (as in a dominant part of the Marvel U) lineup.

It was more Claremont/Byrne than Wolverine, per se, but they were also responsible for turning Wolverine into the massive hit he is today (he had only appeared prior to that twice- once in a last page cameo- in the pages of Len Wein's run on the Hulk, and he was very much undeveloped at that point. He was actually originally going to be one of the High Evolutionary's New Men- an evolved wolverine- and/or his claws were going to be part of his gauntlets).

The Exchange

phantom1592 wrote:

Well... Only saw it once so far, but I know he was at least on set with Coulson. The stood shoulder to shoulder there staring down deathlok and Garrett (who may not have been there same day... who knows...) but I remember the banter of 'you didn't tell me he was THIS crazy' with him turning to look at Coulson...

Though with CGI, I suppose that could have been faked.

Yes, and it doesn't even require CGI.


Skeld wrote:

For my enjoyment, it didn't. I was promised SLJ in the final episode and I was given SLJ. More of him than I expected actually. He was in nearly half the episode.

I'm surprising myself but it did for me. It just seemed like he really wasn't there or interacting with anything.

Maybe he's just in everyone's heads... (kidding! kidding!)


Well this seems to be a general MCU thread as much as it is Agents of Shield, and I gotta say this news is a bit ominous

Edgar Wright no longer directing Antman.


I've had ominous feelings about that since the beginning... While on the subject of characters I can't believe got a feature film ;)

Not having it be Pym and coming out after Ultron..... I... I really don't know WHAT to think...

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

MMCJawa wrote:
Well this seems to be a general MCU thread as much as it is Agents of Shield,

Well "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." appears to have been intended to create "connective tissue" between the MARVEL feature films.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Fyre wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Well this seems to be a general MCU thread as much as it is Agents of Shield,
Well "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." appears to have been intended to create "connective tissue" between the MARVEL feature films.

If not Agents of SHIELD.... at least Coulson :D

One of these days I'm just going to have a Coulson marathon :) Iron man, Iron man 2, Thor, Avengers, Was that all or am I missing one?

Another case of the Actor making something awesome out of a bit part!!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So finally was able to watch Winter Soldier and catch up on SHIELD today.

@The last 5 episodes: Why couldn't the rest of the season have been this good? I almost dropped it multiple times because it was meandering about getting to the point, and they whip this out?

It wasn't just a matter of the content, precisely (which I can understand why they couldn't do that in the previous episodes), but the acting was tighter (like the actors stopped being bored on set), the characterization was better (Skye has been getting steadily better, but I genuinely liked her in these last few episodes, the [now formerly] Blandy McBlanderton got a whole hell of a lot more material to work with, Mai was great, etc.), the pacing was tighter...why couldn't the rest of the season have been like this?


That's the downside of the movie tie in bit. Treading water and waiting for the fun to begin. And now it has. Now that it's started I think it will keep going. There is enough going on to keep the show flowing along without a dead zone before the next movie. I hope...


I'm just hoping they don't pull something similar next season by making Agents tread water for some Age of Ultron tie in.


MMCJawa wrote:
I'm just hoping they don't pull something similar next season by making Agents tread water for some Age of Ultron tie in.

could be the opposite, they might need to rush things to build SHIELD up to a point where it can full fill whatever role it's going to have in the movie


Considering the time line, Guardians happens, then SHIELD, then Agent Carter, then more SHIELD, then AAOU.
Essentially they have the entire season to either rebuild their structure in a way that allows them to provide support for what will happen in AAOU or they will be only tangentially affected by it, it the same way they were by Thor.

Of course... Hayley Atwell is ON the AAOU cast for the role of Peggy Carter. They could, thanks to the mid-season Agent Carter mini series, build mythos on Strucker over the course of the SHIELD season and nod back to it in someway during AAOU.

Like so: MAOS discovers a mystery involving HYDRA... the trail leads back to some old SHIELD documents with a stunning cliffhanger moment leaving everyone asking, "What did they just find out?!"
Cue Agent Carter and we get that answer during that run with the elaborate and exciting backstory. Then they come back to MAOS to use that critical find to move their plot forward, but come just short of resolving it before the world is overrun by the mad human-exterminating Ultron robots.
heh heh


Based on some scenes shot with Hayley Atwell that are supposedly for Avenger: Age of Ultron, I wouldn't be surprised to see that series tie in with that movie (if those shots are actually for AAoU, rather than Agent Carter).


R_Chance wrote:
That's the downside of the movie tie in bit. Treading water and waiting for the fun to begin.

The problem I have with this is that they could have done better standalone episodes. Better writing, more interesting characters (Blandy McSquarejaw, act or no, could have been better done), making the actors be less bored looking on stage (with the exception of Coulson and sometimes Mai) and so on.

It wasn't so much the plot that made the last few episodes great (though that was awesome), it was the upswing in quality of those things as well.

The show was never BAD per se but it could have been a lot better. Hopefully they realize that they've blown their cover next season, with those last 5 episodes they've shown it wasn't a matter of COMPETENCE holding them back, it was just laziness. Said in the least scathing way I can.

Shadow Lodge

Well, honestly, I think that they had a significantly different direction in mind with a lot of characters, (particularly Skye), and had to shift things around a bit too. I'm not sure if I think how things turned out with Ward where planned or part of the shift. In retrospect, with how the team basically screwed him over and pushed the guilt on him for it, in retrospect fits, but it also kind of feels like it was done in retrospect, (at least to me).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't look for much of a Guardians tie-in, especially since I think the movie is going to fly like a lead badoon.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

LazarX wrote:
I don't look for much of a Guardians tie-in, especially since I think the movie is going to fly like a lead badoon.

I expect there will be some tie-in. But you're right, it is tangential enough not to figure too heavily. (The most likely connections are Skye and the Blue Alien.)

Your pun was clever though.


Overall I like where Agents went this season. It would be good to see a few more of the main movie characters, especially the heroes, have cameo appearances even if that is unlikely. I'd like to see a few more characters pop up like Bill Paxton's character - ideally with short arcs with appearances across a small set of episodes featuring a recognizable actor.

And I think all parties would be better off if they could find a way to merge in the other properties like Spiderman, Fantastic Four, Daredevil, etc. into this show but I suspect the creative guys who want that can't get the contracts guys who could work that because the studio heads want what they have and don't want to share with anyone else.


Well if Marvel currently had the film/tv rights to Spiderman/Fantastic Four/Daredevil (though I think they might have gotten back Daredevil. Weren't they doing a Netflix series on him?) we'd probably see them.

It's not a matter of the studio heads getting in the way of the creative team, it's a matter of Fox being unlikely to allow a cameo from one of their money makers.

Sovereign Court

legendarius wrote:
And I think all parties would be better off if they could find a way to merge in the other properties like Spiderman, Fantastic Four, Daredevil, etc. into this show but I suspect the creative guys who want that can't get the contracts guys who could work that because the studio heads want what they have and don't want to share with anyone else.

They can't, they don't own the movie rights for those characters.


Hama wrote:
legendarius wrote:
And I think all parties would be better off if they could find a way to merge in the other properties like Spiderman, Fantastic Four, Daredevil, etc. into this show but I suspect the creative guys who want that can't get the contracts guys who could work that because the studio heads want what they have and don't want to share with anyone else.
They can't, they don't own the movie rights for those characters.

Daredevil they got back. Came down to keeping F4 or Daredevil and Fox chose to keep F4.

Marvel was making a Netflix series for Daredevil but I gather the director for that just quit on them


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Greylurker wrote:
Marvel was making a Netflix series for Daredevil but I gather the director for that just quit on them

Yes, much like the (lamented) Edgar Wright on Ant-Man. ;_;

It was Drew Goddard, of BtVS and Arrow fame, who left, though he's handed the reigns over to Steven DeKnight (also of BtVS fame).

In addition to Daredevil, Marvel got the rights to Ghost Rider back as well.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Ghost Rider's back? WOOHOOOOO!

one at a time.... one at a time... we'll get there

@Legendarius: I think you're on to something... I heard rumors Sony had had talks with Marvel to do just that (i.e. share the loot for any revenue Marvel Studios would generate with Spider-Man)


Yes, it would be nice to see a better take on Ghost Rider than the Nick Cage movies. I suspect that what (if anything) they end up doing with that property will either depend on how well the Netflix series go, with how a possible Doctor Strange movie will go, or both. It would be cool to see them venture out into some magic/horror sorts of movies, in addition to the sorts of things they are already trying- action-thriller (Winter Soldier), space opera (Guardians).


Sony has come off as the studio most desperate to have a tie in with the other studios with marvel properties. They tried to get a cameo from the Oscorp building in Avengers, and also arranged for a post credit x-men scene to be added to Spiderman.

FYI, I don't think Drew Goddard's situation is comparable to Edgar Wright. Goddard is continuing to be a producer on Daredevil, and they will continue to use his scripts for the first two episodes. Can't blame him for choosing a major theatrical movie over a limited Netflix series.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Fox may indeed have the movie rights to several Marvel characters. Do they also have the television rights?


Chris Mortika wrote:
Fox may indeed have the movie rights to several Marvel characters. Do they also have the television rights?

3

From what I heard the television rights are effectively dual-owned in a way that gives both Fox and Marvel (now Disney) veto rights over the other one. So effectively no-one has the rights to make a television show.

I could easily be wrong though.


Marvel technically has veto rights over movies as well. They merely choose not to use it.

I have no idea what the deal is with TV rights for Spiderman, X-men, etc, but given that the Marvel TV shows take place in the MCU, they might not want to spin off tv shows on characters they can't even mention in the movies.

The Exchange

Rynjin wrote:
R_Chance wrote:
That's the downside of the movie tie in bit. Treading water and waiting for the fun to begin.

The problem I have with this is that they could have done better standalone episodes. Better writing, more interesting characters (Blandy McSquarejaw, act or no, could have been better done), making the actors be less bored looking on stage (with the exception of Coulson and sometimes Mai) and so on.

It wasn't so much the plot that made the last few episodes great (though that was awesome), it was the upswing in quality of those things as well.

The show was never BAD per se but it could have been a lot better. Hopefully they realize that they've blown their cover next season, with those last 5 episodes they've shown it wasn't a matter of COMPETENCE holding them back, it was just laziness. Said in the least scathing way I can.

Do you think that

1) F.Z.Z.T (the one with the alien helmet infecting Simmons)
2) "Eye Spy" (the one with the first "villain" controlled by the exploding eye thing)
3) "The Well" (the one with the Asgardian Rod of Being Angry)
4) T.R.A.C.K.S (the one with the train)

were bad lazy episodes? I think they were all very good. Other episodes were decent, and only a few were truly bland.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:

Do you think that

1) F.Z.Z.T (the one with the alien helmet infecting Simmons)
2) "Eye Spy" (the one with the first "villain" controlled by the exploding eye thing)
3) "The Well" (the one with the Asgardian Rod of Being Angry)
4) T.R.A.C.K.S (the one with the train)

were bad lazy episodes? I think they were all very good. Other episodes were decent, and only a few were truly bland.

I agree with you. They filmed in multiple locations, the only recycled set being the airplane really... when you think about all that went into that series you start feeling the respect... compare THAT, for instance, to a show with laugh machines always revolving in the same apartment.... etc.


Lord Snow wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
R_Chance wrote:
That's the downside of the movie tie in bit. Treading water and waiting for the fun to begin.

The problem I have with this is that they could have done better standalone episodes. Better writing, more interesting characters (Blandy McSquarejaw, act or no, could have been better done), making the actors be less bored looking on stage (with the exception of Coulson and sometimes Mai) and so on.

It wasn't so much the plot that made the last few episodes great (though that was awesome), it was the upswing in quality of those things as well.

The show was never BAD per se but it could have been a lot better. Hopefully they realize that they've blown their cover next season, with those last 5 episodes they've shown it wasn't a matter of COMPETENCE holding them back, it was just laziness. Said in the least scathing way I can.

Do you think that

1) F.Z.Z.T (the one with the alien helmet infecting Simmons)
2) "Eye Spy" (the one with the first "villain" controlled by the exploding eye thing)
3) "The Well" (the one with the Asgardian Rod of Being Angry)
4) T.R.A.C.K.S (the one with the train)

were bad lazy episodes? I think they were all very good. Other episodes were decent, and only a few were truly bland.

F.Z.Z.T was good. Eye Spy was meh, but it introduced some good stuff. The Well had potential but I wasn't able to get into it. Mostly because Ward's Blandy McSquarejaw routine kinda ruined any character development that might have been effective.

And T.R.A.C.K.S. was interesting, I'll give it that. Not the hugest fan of the Rashomon style storytelling but I'll give it credit for trying something new (for the show) and the plot twist at the end. Saying it's outright bad would be being dishonest, but I didn't enjoy most of it as much as I could have.

Episodes I liked (besides the last five):

1.) F.Z.Z.T
2.) The Hub
3.) Repairs (at least the first half of it)
4.) The Bridge (at least the last half of it)
5.) Seeds
6.) T.A.H.I.T.I (more the info content than the actual goings on...still a mite peeved that Coulson puts on the "hero" act after putting down two people who are doing the job while they're illegally breaking in).

Others were decent, but it's hard to say I actually liked them, more was watching in the hope it would pick up later, and the good episodes spurred me on with that.

So 10/22 episodes, not the greatest track record in my book.

The rest of the episodes were plagued with one of a few problems, or more.

1.) They focused on a character with little to no personality (Ward, mostly) and added nothing to his character. May focused episodes fall on the borderline of this, but they at least made an attempt and she's a badass anyway so at least that's fun to watch.

2.) The plot twists were telegraphed a mile away. Or even spoiled before the episode even aired.

3.) The acting was stiff and sometimes it almost felt like everybody was bored on set.

4.) The show was just spinning its wheels, waiting for Cap 2 to drop. Which wasn't necessary. They could have done something else for the 16 episodes prior. Some other story arc, setting up for future arcs, hell even fleshing out the Clairvoyant arc before the movie dropped.

1,401 to 1,450 of 4,975 << first < prev | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Television / Agents of Shield All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.