So, you have never heard of Ming-Na Wen?
Yes, this is a recent photo. she is 59 She is just 3 years younger than Temuera Morrison who play Boba Fettt in the Diney+ show
>it's a Blizztroon >xe's complaining about capeshit as if xer beloved setting hasn't been capeshit since day 1 and xe didn't preorder Overwatch premium editions
1 year ago
Anonymous
Looks like the shills are already seething over a new failure for their shitty company.
Not gonna use the Shazam meme anytime soon eh, cuck? Don't answer, i won't bother reading.
I just saw it, it's okay. I'd say it's on par with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. And while the first one had less time to do that because they had to establish the setting for it first, the second movie does a good work at making the team work as a family of super heroes. Best pat was Darla. She got to ride an Unicorn.
[...]
If that's really his reason, then it's stupid. those villain are not even "Girl power" at all. They are just villains who happens to be women, that's it.
It get so, SO much worse >Billy has a crush on Wonder Woman >Dies in the movie >Wonder Woman literally shows up at the end, kisses him, and brings him back to life
This movie is basically Pacific Rim of capeshit: good strong franchising starting first film ruined by a moronic ass sequel ignoring everything good about what came before
Nah the first one was serviceable and fine. Not high art, but you got what you paid for. Now the sequel? Went full moron
>This movie is basically Pacific Rim of capeshit: good strong franchising starting first film ruined by a moronic ass sequel ignoring everything good about what came before
Didn't Wonder Woman already achieve this?
The first Wonder Woman was bad too and I don't care what casual frick tries to say otherwise. Gal was a miscast, the script was bad, and for frick sake Chris Pine's Steve Trevor was arguably the protagonist
It was all crap to me. If you want a decent Wonder Woman origin movie, I'd recommend the 2009 animated movie. Gal's movies are shit, and they're crutched by period piece bullshit to fill gaps in the script
1 year ago
Anonymous
Oh don't get me wrong, the movie was shit and Gal Gadot is a shit actress who only poses in her movies but in terms of what came before it it was better than nothing
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Better than nothing
I disagree. You and many like you only give the first movie a participation ribbon because MoS and BvS were so damn disappointing. Wonder Woman deserves better, and I stand by what I said.
At least the animated movie had Alfred Molina
1 year ago
Anonymous
>You and many like you only give the first movie a participation ribbon
I mean yeah if we're judging the DCEU films then I would say it gets it by default. Is it a good representation of WW? Nope and we agree on that. She does deserve better and hopefully she gets an actual good fricking movie
1 year ago
Anonymous
At this point I'm more holding out for the game
1 year ago
Anonymous
A videogame will be based on modern WW, which is shit.
Wait for muh daughter of zeus, muh warrior, muh sword/shield, muh no kill rule.
Dead character
1 year ago
Anonymous
Frick off sci fi gay
1 year ago
Anonymous
Frick off rebooter
1 year ago
Anonymous
Why do people here talk about Cinemaphile related topics like imbeciles? Serious question because I (probably everyone else as well) have been noticing a complete lack of politeness and civility for years now. It has to be a mix of being raised in a wrong way, the anonymity topic, and for some people probably even an anwarranted amount of narcissism. Why does everything have to be so negative for you people? Obviously, you don't have to like things but being so bitter about something you don't like isn't healthy at all
1 year ago
Anonymous
we have always been like this and always will be
why are you here if you don't like it? piss off somewhere else
1 year ago
Anonymous
>We
Speak for yourself, I have been nice to people since day one. And if not, I was always able to undermine my opinion by writing like a normal person and not like a childish lunatic. Also, stop generalising, there are tons of normal people here you can have great discussions with. Especially on other boards.
>If any single director has killed modern cinema, it was Whedon with Avengers.
No, he didn't. the compalin of "quirky" was never valid and has always exited in movies. Nor does this "quirky" thing has ever been something that has made Marvel movies bad.
I disagree on all accounts >the compalin of "quirky" was never valid
I'm not able to tell whether you are misrepresenting my comment on purpose or not. I was talking about quips and not quirkiness. The MCU has been quirky since day one. Even quips were used on occasion, especially in Phase 1. What was completely new and what started with Avengers 1 was quips and terrible dialogues completely replacing normal dialogues (which occasionally are sprinkled with comedy). >Nor does this "quirky" thing has ever been something that has made Marvel movies bad.
As you're talking about quirky and not about quips, I assume we are completely talking past each other because Thor Ragnarok and Love and Thunder are perfect examples of quips and even quirkiness ruining a movie completely.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Thor Ragnarok and Love and Thunder are perfect examples of quips and even quirkiness ruining a movie completely.
No they are perfect examples of capeshitters not being able to handle anything creative and unique and crying that they didn't get their copy pasted goyslop
1 year ago
Anonymous
If you're not joking, you have one of the most terrible takes on movies ever.
Creativeness is always appreciated but let's not forget that Thor 1 was a perfect example of being visually creative with Asgard while Ragnarok was a CGI shitfest that brought nothing to the table storywise
I would love to hear your points on how Love and Thunder is a legit good movie though because even hardcore MCU fans say it's terribly bad.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>creative and unique
there was literally nothing creative or unique about either of those movies
1 year ago
Anonymous
Show me what movie they are similar to specifically? All American movies look the same to me yet these stood out
1 year ago
Anonymous
>I was talking about quips
Not a valid complain. That's complaining about some of the best Schwarzenegger movies. It make no sense to compalin about it and even less to assign that to Whedon.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>not a valid complaint
You bring zero arguments into the mix, it's pointless talking to you. Schwarzenegger movies had funny comedy, especially quips. Plus, those movies had great practical action scenes. What do MCU movies have to offer in your opinion?
It makes perfect sense to asign that to Whedon but I'll refrain from going into detail because you won't bother giving explanations anyway.
Thor 3 & 4 are ruined in what way exactly? Like obviously they are much better than the previous movies and absolutely mogs Aaron's Thorshit. Maybe you are that autist who complains they ruined Planet Hulk as if it would even make sense to do in live action or that they couldn't still revisit it if they wanted to
I rarely care about comparing everything to comics when it comes to cape movies because I love to see original ideas on the screen. Even when costumes are butchered, I don't care that much as long as the design is neat to look at
>Thor 3 & 4 are ruined in what way exactly?
Thor 1 had a coherent (not perfect) story with great characters. Thor 2 was worse, yet there was more character development. Thor 3 and 4 took all of Thor's character development and flushed it down a toilet. If you think Waititi taking Thor, someone who suffered great losses and who tried to be a better person, resulting in him being fit for wielding Mjölnir, and turning him into a mentally challenged person doesn't mean that the movies are ruined, I guess you can have a good time with the movies. I don't expect cape movies to be the pinnacle of storytelling but not staying coherent in the overall story is lame and downright bad writing. Again, to each their own but I expect more from professional writers
1 year ago
Anonymous
>You bring zero arguments into the mix
I did. I pointed out they have always existed since action movies exists and plenty of 80's and 90's schlocks have them.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>What do MCU movies have to offer in your opinion?
funny comedy and great action scenes.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>things that never happened
You have the mind of a 6yo
1 year ago
Anonymous
>muh character development
Ah reddit must be down or something
1 year ago
Anonymous
>not wanting character development
Are you braindead? Also, why are you talking about Reddit?
1 year ago
Anonymous
Thor 3 & 4 are ruined in what way exactly? Like obviously they are much better than the previous movies and absolutely mogs Aaron's Thorshit. Maybe you are that autist who complains they ruined Planet Hulk as if it would even make sense to do in live action or that they couldn't still revisit it if they wanted to
1 year ago
Anonymous
You get what you deseve for defending bastardization of IPs, characters and concepts, as well as bad products
>typical fish out of water story
Fish out of water stories are the laziest shit ever. When I watch a Thor movie I want to watch a movie about Norse action, not an hour and a half of >durr what is a Walmart
1 year ago
Anonymous
To be fair, having Thor 1 taking place anywhere else but earth would have inflated the costs by a huge amount. You have to remember that Marvel movies during Phase 1 didn't have the same type of budget as now. Plus, the effects were actually great so there was a load of effort going into post production. Had Thor 1 been produced now, I am sure it would have turned out way more the way you would have wanted it from a setting-POV
1 year ago
Anonymous
That's fair. No excuse for Captain Marvel though.
1 year ago
Anonymous
The problem with "Space Hero plays cop" is that no one really sympathizes with alien cultures that are barely sketched out. So you are obligated to either make them cheap Earth parallels like Star Trek falls into, or split the difference on Earth.
Captain Marvel was fine for what it was Mr. Incel, it wasn't top tier MCU but it hit it's beats well enough. It's middle-third MCU, and you need to stop being emotionally compromised over it.
1 year ago
Anonymous
i'd say the main problem with cap marvel is that we only get carol's backstory way too late to really care about her as a character. everything else about it was mid. green lantern was just a waste of film from beginning to end
1 year ago
Anonymous
That is NOT the real complaint made about Captain Marvel, it's not even adjacent to what still has chuds seething over it.
1 year ago
Anonymous
oh you mean that weird thing where they declared that film about the bug eyed robot was the real feminist movie instead?
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Captain Marvel was fine for what it was
Captain Marvel was a completely unremarkable film that had absolutely nothing of interest to say or show. If you're deflecting to the "You hate just women" card, it simply means you hold lower standards for women, making you the sexist.
1 year ago
Anonymous
"Hating women" is thinking they're such fragile infantile creatures that they should never have a threatening and intimidating villain to overcome in their own story or face anything they can't easily beat.
1 year ago
Anonymous
No one in the MCU faced an unbeatable villain until arguably Doctor Strange and Dormammu.
Thor spend a lot of time fighting his little brother for Pete's sake. Pete spends his time fighting villains he has to be careful not to punch too hard and accidentally kill.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Unbeatable threats are just as boring as the unstoppable hero unless we're talking of something like cosmic horror movie and not just action/capeshit.
What really good is finding the right balance between the high level of threat and having a villain a hero could realistically beat.
Well, there's many other factors of making a good capeshit villain but that's beside the point.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Yeah but a lot of the time the hero is simply compromised by their own moral limitations or the situation they find themselves in, not the villains sheer power.
For Spider-Man it's not being willing to punch Vulture or Ock's head clean off; (Batman just not-murders them), T'Challah is culturally obligated to level the ground between him and Killmonger; Carol is an amnesiac fighting for the wrong army.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Except Vulture and Ock are allowed to pummel Spider-Man and give you a sense of "yeah, this could get bad for Spider-Man".
Except "muh not killing" means absolutely frickall for Batman when on one side you have the likes of Joker who is a threat because of being a level of unpredictability Batman has never faced before or Ra's and Bane who are more physical dangers.
Except Captain Marvel is a boring fricking cakewalk story of a hero playing a game on easy mode.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Except Vulture and Ock are allowed to pummel Spider-Man and give you a sense of "yeah, this could get bad for Spider-Man".
Because he lightly slap-fights with them, specifically tries to soft-glove them. Sandman and Goblin (I try to forget SM3's Venom) are the actual threats to his life, even Lizard isn't so much if he fought him intelligently.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I would be more forgiving of Homecoming Spidey struggling against Vulture because he's treated as an absolute amateur if that scene in CW where he takes out both Bucky and Falcon with almost no effort and later put up a fairly decent fight against Captain America didn't exist.
Doc Ock, yeah. Guess Raimi wasn't really concerned with the power-levels there and just went for "it looks cool" kind of deal. I love Spider-Man 2, but I will not pretend it's not an issue.
>This movie is basically Pacific Rim of capeshit: good strong franchising starting first film ruined by a moronic ass sequel ignoring everything good about what came before
Didn't Wonder Woman already achieve this?
the episode we quote failed to make a coherent argument against it beyond “society and police and your wheedling brother will hunt you down and force you to commit suicide if you ever try”, so I elect to ignore it.
Also frick kahl I hope Ike fricks his girlfriend as revenge for that
It get so, SO much worse >Billy has a crush on Wonder Woman >Dies in the movie >Wonder Woman literally shows up at the end, kisses him, and brings him back to life
This movie is basically Pacific Rim of capeshit: good strong franchising starting first film ruined by a moronic ass sequel ignoring everything good about what came before
No she doesn't, she just touches a magic staff and the magic staff brings him back to life.
If she kissed him I would watch the movie.
You know I really liked the first Shazam. And that Mr. Mind teaser at the end was fun. This is just disappointing.
Mr. Mind was never going to be the main villain in this. They did scrap a scene where they reveal he let the female villains get into Earth as part of his keikaku, but the director thought it complicated the plot too much.
post credit scene Mr. Mind actually shows up again in Sivana's cell and Sivana complain that after Mr. Mind told him he had great plans for him (first movie post credit scene), he just left and never came back for 2 years. Mr. Minds tell him that it is not easy to prep things like that with just a caterpillar body, but that now things are ready and he can tell him all he has planned, only to remember at the last moment there is something else he need to do and frick off without telling Sivana anything again.
I think this level of trolling was fully intentional and the director knew it's likely there will be no more sequel.
LOL
I’m gonna kek so hard when they announce there will be no Shazam 3 caussa this one’s flop
Literally canon that Mind forgot what he wanted to do and never did do any plan
I just saw it, it's okay. I'd say it's on par with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. And while the first one had less time to do that because they had to establish the setting for it first, the second movie does a good work at making the team work as a family of super heroes. Best pat was Darla. She got to ride an Unicorn.
yep, girl power is actually the reason mark strong admitted to not coming back for this one
If that's really his reason, then it's stupid. those villain are not even "Girl power" at all. They are just villains who happens to be women, that's it.
>I'd say it's on par with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Well damn, Shang Chi was one of the only two movies (along with Eternals) in the last two Phases I truly enjoyed >They are just villains who happens to be women, that's it.
That's what I've liked about the DCEU movies so far. Even though they are diverse in its cast, they really don't make a huge fuss about the entire diversity, especially girlpower, bullshit. Not even the Wonder Woman movies. And it could have gone a whole other way when you look at the steaming pile of dogshit that is the Arrowverse.
baseless speculation but i'd guess they were going to introduce black adam in 2, have him as the hero in his own movie and then him and billy team up to fight mr mind, sivana and the monster society in 3. dwayne being the egotistical ass that he is wanted his own movie first, so they had to throw something together for 2 and we got the daughters instead
>they were going to introduce black adam in 2, have him as the hero in his own movie and then him and billy team up to fight mr mind, sivana and the monster society in 3.
This is far too organized and sensible for WB to have originally planned.
When I first heard Shazam 2 was immediately following Black Adam I thought they would have Shazam appear at the end or have some set up for Shazam 2. I wonder how much of the blame is on the Rock for not wanting to play ball?
>I wonder how much of the blame is on the Rock for not wanting to play ball?
probably a fair bit with him barely acknowledging cap exists and focusing entirely on black adam vs superman rather than that he's supposed to be billy's villain
>I wonder how much of the blame is on the Rock for not wanting to play ball?
probably a fair bit with him barely acknowledging cap exists and focusing entirely on black adam vs superman rather than that he's supposed to be billy's villain
It literally couldn't happen because the Rock has a contractual agreement where he can't be beaten by anybody so a typical hero beats the villain story wouldn't work for him
[...]
It literally couldn't happen because the Rock has a contractual agreement where he can't be beaten by anybody so a typical hero beats the villain story wouldn't work for him
>WB will be begging Snyder to come back by the end of 2025
thats not going to happen
By the time Gunn fails the entire capeshit thing is going to be dead outside of Spiderman and Batman movies
>Snyder won't come back after how they treated him.
They gave him Justice League even after BvS underperformed. They also let him finish the Snyder Cut. Dude got more chances than most people in the business and he still screwed it up.
Because Gunn is the founding father of le quirky risky nihilistic comedic entertainment trash that populates all corners of pop culture nowadasy. His GotG might as well had killed capeshit as a serious medium forever. I know Iron Man already was pretty dumb and comedic before but it never reached the levels of absurdity that Gunn input in the MCU. A shame because The Russos were ready to bring a new era of more respectable capeshit movies with the Winter Soldier. Everything was going great, and then Gunn stopped them on their tracks and send the whole genre down a cliff.
>GotG >quirky risky nihilistic
The heroes beat the villain in the first one by holding hands while their leader is remembering his dying mom and cries. There are a thousand ways to shit on GotG, or any of Gunn's movies, both seriously or just to shitpost that don't make you look as stupid as saying this. Do people even think about what they're posting?
>Because Gunn is the founding father of le quirky risky nihilistic comedic entertainment trash that populates all corners of pop culture nowadasy.
Joss Whedon
whedon's style is just excessively quippy, nihilism isn't usually part of it
Because Gunn is the founding father of le quirky risky nihilistic comedic entertainment trash that populates all corners of pop culture nowadasy. His GotG might as well had killed capeshit as a serious medium forever. I know Iron Man already was pretty dumb and comedic before but it never reached the levels of absurdity that Gunn input in the MCU. A shame because The Russos were ready to bring a new era of more respectable capeshit movies with the Winter Soldier. Everything was going great, and then Gunn stopped them on their tracks and send the whole genre down a cliff.
If any single director has killed modern cinema, it was Whedon with Avengers. GotG has shitty comedy as well but it's at least got a good story. Every single one of Whedon's blockbusters is complete horseshit with the terrible comedy (quips) which serve as a distraction from a lack of proper story.
>If any single director has killed modern cinema, it was Whedon with Avengers.
No, he didn't. the compalin of "quirky" was never valid and has always exited in movies. Nor does this "quirky" thing has ever been something that has made Marvel movies bad.
without first Avengers there would be no MCU, you fricking moron. Whedon did what no one else could- deliver an actual FUN movie with superheroes that felt like a team, incredible comic book experience
Him kickstarting the franchise to another level means one can't criticise the lack of quality in his movies? Way to miss the entire point. >FUN
There's nothing to argue about with you as you seemingly only care about explosions and posing instead of storytelling. You do you.
>You bring zero arguments into the mix
I did. I pointed out they have always existed since action movies exists and plenty of 80's and 90's schlocks have them.
And the same movies from the past are still criticised to this day for being bad, what is your point?
>What do MCU movies have to offer in your opinion?
funny comedy and great action scenes.
Then the MCU is perfect for you. You can't expect everyone to only care about comedy and boring CGI action sequences though.
>And the same movies from the past are still criticised to this day for being bad
I won't bother agreeing or disagreeing with whether they are bad or not and simply point out that by acknowledging their existence, it undermine the statement that Whedon is at the source of such thing.
> You can't expect everyone to only care about comedy and boring CGI action sequences though.
My point is about how people blame Whedon for things action movies have always been doing since the 80's.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>it undermine the statement that Whedon is at the source of such thing
I assume we have a misunderstanding here. I was not by any means stating Whedon is the source of quips. I am stating that Avengers 1, and thus Whedon, was one of the main contributing factors for MODERN cinema going into a qualitative decline. Avengers 1 was the first superhero movie (to my knowledge) to hit 1.5 billion dollars worldwide and managed to provide a perfect recipe for success with the masses. That recipe (tons of comedy and poor CGI) was then used in most of the following movies. Avengers was even proof for effort not having to go into effects which is more relevant than ever now that you see movies like Black Panther 2 and Love and Thunder basically putting in minimal effort. Quips clearly aren't the only issue here
>My point is about how people blame Whedon for things action movies have always been doing since the 80's.
Can we agree though that he is to be blamed for the decline of the MCU? Phase 1 was completely fine with every director putting in tons of thought (whether positive or negative) into every respective movie and its themes. Can't really say the same about the following ones with only few exceptions
1 year ago
Anonymous
>am stating that Avengers 1, and thus Whedon, was one of the main contributing factors for MODERN cinema going into a qualitative decline.
And you are wrong. it was happening way before that and is in no way different than any other action movies at the time.
Whedon didn't start anything. The movie is simply a product of his time.
>Can we agree though that he is to be blamed for the decline of the MCU?
No. Seeing that if a decline there is,according tot he complain of of the general public audience, it didn't really start before End Game came out. Frick, people were already complaining about Marvel Movie fatigue after some were disappointed by Iron Man 2.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Above, some anons are saying Whedon made the MCU into what it is now and that without him, cape movies wouldn't be such a massive thing, yet you are trying to act like Avengers "is in no way different than any other action movies at the time". So are you against the former point?
>people were already complaining about Marvel Movie fatigue after some were disappointed by Iron Man 2.
And what happened right around the time Iron Man 2 was produced? Damn right, Disney acquisition. That's the whole issue, trying to put the entirety of the MCU into a simplistic formula. Don't get me wrong, it worked out perfectly business wise but the quality saw a massive deterioration. >complain of of the general public audience
Why are you talking about the general public? The masses will love every piece of shit movie out there. That's why TFA, TLJ, and shit like Transformers 4 were so successful. I am talking about film making in particular. Character themes and development, cinematography, soundtracks, effects. Those have been bad way before Endgame.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>bove, some anons are saying Whedon made the MCU into what it is now and that without him, cape movies wouldn't be such a massive thing
Yeah, no. Marvel movies were a massive hit already before the Avengers. I'll give to Whedon the credit that is due, he made the sauce work. He established the standard as to how make big ensemble cast coming from individual centric movies work well together without any of them losing to much or being munched to much by others in more a limited screentime-per-characters condition.
He didn't create the MCU formula, but he set up the minimal requirement for the next avengers movie as well as how to handle cameo in the more Solo MCU movies.
>And what happened right around the time Iron Man 2 was produced? Damn right, Disney acquisition.
You do realise that Marvel movies only became more popular afterward, right? it only further my point that there was no real fatigue until at least the after End Game and that all those complain were always, for the most, contrarian. Frick, even trying to argue of a marvel fatigue after that point is dubious at most, as the third Spider-man movie turned out to be hugely popular and loved not just by the general audience, but also most hardcore fans.
>The masses will love every piece of shit movie out there
The point is to establish a marvel fatigue and what made it turn bad, if it ever happened. What make a movie good or bad rely on a lot of subjectivity and the general popularity of a movie is one of the few objective measures.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Quips existed before, but not the marvelesque quipshit
1 year ago
Anonymous
Same difference.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>ESL
To the 6yo-like mind af an acritical capeshitter, maybe.
Actual adults can tell the difference between schlock made for adults and cringetstic shit made for terminally online underage serial consumers
1 year ago
Anonymous
Well if any pass by, try to invite them into the conversation.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>>ESL
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/same+difference
https://grammarist.com/idiom/same-difference/
Starting to think English isn't YOUR native language...
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Actual adults can tell the difference between schlock made for adults and cringetstic shit made for terminally online underage serial consumers
1 year ago
Anonymous
>They hated him because he told the truth.jpg
1 year ago
Anonymous
>they predicted the smug video essays about a:tla
a prophet
1 year ago
Anonymous
You aren't entitled to have your era to be the best ever, or even good at all. Things and decades get good and go to shit all the times.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You ,know what? I think you are right. Thank you for being straight with me.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>pick up old Marvel comic >look inside >quips
How did the MCU do this?
>the Russo bros and Ryan coogler made better MCU movies than fricking guardians.
Civil War was good but that's about it, Guardians is the only time MCU made literal whos outside of core Avengers popular and they've been failing ever since also it was a perfect balance of seriousness and lightheartedness that everyone else has been trying to copy and also failing at
Gunn is better than any literal who indie director and Reddit and Memey writer the MCU currently has the problem is he is not the type of guy you would give Superman and Batman too
I smiled throughout her reading the entire letter and I'm not a fan of comedy in superhero movies at all. Seems like people here will just hate on anything. If the second is anything like the first movie, I'll like it.
I hope they will use Mr. Mind in the third
>If the second is anything like the first movie, I'll like it.
See
I just saw it, it's okay. I'd say it's on par with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. And while the first one had less time to do that because they had to establish the setting for it first, the second movie does a good work at making the team work as a family of super heroes. Best pat was Darla. She got to ride an Unicorn.
[...]
If that's really his reason, then it's stupid. those villain are not even "Girl power" at all. They are just villains who happens to be women, that's it.
At this point they're deliberately putting out shit movies to condition audiences to accept that the Gunnverse without question. WB's not as smart as they think they are if it's this easy to suss them out.
Jesus Christ anon, no. They made these movies years ago not two months ago.
Disney fricked up the last 2 X-Men movies after the merger, why wouldn't it happen again here?
They didn't think THAT far ahead but the reason why Shazam 2 doesn't have Mister Mind is because Black Adam was being favored and thought to be a winner at the time before release
He's still worse >h-his films made money though
Yeah, at the start of the domination of capeshit in movie theaters, and even then his DC never stacked up to Marvel or even FoX-Men.
>The Marvels was so fricking bad they had to delay it by nearly half a year >currently stuck in reshoot hell and they are chopping off entire acts from the movie
Tick tock.
>Man of Steel to Batman v Superman >Wonder Woman to WW84 >Shazam to Shazam: Fury of the Gods >Aquaman to Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (according to rumors)
DC has had an awful track record with sequels for the past decade goddamn
TO BE FAIR Wonder Woman and Superman were basically propaganda pieces just like Cap. However I agree, it really shouldn't have been set in that decade. Period piece shit is so damn gimmicky and lazy, pigeonholing a character in an era
>I'm sorry, Salt Shaker. You can't join the Autobots. You're going to make me say it, aren't you? You turn into a pretzel cart. How is that going to look? "Here comes the pretzel cart".
I assume the media is smearing this because Levi called out the clot shots. I had no interest in seeing this but now I want to because it can't possibly be as bad as the media smears say it is.
Executive meddling, they couldn't leave it alone, they never can. I'll still see it to support my wife, I really hope she goes on to bigger and bigger things.
I didn't recognize who you were posting at first. She does have a lot of potential. I have to say, I hope she gets more (film) work too. As far Shazam 2, it was pushed back several times. Didn't they actually do reshoots at some point too?
>they have to pay royalties to the original author.
No they don't. They're work for hire. Anything they make, the company 100% owns. Giving them any sort of "royalties" is just a courtesy thing. Nothing more.
IMPORTANT SPOILER! DON'T LOOK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED OF SOMETHING BIG!!! The old wizard is brought back to earth at the end and he decides to have a change of style and dress like a pimp.
I will maintain that overall cinema going into decline is as much of Blumhouse's as it is MCU's fault. People call MCU conveyer-belt shit, but Blumhouse is 10x that. And the attempts to separate the horror genre from that are more ofthen than not also bad, but get praised for being different from Blumhouse trash because they raped horror genre so hard, being distinct from their awful shit seems like something worth commending. God, I hate Blumhouse so damn much.
Interesting take although your comment would require horror being enormously mainstream to the point where everyone and their mom watches horror. I get what you mean but horror still is a rather niche genre in comparison to genres that reach 500 million - 1 billion bucks on a regular basis
Here's the top grossing movies of 1985, well before a lot of you were born. Silly PG comedies, sequels and sequel-bait. None of these movies are "important" any moreso than 2022's top 10.
1. Back to the Future
2. Beverly Hills Cop
3. Rambo: First Blood Part II
4. Rocky IV
5. Cocoon
6. Witness
7. The Goonies
8. Police Academy 2: Their First Assignment
9. Fletch
10. A View to a Kill
You homosexuals just want to cherry-pick movies spread across decades to indict modern movies for being shallow dreck, when it has always been thus.
Wrong board
A good deal of those are actually at least relevant in pop culture to this day. What really makes me laugh is people acting as if pre-MCU 2000's movies were full of arthouse movies being appreciated, most of it was garbage.
>people acting as if pre-MCU 2000's movies were full of arthouse movies being appreciated, most of it was garbage.
I don't think any of it aspired to be arthouse? It wanted to be fun Serial Adventures, which I would argue it succeeded at to a ridiculous degree.
It's just biff-pow-bang superadventures with cackling villains and noble charming heroes, and THAT'S FINE.
Man of Steel tried to be arthouse, arguably, or at least oppressively symbolic and angsty.
You fail to understand that "fun" used to be not mass produced dogshit made and consumed without standards, unless it was cheap shit made for lesser TV channels.
Also fun VS arthouse where capeshit represents the "fun" side is a false dichotomy
>You fail to understand that "fun" used to be not mass produced dogshit
When was this? Not the era of teen camp raunch comedies, or "SNL star makes a stupid movie", not the era of "Slasher XXI, the Slashening" or the era of "Ridiculously Propagandist America FRICK YEAH".
capeshit is a unprecedented level of inhuman shit, but with beyond stellar marketing and budget.
You would have never seen the budget of Cleopatra given to Mac and Me in any decade, unlike now >When was this golden age?
Golden age of hollywod is called that for a reason. 70-mid90 is another. But I'm sure you're tired of hearing this fact every time you ask that question, capeshitter
1 year ago
Anonymous
>capeshit is a unprecedented level of inhuman shit
I can't even take this sort of post seriously. Sorry.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Ah, yes, I rememeber when Ghostbusters Cops used to cost 300 gorillions and to be regarded as an acceptable product
1 year ago
Anonymous
The most expensive movie of 1980 was shlock Rambo III. At the time the most expensive movie ever produced. Your arguments are shit.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Mid movie, great practical action. It has its merit.
Towers over all capeshit made in the last decade combined.
Lmao you keep comparing schlock that doesn't embarass an adult to capeshit aimed at manchildren and actual toddlers
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Rambo 3 towers over all capeshit made in the last decade combined.
Ok, it's been fun, but I gotta tap out with this comment. gg girls. You can call this my consnession if you like. Stay Hilarious.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You know what's productive? Murdering capeshitters. Let's do it so cinemas will thrive again.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Having them realize that they are watching the unfun equivalent of porn would be enough, thanks
1 year ago
Anonymous
1 year ago
Anonymous
People that laughs incontrollabily at the same poop joke for ten years in a row arent' in the position to define "fun"
1 year ago
Anonymous
Porn is boring trash to begin with.
I prefer stuff like Playboy erotica movies, where the nudity is just enough to be exciting without revealing too much. Watching a meat stick enter a meat hole is boring.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Porn is boring trash to begin with.
That's the point. It's also cheap and crass unless it knows its place. And make people moronic with overexposure.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Lol, this is the reason why capeshit is still at large, because all you pussies just talk instead of killing them.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You know what? You are actually right!
I'll now grab my gun and bring some justice to them.
Bye, friend.
Lmao 1 to 4 and 7 tower over everything made in the last decade. The comparison is 100% embarassing.
5 is probably only surpassed by an handful of modern movie despite being what? A midlle of the road TV flick?
The rest I haven't seen but I guess I'd probably like them over any disney mcu movie ever
Way to embarass your argument, lmao
I'm certainly older than you are, and I am nostalgic for even older flicks than you. I am not pretentious enough to pretend that my childhood was filled with Films of Superior Quality, I watched a shit-ton of stupid contemporary movie s too, and had to listen to my old pops being nostalgic for the "great" B&W Era, which was also brimming with cheap throwaway entertainment. It wasn't all Marx Brothers classics. (which is the epitome of quippery).
>I'm certainly older than you are
not a badge. And you can't know it >, and I am nostalgic for even older flicks than you. I am not pretentious enough to pretend that my childhood was filled with Films of Superior Quality,
I'm not nostalgic. I call good what's good and bad what's bad. And I never mentioned my childhood. > I watched a shit-ton of stupid contemporary movie s too, and had to listen to my old pops being nostalgic for the "great" B&W Era, which was also brimming with cheap throwaway entertainment. It wasn't all Marx Brothers classics. (which is the epitome of quippery).
Old cheap shit used to be considered cheap shit and to know its place in terms of budget e reputation, unlike modern stuff
1 year ago
Anonymous
>And you can't know it
I know it from what you are nostalgic for, just like
Okay, I hear you all, I understand Nostalgia and all, but nevertheless, THIS is peak cinema and it has all gone downhill since then.
So it's BUDGET that pisses you off? Or box office? You aren't peevish old Scorcese so stop channeling him.
1 year ago
Anonymous
YOU chose the decade
Want to talk about John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Cary Grant? >So it's BUDGET that pisses you off? Or box office? You aren't peevish old Scorcese so stop channeling him.
It's the quality, the money compared to quality, the reception compared to quality. They are bad products made bad creators for a bad audience, al thins that used to exist in their shitty niche where they belong.
You are a biased moron doing nothing but calling others biased
1 year ago
Anonymous
>the reception compared to quality.
Quality is subjective, but at least we've distilled your argument down to "I hate current popular things". >Want to talk about John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Cary Grant?
My pops made sure that I saw all of their movies, they range from great to bad, just like everyone else.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Quality is subjective,
No it isn't, only enjoyment is > but at least we've distilled your argument down to "I hate current popular things".
No I didn't. If current thing is bad I'll say it's bad because it's bat things I don't like >My pops made sure that I saw all of their movies, they range from great to bad, just like everyone else.
Unlike capeshit and similar contemporary stuff that is a new level of bad
>Rambo 3 towers over all capeshit made in the last decade combined.
Ok, it's been fun, but I gotta tap out with this comment. gg girls. You can call this my consnession if you like. Stay Hilarious.
You didn't refute. Laughing at facts isn't an argument, zaelot
Superman: the movie was THE most expensive movie of the 70's, and the box office champ for a while. Unfortunately for them, WB cannot into sequels, so they throttled the genre for a while with garbage follow-ups, a thing they are noted for.
Audiences would have piled in for more Superman, if any decent stuff had been offered, BECAUSE AUDIENCES HAVE ALWAYS LOVED THAT SHIT MAN.
Stop trying to larp as a 60-yr old movie critivc, fricksakes.
But it wasn't the 70s. And having one expensive fantasy movie with a flying man is not bastardizing the industry to put that shit out of a converyor belt without even having the decency to make them actual movies.
I repeat: you don't represent "fun" in a fun VS arthouse dichotomy. You represent eating shit outside of a cinema that didn't allow you in.
>And having one expensive fantasy movie with a flying man is not bastardizing the industry
Anon, there are only 3 MCU movie per year. in the mist of many, many, many, many more. those MCU movies aren't doing that either.
All they are doing is being talk about a lot on the internet, something that was less accessible in the 70's or even the 80's.
This whole time, you have not been complaining about what the MCU is doing to the movies. You have been complaining about what it does to the movies discourse, because it is no longer limited to two dude giving thumbs on the TV screen or some columnist in a magazine. It has created a whole market of clout-chaser who know they will get view if they make videos or tweets about the MCU, but the kino biome itself is mostly unaffected by what boil down to three movies per years.
He's chuffed because Disney has ruled the box office for most of the last decade, this is the first year they haven't completely dommed the top 10 and he's super-angry about all that.
So he makes up this fantasy bullshit about how Hollywood used to be better.
I think I'm getting tired of live action capeshit in general. I've gone back to rewatch things like Superman TAS and X-Men Evolution and I forgot how much soul they had, and then I see and I reminded how much hardly anyone involved actually gives two shits about the source material.
I heard they scrapped Mr Mind for Generic Female Villain OC. Is this true?
Yes, and it's not even a cool OC.
And scrapped Black Adam.
Black Adam was because The Rock is too arrogant to fight Shazam.
The only thing I want from this movie is a bunch of Shazam domming Lucy Liu porn in this costume.
>Shit cgi
>SHitting on the source material
>Hot sorceress
>Color coded superheroes
it's power rangers 2017 reboot all over again
Damn, she's not quite Cassandra Peterson levels of cheating old age but she looks good for someone who should theoretically be well past the wall
She's 54. The wall is 30. Even with an Asian bonus the wall is only 10-20 years extra.
So, you have never heard of Ming-Na Wen?
Yes, this is a recent photo.
she is 59
She is just 3 years younger than Temuera Morrison who play Boba Fettt in the Diney+ show
>Ming-Na Wen
You mean legs leggs mommydom leg? Yeah I've heard of her.
she can still play chun li
God I wish. Marvel vs Capcom when?
Lol, who and why invited the looser team to the captain marvel premiere?
>Philthies
That cgi
Look at those PS2 graphics.
To be honest, the deadly sins in the first movie looked like shit too.
Lucy Liu is my favorite hag.
I've seen teenagers make better costumes with cardboard and duct tape.
Lucy Liu aged like wine.
Imagine making your CGI worse than rendered graphics in a videogame.
WB is fricking incompetent beyond belief.
>similar color
>similar horns on head
>same body type/dragon type
>weathered wings
pretty sus
>Removed original villain and rushed out a new one.
Pretty sure they just stole the 3D rip from Elden Ring and made some changes to it.
AYO MY BOY ALDUIN
For a split second I legit thought you posted a Dark Souls screenshot
God damn her filmography has been depressingly sparse for a while now. One of her most recent movies was Sherlock Gnomes...
The dragon and monsters actually look good. the only bad CGI I saw were the cars when they made them crash, somehow;
she's so hot bros, but I will not be watching
The cinematic for Wrath of The Lich King had better CGI than this.
Having seen it, it actually look quite good.
I know, WotLK was the hype. Nothing compared to this capeshit garbage.
I was talking about the Shazam 2 movie.
>it's a Blizztroon
>xe's complaining about capeshit as if xer beloved setting hasn't been capeshit since day 1 and xe didn't preorder Overwatch premium editions
Looks like the shills are already seething over a new failure for their shitty company.
Not gonna use the Shazam meme anytime soon eh, cuck? Don't answer, i won't bother reading.
yep, girl power is actually the reason mark strong admitted to not coming back for this one
Source?
Based if true
see
It get so, SO much worse
>Billy has a crush on Wonder Woman
>Dies in the movie
>Wonder Woman literally shows up at the end, kisses him, and brings him back to life
This movie is basically Pacific Rim of capeshit: good strong franchising starting first film ruined by a moronic ass sequel ignoring everything good about what came before
Pacific RIm was never good.
Nah the first one was serviceable and fine. Not high art, but you got what you paid for. Now the sequel? Went full moron
The first Wonder Woman was bad too and I don't care what casual frick tries to say otherwise. Gal was a miscast, the script was bad, and for frick sake Chris Pine's Steve Trevor was arguably the protagonist
For a typical fish out of water story, Wonder Woman was passable until the final act which was completely fricking stupid
It was all crap to me. If you want a decent Wonder Woman origin movie, I'd recommend the 2009 animated movie. Gal's movies are shit, and they're crutched by period piece bullshit to fill gaps in the script
Oh don't get me wrong, the movie was shit and Gal Gadot is a shit actress who only poses in her movies but in terms of what came before it it was better than nothing
>Better than nothing
I disagree. You and many like you only give the first movie a participation ribbon because MoS and BvS were so damn disappointing. Wonder Woman deserves better, and I stand by what I said.
At least the animated movie had Alfred Molina
>You and many like you only give the first movie a participation ribbon
I mean yeah if we're judging the DCEU films then I would say it gets it by default. Is it a good representation of WW? Nope and we agree on that. She does deserve better and hopefully she gets an actual good fricking movie
At this point I'm more holding out for the game
A videogame will be based on modern WW, which is shit.
Wait for muh daughter of zeus, muh warrior, muh sword/shield, muh no kill rule.
Dead character
Frick off sci fi gay
Frick off rebooter
Why do people here talk about Cinemaphile related topics like imbeciles? Serious question because I (probably everyone else as well) have been noticing a complete lack of politeness and civility for years now. It has to be a mix of being raised in a wrong way, the anonymity topic, and for some people probably even an anwarranted amount of narcissism. Why does everything have to be so negative for you people? Obviously, you don't have to like things but being so bitter about something you don't like isn't healthy at all
we have always been like this and always will be
why are you here if you don't like it? piss off somewhere else
>We
Speak for yourself, I have been nice to people since day one. And if not, I was always able to undermine my opinion by writing like a normal person and not like a childish lunatic. Also, stop generalising, there are tons of normal people here you can have great discussions with. Especially on other boards.
I disagree on all accounts
>the compalin of "quirky" was never valid
I'm not able to tell whether you are misrepresenting my comment on purpose or not. I was talking about quips and not quirkiness. The MCU has been quirky since day one. Even quips were used on occasion, especially in Phase 1. What was completely new and what started with Avengers 1 was quips and terrible dialogues completely replacing normal dialogues (which occasionally are sprinkled with comedy).
>Nor does this "quirky" thing has ever been something that has made Marvel movies bad.
As you're talking about quirky and not about quips, I assume we are completely talking past each other because Thor Ragnarok and Love and Thunder are perfect examples of quips and even quirkiness ruining a movie completely.
>Thor Ragnarok and Love and Thunder are perfect examples of quips and even quirkiness ruining a movie completely.
No they are perfect examples of capeshitters not being able to handle anything creative and unique and crying that they didn't get their copy pasted goyslop
If you're not joking, you have one of the most terrible takes on movies ever.
Creativeness is always appreciated but let's not forget that Thor 1 was a perfect example of being visually creative with Asgard while Ragnarok was a CGI shitfest that brought nothing to the table storywise
I would love to hear your points on how Love and Thunder is a legit good movie though because even hardcore MCU fans say it's terribly bad.
>creative and unique
there was literally nothing creative or unique about either of those movies
Show me what movie they are similar to specifically? All American movies look the same to me yet these stood out
>I was talking about quips
Not a valid complain. That's complaining about some of the best Schwarzenegger movies. It make no sense to compalin about it and even less to assign that to Whedon.
>not a valid complaint
You bring zero arguments into the mix, it's pointless talking to you. Schwarzenegger movies had funny comedy, especially quips. Plus, those movies had great practical action scenes. What do MCU movies have to offer in your opinion?
It makes perfect sense to asign that to Whedon but I'll refrain from going into detail because you won't bother giving explanations anyway.
I rarely care about comparing everything to comics when it comes to cape movies because I love to see original ideas on the screen. Even when costumes are butchered, I don't care that much as long as the design is neat to look at
>Thor 3 & 4 are ruined in what way exactly?
Thor 1 had a coherent (not perfect) story with great characters. Thor 2 was worse, yet there was more character development. Thor 3 and 4 took all of Thor's character development and flushed it down a toilet. If you think Waititi taking Thor, someone who suffered great losses and who tried to be a better person, resulting in him being fit for wielding Mjölnir, and turning him into a mentally challenged person doesn't mean that the movies are ruined, I guess you can have a good time with the movies. I don't expect cape movies to be the pinnacle of storytelling but not staying coherent in the overall story is lame and downright bad writing. Again, to each their own but I expect more from professional writers
>You bring zero arguments into the mix
I did. I pointed out they have always existed since action movies exists and plenty of 80's and 90's schlocks have them.
>What do MCU movies have to offer in your opinion?
funny comedy and great action scenes.
>things that never happened
You have the mind of a 6yo
>muh character development
Ah reddit must be down or something
>not wanting character development
Are you braindead? Also, why are you talking about Reddit?
Thor 3 & 4 are ruined in what way exactly? Like obviously they are much better than the previous movies and absolutely mogs Aaron's Thorshit. Maybe you are that autist who complains they ruined Planet Hulk as if it would even make sense to do in live action or that they couldn't still revisit it if they wanted to
You get what you deseve for defending bastardization of IPs, characters and concepts, as well as bad products
>For a typical fish out of water story, Wonder Woman was passable until the final act which was completely fricking stupid
that's just normal for superhero movies. it was MCU level. if you think that 90% of the MCU is shit, then you'll find that Wonder Woman was shit too.
>typical fish out of water story
Fish out of water stories are the laziest shit ever. When I watch a Thor movie I want to watch a movie about Norse action, not an hour and a half of
>durr what is a Walmart
To be fair, having Thor 1 taking place anywhere else but earth would have inflated the costs by a huge amount. You have to remember that Marvel movies during Phase 1 didn't have the same type of budget as now. Plus, the effects were actually great so there was a load of effort going into post production. Had Thor 1 been produced now, I am sure it would have turned out way more the way you would have wanted it from a setting-POV
That's fair. No excuse for Captain Marvel though.
The problem with "Space Hero plays cop" is that no one really sympathizes with alien cultures that are barely sketched out. So you are obligated to either make them cheap Earth parallels like Star Trek falls into, or split the difference on Earth.
Captain Marvel was fine for what it was Mr. Incel, it wasn't top tier MCU but it hit it's beats well enough. It's middle-third MCU, and you need to stop being emotionally compromised over it.
i'd say the main problem with cap marvel is that we only get carol's backstory way too late to really care about her as a character. everything else about it was mid. green lantern was just a waste of film from beginning to end
That is NOT the real complaint made about Captain Marvel, it's not even adjacent to what still has chuds seething over it.
oh you mean that weird thing where they declared that film about the bug eyed robot was the real feminist movie instead?
>Captain Marvel was fine for what it was
Captain Marvel was a completely unremarkable film that had absolutely nothing of interest to say or show. If you're deflecting to the "You hate just women" card, it simply means you hold lower standards for women, making you the sexist.
"Hating women" is thinking they're such fragile infantile creatures that they should never have a threatening and intimidating villain to overcome in their own story or face anything they can't easily beat.
No one in the MCU faced an unbeatable villain until arguably Doctor Strange and Dormammu.
Thor spend a lot of time fighting his little brother for Pete's sake. Pete spends his time fighting villains he has to be careful not to punch too hard and accidentally kill.
Unbeatable threats are just as boring as the unstoppable hero unless we're talking of something like cosmic horror movie and not just action/capeshit.
What really good is finding the right balance between the high level of threat and having a villain a hero could realistically beat.
Well, there's many other factors of making a good capeshit villain but that's beside the point.
Yeah but a lot of the time the hero is simply compromised by their own moral limitations or the situation they find themselves in, not the villains sheer power.
For Spider-Man it's not being willing to punch Vulture or Ock's head clean off; (Batman just not-murders them), T'Challah is culturally obligated to level the ground between him and Killmonger; Carol is an amnesiac fighting for the wrong army.
Except Vulture and Ock are allowed to pummel Spider-Man and give you a sense of "yeah, this could get bad for Spider-Man".
Except "muh not killing" means absolutely frickall for Batman when on one side you have the likes of Joker who is a threat because of being a level of unpredictability Batman has never faced before or Ra's and Bane who are more physical dangers.
Except Captain Marvel is a boring fricking cakewalk story of a hero playing a game on easy mode.
>Except Vulture and Ock are allowed to pummel Spider-Man and give you a sense of "yeah, this could get bad for Spider-Man".
Because he lightly slap-fights with them, specifically tries to soft-glove them. Sandman and Goblin (I try to forget SM3's Venom) are the actual threats to his life, even Lizard isn't so much if he fought him intelligently.
I would be more forgiving of Homecoming Spidey struggling against Vulture because he's treated as an absolute amateur if that scene in CW where he takes out both Bucky and Falcon with almost no effort and later put up a fairly decent fight against Captain America didn't exist.
Doc Ock, yeah. Guess Raimi wasn't really concerned with the power-levels there and just went for "it looks cool" kind of deal. I love Spider-Man 2, but I will not pretend it's not an issue.
You were never good
>This movie is basically Pacific Rim of capeshit: good strong franchising starting first film ruined by a moronic ass sequel ignoring everything good about what came before
Didn't Wonder Woman already achieve this?
has a crush on Wonder Woman
Way to go son!
Are we just not going to ignore that Zeus is in there, witnessing all of this?
They weren't related back then
>Pedophilia is okay if it's a woman
Twitter will riot over this
How did the
>Rape is okay if it's a woman
work out with her last movie anyway?
Nice.
do people who post this realize that the episode they quote was making fun of them
yes, but does it change that its completely true?
the episode we quote failed to make a coherent argument against it beyond “society and police and your wheedling brother will hunt you down and force you to commit suicide if you ever try”, so I elect to ignore it.
Also frick kahl I hope Ike fricks his girlfriend as revenge for that
No she doesn't, she just touches a magic staff and the magic staff brings him back to life.
If she kissed him I would watch the movie.
>No she doesn't, she just touches a magic staff and the magic staff brings him back to life.
This is just like my Japanese hentai.
Pacific Rim 2 is unironically kino
They already said it's ok to rape a male in second movie. Pedophilia is next step.
>They already said it's ok to rape a male in second movie
No, they didn't.
it's not like they can bring back ISIS
You know I really liked the first Shazam. And that Mr. Mind teaser at the end was fun. This is just disappointing.
None of those bits are really important part of the movie, though.
I feel you guy. First movie was great. Sad to hear this one sucks.
see
Mr. Mind was never going to be the main villain in this. They did scrap a scene where they reveal he let the female villains get into Earth as part of his keikaku, but the director thought it complicated the plot too much.
At least it would make more sense why remove it?
post credit scene
Mr. Mind actually shows up again in Sivana's cell and Sivana complain that after Mr. Mind told him he had great plans for him (first movie post credit scene), he just left and never came back for 2 years. Mr. Minds tell him that it is not easy to prep things like that with just a caterpillar body, but that now things are ready and he can tell him all he has planned, only to remember at the last moment there is something else he need to do and frick off without telling Sivana anything again.
I think this level of trolling was fully intentional and the director knew it's likely there will be no more sequel.
LOL
I’m gonna kek so hard when they announce there will be no Shazam 3 caussa this one’s flop
Literally canon that Mind forgot what he wanted to do and never did do any plan
I just saw it, it's okay. I'd say it's on par with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. And while the first one had less time to do that because they had to establish the setting for it first, the second movie does a good work at making the team work as a family of super heroes. Best pat was Darla. She got to ride an Unicorn.
If that's really his reason, then it's stupid. those villain are not even "Girl power" at all. They are just villains who happens to be women, that's it.
I want to rape the delicious negress superheroine
>I'd say it's on par with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Well damn, Shang Chi was one of the only two movies (along with Eternals) in the last two Phases I truly enjoyed
>They are just villains who happens to be women, that's it.
That's what I've liked about the DCEU movies so far. Even though they are diverse in its cast, they really don't make a huge fuss about the entire diversity, especially girlpower, bullshit. Not even the Wonder Woman movies. And it could have gone a whole other way when you look at the steaming pile of dogshit that is the Arrowverse.
These pretzels are making me thirsty.
>Daily Beast
Anyone else think this was intentional?
No because this was made ages ago. The terrible marketing was intentional
>Anyone else think this was intentional?
Disney-owned media attacking DC? Nah.
Why didn’t they use Mister Mind or Black Adam I don’t get it.
Probably saving Mr Mind as the villain for a third film and Dwayne just refuses to interact with Shazam which has done nothing but ensure both fail.
baseless speculation but i'd guess they were going to introduce black adam in 2, have him as the hero in his own movie and then him and billy team up to fight mr mind, sivana and the monster society in 3. dwayne being the egotistical ass that he is wanted his own movie first, so they had to throw something together for 2 and we got the daughters instead
>they were going to introduce black adam in 2, have him as the hero in his own movie and then him and billy team up to fight mr mind, sivana and the monster society in 3.
This is far too organized and sensible for WB to have originally planned.
When I first heard Shazam 2 was immediately following Black Adam I thought they would have Shazam appear at the end or have some set up for Shazam 2. I wonder how much of the blame is on the Rock for not wanting to play ball?
>I wonder how much of the blame is on the Rock for not wanting to play ball?
probably a fair bit with him barely acknowledging cap exists and focusing entirely on black adam vs superman rather than that he's supposed to be billy's villain
It literally couldn't happen because the Rock has a contractual agreement where he can't be beaten by anybody so a typical hero beats the villain story wouldn't work for him
>the Rock has a contractual agreement where he can't be beaten by anybody
God that is pathetic.
I've heard stories like that about Steven Seagal.
All action stars have contracts like that. Diesel, Statham, Seagal back in the time.
Diesel actually counts how many times he is punched and demands he punch people an equal or greater number of times.
what the frick is this Gunn pushing? the Russo bros and Ryan coogler made better MCU movies than fricking guardians.
>the Russo bros and Ryan coogler
Not that GotG was good but come on.
Pedos help each other
Gunn's shit is going to flop so hard it's going to be hilarious.
GotG Vol 2 was shit
the Holiday special was also shit
The Suicide Squad was rancid dogshit
WB will be begging Snyder to come back by the end of 2025
>WB will be begging Snyder to come back by the end of 2025
thats not going to happen
By the time Gunn fails the entire capeshit thing is going to be dead outside of Spiderman and Batman movies
>The Suicide Squad was rancid dogshit
opinion discarded
Snyder won't come back after how they treated him. He's a Caligay, but no man has an anus that loose and doesn't dye the hair in pink or blue.
>Snyder won't come back after how they treated him.
They gave him Justice League even after BvS underperformed. They also let him finish the Snyder Cut. Dude got more chances than most people in the business and he still screwed it up.
Pure nepotism.
Snyder's wife is on the board of directors at WB. Big surprise.
The guy is an idiotic c**t and a hack.
>They gave him Justice League even after BvS underperforme
He was already filming Justice League before BvS came out
The state of Snyderstans right here.
Pure delusions.
poo in the loo
Bro u are going to suicide on april
>Gunn's shit is going to flop so hard it's going to be hilarious.
Going to happen becasue nobody will like that shit
>WB will be begging Snyder to come back by the end of 2025
Not goint to happen because nobody liked his shit
Looks like people don't want dogshit movies. Despite making an exception for marvel, for some reason
It is pretty amazing that WB execs saw his suicide squad movie & thought, this is the guy we should give complete control to
They also saw his Peacemaker TV show and this has been an almost unanimous hit.
Because Gunn is the founding father of le quirky risky nihilistic comedic entertainment trash that populates all corners of pop culture nowadasy. His GotG might as well had killed capeshit as a serious medium forever. I know Iron Man already was pretty dumb and comedic before but it never reached the levels of absurdity that Gunn input in the MCU. A shame because The Russos were ready to bring a new era of more respectable capeshit movies with the Winter Soldier. Everything was going great, and then Gunn stopped them on their tracks and send the whole genre down a cliff.
You've never seen a Troma movie, you uncultured child
>GotG
>quirky risky nihilistic
The heroes beat the villain in the first one by holding hands while their leader is remembering his dying mom and cries. There are a thousand ways to shit on GotG, or any of Gunn's movies, both seriously or just to shitpost that don't make you look as stupid as saying this. Do people even think about what they're posting?
>Because Gunn is the founding father of le quirky risky nihilistic comedic entertainment trash that populates all corners of pop culture nowadasy.
Joss Whedon
Not Joss Whedon.This has always been a thing. Every 80's heroes had quipy characters doing one-liners.
whedon's style is just excessively quippy, nihilism isn't usually part of it
>capeshit as a serious medium
come on now
If any single director has killed modern cinema, it was Whedon with Avengers. GotG has shitty comedy as well but it's at least got a good story. Every single one of Whedon's blockbusters is complete horseshit with the terrible comedy (quips) which serve as a distraction from a lack of proper story.
Based. Frick Cabin in the Woods dicksuckers.
>If any single director has killed modern cinema, it was Whedon with Avengers.
No, he didn't. the compalin of "quirky" was never valid and has always exited in movies. Nor does this "quirky" thing has ever been something that has made Marvel movies bad.
without first Avengers there would be no MCU, you fricking moron. Whedon did what no one else could- deliver an actual FUN movie with superheroes that felt like a team, incredible comic book experience
Him kickstarting the franchise to another level means one can't criticise the lack of quality in his movies? Way to miss the entire point.
>FUN
There's nothing to argue about with you as you seemingly only care about explosions and posing instead of storytelling. You do you.
And the same movies from the past are still criticised to this day for being bad, what is your point?
Then the MCU is perfect for you. You can't expect everyone to only care about comedy and boring CGI action sequences though.
>And the same movies from the past are still criticised to this day for being bad
I won't bother agreeing or disagreeing with whether they are bad or not and simply point out that by acknowledging their existence, it undermine the statement that Whedon is at the source of such thing.
> You can't expect everyone to only care about comedy and boring CGI action sequences though.
My point is about how people blame Whedon for things action movies have always been doing since the 80's.
>it undermine the statement that Whedon is at the source of such thing
I assume we have a misunderstanding here. I was not by any means stating Whedon is the source of quips. I am stating that Avengers 1, and thus Whedon, was one of the main contributing factors for MODERN cinema going into a qualitative decline. Avengers 1 was the first superhero movie (to my knowledge) to hit 1.5 billion dollars worldwide and managed to provide a perfect recipe for success with the masses. That recipe (tons of comedy and poor CGI) was then used in most of the following movies. Avengers was even proof for effort not having to go into effects which is more relevant than ever now that you see movies like Black Panther 2 and Love and Thunder basically putting in minimal effort. Quips clearly aren't the only issue here
>My point is about how people blame Whedon for things action movies have always been doing since the 80's.
Can we agree though that he is to be blamed for the decline of the MCU? Phase 1 was completely fine with every director putting in tons of thought (whether positive or negative) into every respective movie and its themes. Can't really say the same about the following ones with only few exceptions
>am stating that Avengers 1, and thus Whedon, was one of the main contributing factors for MODERN cinema going into a qualitative decline.
And you are wrong. it was happening way before that and is in no way different than any other action movies at the time.
Whedon didn't start anything. The movie is simply a product of his time.
>Can we agree though that he is to be blamed for the decline of the MCU?
No. Seeing that if a decline there is,according tot he complain of of the general public audience, it didn't really start before End Game came out. Frick, people were already complaining about Marvel Movie fatigue after some were disappointed by Iron Man 2.
Above, some anons are saying Whedon made the MCU into what it is now and that without him, cape movies wouldn't be such a massive thing, yet you are trying to act like Avengers "is in no way different than any other action movies at the time". So are you against the former point?
>people were already complaining about Marvel Movie fatigue after some were disappointed by Iron Man 2.
And what happened right around the time Iron Man 2 was produced? Damn right, Disney acquisition. That's the whole issue, trying to put the entirety of the MCU into a simplistic formula. Don't get me wrong, it worked out perfectly business wise but the quality saw a massive deterioration.
>complain of of the general public audience
Why are you talking about the general public? The masses will love every piece of shit movie out there. That's why TFA, TLJ, and shit like Transformers 4 were so successful. I am talking about film making in particular. Character themes and development, cinematography, soundtracks, effects. Those have been bad way before Endgame.
>bove, some anons are saying Whedon made the MCU into what it is now and that without him, cape movies wouldn't be such a massive thing
Yeah, no. Marvel movies were a massive hit already before the Avengers. I'll give to Whedon the credit that is due, he made the sauce work. He established the standard as to how make big ensemble cast coming from individual centric movies work well together without any of them losing to much or being munched to much by others in more a limited screentime-per-characters condition.
He didn't create the MCU formula, but he set up the minimal requirement for the next avengers movie as well as how to handle cameo in the more Solo MCU movies.
>And what happened right around the time Iron Man 2 was produced? Damn right, Disney acquisition.
You do realise that Marvel movies only became more popular afterward, right? it only further my point that there was no real fatigue until at least the after End Game and that all those complain were always, for the most, contrarian. Frick, even trying to argue of a marvel fatigue after that point is dubious at most, as the third Spider-man movie turned out to be hugely popular and loved not just by the general audience, but also most hardcore fans.
>The masses will love every piece of shit movie out there
The point is to establish a marvel fatigue and what made it turn bad, if it ever happened. What make a movie good or bad rely on a lot of subjectivity and the general popularity of a movie is one of the few objective measures.
Quips existed before, but not the marvelesque quipshit
Same difference.
>ESL
To the 6yo-like mind af an acritical capeshitter, maybe.
Actual adults can tell the difference between schlock made for adults and cringetstic shit made for terminally online underage serial consumers
Well if any pass by, try to invite them into the conversation.
>>ESL
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/same+difference
https://grammarist.com/idiom/same-difference/
Starting to think English isn't YOUR native language...
>Actual adults can tell the difference between schlock made for adults and cringetstic shit made for terminally online underage serial consumers
>They hated him because he told the truth.jpg
>they predicted the smug video essays about a:tla
a prophet
You aren't entitled to have your era to be the best ever, or even good at all. Things and decades get good and go to shit all the times.
You ,know what? I think you are right. Thank you for being straight with me.
>pick up old Marvel comic
>look inside
>quips
How did the MCU do this?
Marvel Studios doesn't hate comics like WB.
>the Russo bros and Ryan coogler made better MCU movies than fricking guardians.
Civil War was good but that's about it, Guardians is the only time MCU made literal whos outside of core Avengers popular and they've been failing ever since also it was a perfect balance of seriousness and lightheartedness that everyone else has been trying to copy and also failing at
Gunn is better than any literal who indie director and Reddit and Memey writer the MCU currently has the problem is he is not the type of guy you would give Superman and Batman too
>Daily Beast
It probably isn't good but
>Daily Beast
>MrBeast
What? I refuse to believe anyone could hate this kino
OMG MY SIDES ARE IN ORBIT, TRULY COMEDY GENIUS. YOU THINK IT'S GONNA STOP BUT IT JUST KEEPS GOING
cute
Cute
Pretty funny in blowing air out of your nostrils way
Oh my god. Just what were they thinking.
Not gonna lie, I laughed at "Nawww". Something about a woman who sounds so educated and upper-crust saying that is funny.
That was funny as hell
This looks like a cheap tv show.
Did you see the first Shazam?
did anyone?
Looked like bullshit as a movie, on top of being based on new52 shitzam
That was actually funny.
I smiled throughout her reading the entire letter and I'm not a fan of comedy in superhero movies at all. Seems like people here will just hate on anything. If the second is anything like the first movie, I'll like it.
I hope they will use Mr. Mind in the third
>If the second is anything like the first movie, I'll like it.
See
I think you will.
Actually funny.
This was actually funny, what is wrong with you?
Where did the joy go in your life?
siiiiiiiiiiip
WB was extra shameless with the social media embargo this time. Most of them said it was good but they were from sites like geek kingdom or whatever.
who is this guy? pretty much every other person has said its great
Probably israelitetubers. It has a 52 in MT.
At this point they're deliberately putting out shit movies to condition audiences to accept that the Gunnverse without question. WB's not as smart as they think they are if it's this easy to suss them out.
Jesus Christ anon, no. They made these movies years ago not two months ago.
Disney fricked up the last 2 X-Men movies after the merger, why wouldn't it happen again here?
Disney has had nothing to do with the X-Men movie. Those were all Fox.
They didn't think THAT far ahead but the reason why Shazam 2 doesn't have Mister Mind is because Black Adam was being favored and thought to be a winner at the time before release
Tell us where the Warner Execs are, anon? Are they in the room with us right now?
Apologize
He's still worse
>h-his films made money though
Yeah, at the start of the domination of capeshit in movie theaters, and even then his DC never stacked up to Marvel or even FoX-Men.
I'm sorry WB was dumb enough to hire him.
You cultists are gonna be extra insufferable at the end of April huh?
Just because someone takes a massive diarrhea shit in the bed doesn't mean you did a good job because when you shit the bed it was solid steaming logs
>Cucked out of his own name by Carol
>Cucked out of a successful sequel in November
Tick tock.
>The Marvels was so fricking bad they had to delay it by nearly half a year
>currently stuck in reshoot hell and they are chopping off entire acts from the movie
Tick tock.
The Marvels is going to be hot garbage, just like Antman 3 and Shazam 2, and Aquaman 2.
Most capeshit coming out this year are going to crash and burn the whole genre.
>Most capeshit coming out this year are going to crash and burn the whole genre.
About damn time.
I cannot wait for the marvelcucks to cope and seethe as that flamming hot turd of a movie shits itself opening week. Will be worth the wait.
I shit you not the captcha was: W0RS4
It's gonna get another Briellion, and it's gonna be glorious.
>Man of Steel to Batman v Superman
>Wonder Woman to WW84
>Shazam to Shazam: Fury of the Gods
>Aquaman to Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (according to rumors)
DC has had an awful track record with sequels for the past decade goddamn
>>Man of Steel to Batman v Superman
those are both shit though
Woman to WW84
those are both shit though
Wrong
WW 2017 was only good in the first act when it was just amazons.
As soon as it switched to the captain america ripoff it nose dived in quality.
btw the Amazons were fricking awesome in the snydercut. so fricking cool
TO BE FAIR Wonder Woman and Superman were basically propaganda pieces just like Cap. However I agree, it really shouldn't have been set in that decade. Period piece shit is so damn gimmicky and lazy, pigeonholing a character in an era
>I'm sorry, Salt Shaker. You can't join the Autobots. You're going to make me say it, aren't you? You turn into a pretzel cart. How is that going to look? "Here comes the pretzel cart".
"You let Trimmer in and he turns into a riding mower!"
HEY MAN, I'LL FRICK A GOPHER UP!
Couldn’t even give them Badass oc's to be the villain.
Being a captain marvel fan makes me wish i was a masochist. I'm banking everything on mark waids story.
>I'm banking everything on mark waids story.
20 years ago that might've been a safe bet.
Exactly. That’s how bad things have gotten, I'm only banking on it because it's the only thing I have to bank on.
I hope you enjoy it then, anon. I'd love for something good to come out for Billy but I just can't give my money to that butthole Waid or DC anymore.
Thanks, I'll pirate the first few issues to see where things go.
I assume the media is smearing this because Levi called out the clot shots. I had no interest in seeing this but now I want to because it can't possibly be as bad as the media smears say it is.
Good thing I'm watching it for the plot.
Why even put this out? Just do the Batgirl and cancel. This will only ruin the credibility of DC.
Why are you guys acting like this is Morbius levels of shit? It's still fresh in RT
So this is the first movie in Gunn's new Cinematic Universe, huh?
No. moron
>the authority : Film
>Lanterns Corp: Live-Action series
what the frick, that should be reversed
If it was, everyone would just call authority a cheap knock off of the boys.
The brave and the bold? Like the cartoon?
no you fricking moron
Well what is it then?
>Gunn retcons all of the DCEU except for his Suicide Squad shit
kek
He doesn't seem to retcon Aquaman either.
This will all be forgotten & erased after The Flash. Otherwise he'll be pulling a DC with a half assed reboot in name only deal.
>This will all be forgotten & erased after The Flash.
Look again. Aquaman 2 take place after the Flash, hence my point.
I highly doubt it.
Do normalgays even know what the concept of an "elseworld" story is?
Gunn is putting a lot of misplaced faith in that.
>paradise lost
>it's about the amazons and not about satan's fall from heaven and the temptation of adam even
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
They already ruined Sandman though
The first movie was really good, what happened?
Cavill left.
Executive meddling, they couldn't leave it alone, they never can. I'll still see it to support my wife, I really hope she goes on to bigger and bigger things.
You mean you hope she gets breast implants?
They're already looking pretty big anon, she could just naturally gain weight and be Christina Hendricks-size in no time.
I didn't recognize who you were posting at first. She does have a lot of potential. I have to say, I hope she gets more (film) work too. As far Shazam 2, it was pushed back several times. Didn't they actually do reshoots at some point too?
Gimme one good reason they shouldn’t have adapted Multiversity
DCU writers don't like to do that because they have to pay royalties to the original author.
>they have to pay royalties to the original author.
No they don't. They're work for hire. Anything they make, the company 100% owns. Giving them any sort of "royalties" is just a courtesy thing. Nothing more.
>Greedy WB giving away money for free
Hahahahahahaha no...they're obligated by contract.
>femcel villain
I actually feel bad for her
Lame
DC has always been shit. And it's only gotten worse with time.
Shazam got...Shazam'd
This cant be good for capeshit.
Worst part is this means we're never getting another good Shazam movie for years to come.
At this point, Hollywood not touching characters you like is becoming more of a blessing than a curse.
shazam chads…. we lost to the elden ring troons
This will be the last Shazam movie we'll ever get.
>Captain Marvel.
There can be only one.
Well, it's official: This movie won't be saved by word of mouth.
>next week is John Wick 4
>week after that is Mario
this movie has to be a tax write-off
It will be saved by post credits cameos
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/S7szBrSD1qY
IMPORTANT SPOILER! DON'T LOOK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED OF SOMETHING BIG!!!
The old wizard is brought back to earth at the end and he decides to have a change of style and dress like a pimp.
Why is Shazam black?
I hate live action comic book movies so fricking much.
Oh my God, it's this homosexual autist again.
I have no idea what you're trying to say, but Taika Waititi is a hack and MCU Spider-Man movies are trash with no style of its own.
The frick is the Daily Beast, and do they pay their interns to spam here?
I will maintain that overall cinema going into decline is as much of Blumhouse's as it is MCU's fault. People call MCU conveyer-belt shit, but Blumhouse is 10x that.
And the attempts to separate the horror genre from that are more ofthen than not also bad, but get praised for being different from Blumhouse trash because they raped horror genre so hard, being distinct from their awful shit seems like something worth commending. God, I hate Blumhouse so damn much.
Interesting take although your comment would require horror being enormously mainstream to the point where everyone and their mom watches horror. I get what you mean but horror still is a rather niche genre in comparison to genres that reach 500 million - 1 billion bucks on a regular basis
Here's the top grossing movies of 1985, well before a lot of you were born. Silly PG comedies, sequels and sequel-bait. None of these movies are "important" any moreso than 2022's top 10.
1. Back to the Future
2. Beverly Hills Cop
3. Rambo: First Blood Part II
4. Rocky IV
5. Cocoon
6. Witness
7. The Goonies
8. Police Academy 2: Their First Assignment
9. Fletch
10. A View to a Kill
You homosexuals just want to cherry-pick movies spread across decades to indict modern movies for being shallow dreck, when it has always been thus.
Wrong board
A good deal of those are actually at least relevant in pop culture to this day. What really makes me laugh is people acting as if pre-MCU 2000's movies were full of arthouse movies being appreciated, most of it was garbage.
>people acting as if pre-MCU 2000's movies were full of arthouse movies being appreciated, most of it was garbage.
I don't think any of it aspired to be arthouse? It wanted to be fun Serial Adventures, which I would argue it succeeded at to a ridiculous degree.
It's just biff-pow-bang superadventures with cackling villains and noble charming heroes, and THAT'S FINE.
Man of Steel tried to be arthouse, arguably, or at least oppressively symbolic and angsty.
You fail to understand that "fun" used to be not mass produced dogshit made and consumed without standards, unless it was cheap shit made for lesser TV channels.
Also fun VS arthouse where capeshit represents the "fun" side is a false dichotomy
>You fail to understand that "fun" used to be not mass produced dogshit
When was this? Not the era of teen camp raunch comedies, or "SNL star makes a stupid movie", not the era of "Slasher XXI, the Slashening" or the era of "Ridiculously Propagandist America FRICK YEAH".
When was this golden age?
1988 with the release of Oliver and Company. Everything before and since is dwarfed.
Please don't tell me about your Fursona.
capeshit is a unprecedented level of inhuman shit, but with beyond stellar marketing and budget.
You would have never seen the budget of Cleopatra given to Mac and Me in any decade, unlike now
>When was this golden age?
Golden age of hollywod is called that for a reason. 70-mid90 is another. But I'm sure you're tired of hearing this fact every time you ask that question, capeshitter
>capeshit is a unprecedented level of inhuman shit
I can't even take this sort of post seriously. Sorry.
Ah, yes, I rememeber when Ghostbusters Cops used to cost 300 gorillions and to be regarded as an acceptable product
The most expensive movie of 1980 was shlock Rambo III. At the time the most expensive movie ever produced. Your arguments are shit.
Mid movie, great practical action. It has its merit.
Towers over all capeshit made in the last decade combined.
Lmao you keep comparing schlock that doesn't embarass an adult to capeshit aimed at manchildren and actual toddlers
>Rambo 3 towers over all capeshit made in the last decade combined.
Ok, it's been fun, but I gotta tap out with this comment. gg girls. You can call this my consnession if you like. Stay Hilarious.
You know what's productive? Murdering capeshitters. Let's do it so cinemas will thrive again.
Having them realize that they are watching the unfun equivalent of porn would be enough, thanks
People that laughs incontrollabily at the same poop joke for ten years in a row arent' in the position to define "fun"
Porn is boring trash to begin with.
I prefer stuff like Playboy erotica movies, where the nudity is just enough to be exciting without revealing too much. Watching a meat stick enter a meat hole is boring.
>Porn is boring trash to begin with.
That's the point. It's also cheap and crass unless it knows its place. And make people moronic with overexposure.
Lol, this is the reason why capeshit is still at large, because all you pussies just talk instead of killing them.
You know what? You are actually right!
I'll now grab my gun and bring some justice to them.
Bye, friend.
I didn't mean superhero movies, just 2000's top movies in general.
Lmao 1 to 4 and 7 tower over everything made in the last decade. The comparison is 100% embarassing.
5 is probably only surpassed by an handful of modern movie despite being what? A midlle of the road TV flick?
The rest I haven't seen but I guess I'd probably like them over any disney mcu movie ever
Way to embarass your argument, lmao
>Lmao 1 to 4 and 7 tower over everything made in the last decade.
see
You chose the decade moron. I can do this for all the decades and your capeshit will come out embarassed every single time
I'm certainly older than you are, and I am nostalgic for even older flicks than you. I am not pretentious enough to pretend that my childhood was filled with Films of Superior Quality, I watched a shit-ton of stupid contemporary movie s too, and had to listen to my old pops being nostalgic for the "great" B&W Era, which was also brimming with cheap throwaway entertainment. It wasn't all Marx Brothers classics. (which is the epitome of quippery).
>I'm certainly older than you are
not a badge. And you can't know it
>, and I am nostalgic for even older flicks than you. I am not pretentious enough to pretend that my childhood was filled with Films of Superior Quality,
I'm not nostalgic. I call good what's good and bad what's bad. And I never mentioned my childhood.
> I watched a shit-ton of stupid contemporary movie s too, and had to listen to my old pops being nostalgic for the "great" B&W Era, which was also brimming with cheap throwaway entertainment. It wasn't all Marx Brothers classics. (which is the epitome of quippery).
Old cheap shit used to be considered cheap shit and to know its place in terms of budget e reputation, unlike modern stuff
>And you can't know it
I know it from what you are nostalgic for, just like
So it's BUDGET that pisses you off? Or box office? You aren't peevish old Scorcese so stop channeling him.
YOU chose the decade
Want to talk about John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Cary Grant?
>So it's BUDGET that pisses you off? Or box office? You aren't peevish old Scorcese so stop channeling him.
It's the quality, the money compared to quality, the reception compared to quality. They are bad products made bad creators for a bad audience, al thins that used to exist in their shitty niche where they belong.
You are a biased moron doing nothing but calling others biased
>the reception compared to quality.
Quality is subjective, but at least we've distilled your argument down to "I hate current popular things".
>Want to talk about John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Cary Grant?
My pops made sure that I saw all of their movies, they range from great to bad, just like everyone else.
>Quality is subjective,
No it isn't, only enjoyment is
> but at least we've distilled your argument down to "I hate current popular things".
No I didn't. If current thing is bad I'll say it's bad because it's bat things I don't like
>My pops made sure that I saw all of their movies, they range from great to bad, just like everyone else.
Unlike capeshit and similar contemporary stuff that is a new level of bad
You didn't refute. Laughing at facts isn't an argument, zaelot
You can’t be dumb enough to make this post when your leading example is Back to the Future.
That doesn't undermine his point, you know?
Okay, I hear you all, I understand Nostalgia and all, but nevertheless, THIS is peak cinema and it has all gone downhill since then.
>The most expensive movie of the 1970's: capeshit ala Superman: the motion picture.
Lol.
LMAO
Cinemaphile fart-huffer btfo
Now tell me how many of them there were around and how they were strangling actual movie, the fuking 70s decade of moviemaking of all things.
Superman: the movie was THE most expensive movie of the 70's, and the box office champ for a while. Unfortunately for them, WB cannot into sequels, so they throttled the genre for a while with garbage follow-ups, a thing they are noted for.
Audiences would have piled in for more Superman, if any decent stuff had been offered, BECAUSE AUDIENCES HAVE ALWAYS LOVED THAT SHIT MAN.
Stop trying to larp as a 60-yr old movie critivc, fricksakes.
But it wasn't the 70s. And having one expensive fantasy movie with a flying man is not bastardizing the industry to put that shit out of a converyor belt without even having the decency to make them actual movies.
I repeat: you don't represent "fun" in a fun VS arthouse dichotomy. You represent eating shit outside of a cinema that didn't allow you in.
The highest grossing movies of the 70's were popcorn movies and silly pap, not IMPORTANT movies, and you are a dumbass my good sir.
Theaters have always served up dumb spectacle and silly crowd-pleasers, because their primary audience isn't pretentious fart-huffers.
>And having one expensive fantasy movie with a flying man is not bastardizing the industry
Anon, there are only 3 MCU movie per year. in the mist of many, many, many, many more. those MCU movies aren't doing that either.
All they are doing is being talk about a lot on the internet, something that was less accessible in the 70's or even the 80's.
This whole time, you have not been complaining about what the MCU is doing to the movies. You have been complaining about what it does to the movies discourse, because it is no longer limited to two dude giving thumbs on the TV screen or some columnist in a magazine. It has created a whole market of clout-chaser who know they will get view if they make videos or tweets about the MCU, but the kino biome itself is mostly unaffected by what boil down to three movies per years.
He's chuffed because Disney has ruled the box office for most of the last decade, this is the first year they haven't completely dommed the top 10 and he's super-angry about all that.
So he makes up this fantasy bullshit about how Hollywood used to be better.
And BEFORE the 70's, the big budget, high grossers were Sandal and Toga genre, reliably.
The Capeshit of the "Golden Era of Hollywood".
She’s not getting her own movie is she?
In a few years she'll star in the Bog Brother's biopic.
>he wouldn't a bog
I want darkseid to violate hate.
Mary Marvel is the kiss of death.
>Thinking Gunn's shit is gonna be any better than this.
Makin' a LOT of assumptions.
I don't know. If critics hate it. It's highly likely audience may like it.
>SHAZ-ACK failed at videogames and now failed at it's own movie
Rough
Shazam has a game???
I didn't care for the first one, felt like the worst combination of old superhero movies (camp and cheese) and new super hero (quip and irony).
https://twitter.com/akanshajaswall/status/1636346559825842176
Post-credits scene with Gunn's wife because she has to be in everything now
So wait, is shazam also retconed out or not? Why even bother with after credit scene, if it is?
I think I'm getting tired of live action capeshit in general. I've gone back to rewatch things like Superman TAS and X-Men Evolution and I forgot how much soul they had, and then I see and I reminded how much hardly anyone involved actually gives two shits about the source material.
>Superman TAS and X-Men Evolution
Series have more time to develop stories and characters than movies, though.
I could also bring up the Chris Reeve Superman and original X-Men movies and it would still be the same shill.