Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Eternals @ 2021/11/04 02:01:44


Post by: Lance845


So this is coming out tomorrow and I have my tickets purchased for tomorrow night. Figured I would get the thread started. It looks like the reviews are mixed, but in my opinion they seem to be based on a lot of nonsense. "This isn't like other marvel movies so you won't like it" or "This isn't like other marvel movies so you will like it".

Me, I am really excited. This is the movie thats going to introduce some real deep marvel mythology. And we are not seeing this movie for the sake of the eternals as a team. This is here to introduce stuff thats going to matter going forward. I predict the activation of the x gene and mutants.

We will find out soon!


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 03:51:56


Post by: Voss


Huh. Most of the reviews I've seen aren't mixed, they're simply bored.

This is here to introduce stuff thats going to matter going forward

Eh. To a degree, I guess. But that kind of conflicts with the central premise of the MCU, which is that you don't need to watch everything.

Given its the Eternals, it could also be the same problem the comic version has- they really don't matter very much. What they do in their own corner of the setting is largely irrelevant to everyone else. Superhero team #214 just isn't that exciting.

But at least they aren't the Inhumans.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 04:11:11


Post by: Grimskul


I can also see its ensemble cast having issues since it goes against the general MCU formula of having the characters being introduced separately before bringing them together. In this case, we have way too many new people for any meaningful development and the deviants look like generic CGI villains, so you're spreading yourself thin on expository info for introducing the characters while not having any worthwhile looking villains for the movie. I would also say that their whole schtick of being immortal and not doing anything while Thanos did his thing is also another mark against them, since "Celestials said no" is kind of a crap excuse and only makes their intervention now with the Deviants make them look bad, especially when they're clearly still interacting with humanity. It's one thing if they were only observant, ala the Watcher, but they are clearly involved in human lives even if its not in a protecting sort of way.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 05:41:48


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Reckon I’m gonna go see it. I’ve avoided reviews for fear of spoilers, and I don’t know much about their comics, so going in as blind as I can.

Though this month I’m mostly looking forward to Ghostbusters Afterlife….


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 05:49:30


Post by: Ahtman


 Grimskul wrote:
their intervention now with the Deviants make them look bad


The Celestials said "no" to everything else but left them on Earth to specifically deal with Deviants when they pop up so that isn't an exception but their primary purpose. Essentially it is "don't interfere with the way humanity plays out but stop the deviants from taking over and/or destroying humanity". They can still talk to people and interact but not take over and rule or massively derail the timeline. Having Biscuits and Gravy with Bob at the town diner is ok but being the ruler of Europe not so much. Same with wars started by humans.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 07:46:05


Post by: Turnip Jedi


Thinking any non Avenger adjacent film post End Game might be struggling, a 2h 30 run time seems indulgent and dropping a whole new team more or less out of nowhere is an even harder sell


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 08:40:42


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


If anyone can pull it off, it’s the MCU?


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 09:21:26


Post by: Lance845


I... don't think the deviants are the real villains of the film. I think the threat of a celestial judgement is.



Eternals @ 2021/11/04 12:49:41


Post by: Grimskul


 Lance845 wrote:
I... don't think the deviants are the real villains of the film. I think the threat of a celestial judgement is.



Isn't that worse in a sense? Are we going to get another sky beam of "oh no, they started the countdown nuke for earth because deviants have been detected/or we didn't obey the laaaaaw". There hasn't been any build up to this so I doubt the audience are going to be invested in whatever stuff Celestials might do to earth or what their plans were if the Eternals didn't follow their commands (especially since they're effectively non-entities in the MCU given their lack of presence barring Ego who explicitly talked about being "alone").


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 13:54:08


Post by: Voss


Setup for Celestials is GotG 1, not 2. They're in the collectors video exposition about the stones, and Knowhere is the severed head of one.

Ego is just a celestial being (the living planet), not a Capital C Celestial. They sort of borked that explanation though.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 14:00:44


Post by: LunarSol


Mixed reviews honestly kind of has me excited about it. I suspect I won't like all of it, but from what I've heard its main issues are that its overly ambitious and doesn't always hit. It's also apparently very driven by character dialog over action sequences. It sounds interesting even if its not good by the standards set elsewhere in the franchise. Like, the opposite of Ant Man and the Wasp.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 15:20:01


Post by: MDSW


On an outside observation, yeah, way too many heroes to cram into their first movie without any set-up. I guess we are to believe they were born this way and have just existed all this time in the background, so no explanation needed?

In any case, I am with Doc, that I do not know the comics and have not read reviews and will look forward to spending the 2.5 hours.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 21:38:32


Post by: Lance845


 Grimskul wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
I... don't think the deviants are the real villains of the film. I think the threat of a celestial judgement is.



Isn't that worse in a sense? Are we going to get another sky beam of "oh no, they started the countdown nuke for earth because deviants have been detected/or we didn't obey the laaaaaw". There hasn't been any build up to this so I doubt the audience are going to be invested in whatever stuff Celestials might do to earth or what their plans were if the Eternals didn't follow their commands (especially since they're effectively non-entities in the MCU given their lack of presence barring Ego who explicitly talked about being "alone").


I don't think so. The deviants would just be either a bunch of animals or mustache twirling villains trying to destroy for the sake of destruction. The end would just be a big punch off.

The celestials though... Its not something you CAN fight. Being worried about celestial judgement is an eventual inevitability. Its closer to a disaster movie. Knowing the volcano is going to erupt and not being able to stop it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as others said. Ego is not a celestial. HE thinks of himself as a celestial. But thats his own ego considering himself godlike. The celestials are something else entirely.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 21:56:19


Post by: LunarSol


 MDSW wrote:
On an outside observation, yeah, way too many heroes to cram into their first movie without any set-up. I guess we are to believe they were born this way and have just existed all this time in the background, so no explanation needed?


They're very much a family unit so they don't really need or even really benefit from setting them up individually. The idea is they grew up together then went out wandering the earth (hence having names like Icarus, Athena, Gilgamesh, etc) but keep in touch and reconnect over the centuries. Set up is kind of the interesting part of their story, more than any of their present day adventures, and I suspect alot of the divisive response is the slow burn storytelling that probably results in.

As for Eternals, Celestials, and Deviants in the comics. Mostly speculation on my part, but if you want to go in totally blind:

Spoiler:
Celestials are generally depicted either as big G gods with the Eternals acting more like mythical god/demigod offspring or Celestials are depicted as Angels in the sense that they run the universe for the actual One Above All.

Deviants are a little quirkier. They are absolutely the least used aspect of the mythology, but I'll say that the likelihood that they are not truly evil and the Celestials are the real bad guys in the vein of Captain Marvel is... very very high.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 22:13:02


Post by: Lance845


 LunarSol wrote:
 MDSW wrote:
On an outside observation, yeah, way too many heroes to cram into their first movie without any set-up. I guess we are to believe they were born this way and have just existed all this time in the background, so no explanation needed?


They're very much a family unit so they don't really need or even really benefit from setting them up individually. The idea is they grew up together then went out wandering the earth (hence having names like Icarus, Athena, Gilgamesh, etc) but keep in touch and reconnect over the centuries. Set up is kind of the interesting part of their story, more than any of their present day adventures, and I suspect alot of the divisive response is the slow burn storytelling that probably results in.

As for Eternals, Celestials, and Deviants in the comics. Mostly speculation on my part, but if you want to go in totally blind:

Spoiler:
Celestials are generally depicted either as big G gods with the Eternals acting more like mythical god/demigod offspring or Celestials are depicted as Angels in the sense that they run the universe for the actual One Above All.

Deviants are a little quirkier. They are absolutely the least used aspect of the mythology, but I'll say that the likelihood that they are not truly evil and the Celestials are the real bad guys in the vein of Captain Marvel is... very very high.


Spoiler:
I suspect that the devients are the Eternals of another planet that got judged and was wiped out. The devients now try to undermine the celestials work as revenge. The way the humanoid devient (can't remember his name) says "You can't protect any of them" isn't a threat. It's a sorrowful statement of fact born from experience. The celestials are coming. You love these people, and there is nothing you can do to protect them from whats coming.


Eternals @ 2021/11/04 23:09:09


Post by: Da Boss


I find myself pretty disinterested in marvel movies now. I went to see every single one up to Endgame in the cinema, sometimes more than once, and enjoyed all of them to some extent.

But now I'm just not that interested in any of the ones that have come out. Maybe I'll watch them later but I'm not going to the cinema with the covid rates the way they are for these.


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 00:17:38


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


That’s where I am, too. I don’t see myself returning to movie theaters at all this year.


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 01:20:23


Post by: gorgon


I'm just not interested in the Eternals. I never found them compelling, and frankly they were Kirby's lesser creation compared to the New Gods. I get that the movie might be a totally different thing, but my natural reaction is a yawn. There are other DC and Marvel teams/groups I'd feel similarly about.

Having said that, I find it hard to believe that this film deserves to be 15 RT points worse than Thor: The Dark World. I suspect it's better than its rating and a solid watch, just as certain other Marvel films aren't worth their rating.


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 05:40:20


Post by: Ahtman


 gorgon wrote:
I'm just not interested in the Eternals.


Pretty much this. I enjoyed Loki and Falcon and Winter Soldier but they were available to watch at home and I still haven't watched What If?. As for movies still haven't seen Black Widow but I did see Shang Chi. Someone asked me if I was going to see this and the best I can muster is a shrug. I'm in the same seat as Da Boss on the whole thing.


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 08:30:29


Post by: Baragash


I really liked it, it would almost certainly make my top 5 MCU if I sat down and ranked them.

It wasn't perfect, some of the humour missed the mark because the standard Marvel banter doesn't work in as many places as it does in normal MCU movies, and the style of film isn't necessarily as rewatchable as the normal MCU films either.


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 13:25:50


Post by: MDSW


I guess it will be explained, as I have many questions...

If this is part of the MCU and after Endgame, why did they not intervene in a universal baddie looking to wipe out half of the universe (and Earth)? It does not get much more deviant than that.

In the comics, are they also part of the greater MCU universe? After the human super-heroes evolved, was there just no reason for the Eternals to get involved in anything and just went against their legacy to sit back and watch?

Why was it necessary to make them part of the MCU? Might have been a better set up for this to be an unconnected group and movie - sure, made by Marvel, but separately.

I guess I will need to see the movie after all!!


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 14:23:14


Post by: Grimskul


 MDSW wrote:
I guess it will be explained, as I have many questions...

If this is part of the MCU and after Endgame, why did they not intervene in a universal baddie looking to wipe out half of the universe (and Earth)? It does not get much more deviant than that.

In the comics, are they also part of the greater MCU universe? After the human super-heroes evolved, was there just no reason for the Eternals to get involved in anything and just went against their legacy to sit back and watch?

Why was it necessary to make them part of the MCU? Might have been a better set up for this to be an unconnected group and movie - sure, made by Marvel, but separately.

I guess I will need to see the movie after all!!


They vaguely mention it in the trailer, but the cliffnotes version of it is basically a Celestial said "No" and they were like "Sounds good, boss"


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 14:56:19


Post by: Lance845


None of what I am about to say comes from the movie outside of the trailers.

 MDSW wrote:
I guess it will be explained, as I have many questions...

If this is part of the MCU and after Endgame, why did they not intervene in a universal baddie looking to wipe out half of the universe (and Earth)? It does not get much more deviant than that.


The Celestials told them not to. It works like this. The celestials travel around or appear in places in groups called Hosts. They do things to planets and on planets and to the things that live on planets for reasons that are not particularly clear and have different explanations depending on continuity. In a non-canonical series called Earth X, for example, the molten core of earth is a nascent Celestial. Most planets with molten cores and life are. They are basically celestial eggs. Galactus devouring planets is a galactic predator that keeps celestial numbers in check. The celestial modify the genetics of the species on the planet to create basically an immune system to protect the baby. Thats why earth has mutants and so many super powered people. They are a white blood cell system to attempt to protect the baby till it "hatches".

In 616 (the main universe in the comics) The Eternals are taken from prehuman stock, modified greatly and tasked with overseeing the experiment until the next Celestial Host arrives. They are given strict instructions on what they can and cannot interfere with because doing otherwise would tamper with the experiment. Other bits of the Prehuman stock are modified in a bunch of ways so that certain evolutionary paths are available and things are likely to occur in certain ways. Basically it results in the X gene. (An aside to this. Apocolypse's "survival of the fittest" is about ensuring that the population of Earth is deemed worthy and survives the next Celestial Host.His tech is actually some celestial tech and his ship is a celestial ship.) But also, later, the Kree come along and see how genetically capable humanity are and tamper with them further creating the off shoot that is the Inhumans as an experiment to make weapons for the Kree Skrull war.

The Deviants are just like the Eternals in the comics. Taken from pre human stock, modified greatly, except they are monstrous. Thanos is actually a descendant of the Deviants in the comics which explains why hes so damn tough and hard to kill. Thats right. Thanos is actually distantly descended from Earth.

In the comics, are they also part of the greater MCU universe? After the human super-heroes evolved, was there just no reason for the Eternals to get involved in anything and just went against their legacy to sit back and watch?


Yes, but very rarely if ever used for much. The Eternals in the comics are literally immortal in a way that is stupefying and would make them suck the tension out of any conflict. You could atomize them and they will reconstitute.

Why was it necessary to make them part of the MCU? Might have been a better set up for this to be an unconnected group and movie - sure, made by Marvel, but separately.

I guess I will need to see the movie after all!!


My guess is we are digging into the MCU version of all that history and mythology to bring things forward. Mutants are tied to this. The celestial Hosts are a big deal. The Black Knight is in this movie and I am sure thats so he can go do some stuff in future movies as well. This whole movie is going to be like introducing the Tesseract or the power stone. Except it's not one trinket. It's a swathe of trinkets in the shape of people and foundational events that shape why things are the way they are.


Eternals @ 2021/11/05 17:45:31


Post by: Ouze


 Ahtman wrote:
 gorgon wrote:
I'm just not interested in the Eternals.


Pretty much this. I enjoyed Loki and Falcon and Winter Soldier but they were available to watch at home and I still haven't watched What If?. As for movies still haven't seen Black Widow but I did see Shang Chi. Someone asked me if I was going to see this and the best I can muster is a shrug. I'm in the same seat as Da Boss on the whole thing.



I'm in a very similar boat as you are (but swap Shang Chi with Black Widow for me). I do love comic book movies and watch very nearly all of them, but genuinely have zero interest in Eternals. If I had free tickets in a sanitized theater by myself - so most powerful economic argument coupled with maximum safety - I still wouldn't go see it.

I'm still interested in the MCU in general, but these guys just genuinely didn't solicit any interest at all. I dunno why, it just feels like... we've done this before. I know that is true of almost every comic book movie but couple the "been there done that" with a bunch of what seem to be very uncompelling characters....

I did love the What If? series but I was a very very big fan of the What If? comics growing up so I am strongly biased.





Eternals @ 2021/11/05 22:44:39


Post by: Baragash


For those who it isn't important to wait for the answer:

Spoiler:
The Celestials sent out eggs which live in the molten core of planets.

Eternals are a form of artificial life created by the Celestials to protect planets from Deviants, until the population reaches the required level to trigger the birth of the Celestial. After each emergence, the Eternals have their memories wiped before being sent out to repeat for the next Celestial.

It covers the wider mythology/purpose of the Celestials as creating galaxies and life, at the cost of single planets on an irregular basis (it was like 1 Celestial born every 100 million years). Thanos' actions didn't really interefere, since all he did was roll the process of birth back a little bit by reducing the population, the whole remake the universe idea from Endgame may have been a different kettle of fish, but it never happened so.....

Implied in the mid-credit scene: Thanos is an Eternal, because his brother appears.

Deviants were also created by the Celestials, I don't think the reason was given, but I felt it was implied that they were an earlier Eternal variant that found out the truth.

Implied: like the Eternals of the movie, Thanos didn't know the truth of the Celestials because it renders his goal meaningless.

None of the other comic history lance mentions seems to have carried across (no Hosts, no Kree involvement unless they later get outed as causing deviation in a future movie. As they only fight Deviants, we have no frame of reference for how powerful Eternals are relative to human super-heroes/mutants, and we see them injured and killed. It's unclear whether they self-heal, or whether only the team leader has the healing power. It's also unclear how much of their powers are tech-based an how much are part of them.

The Black Knight doesn't play a part in the movie, apart from a few quips (his jokes generally do land), and the 2nd post-movie scene where he opens a box with the Ebony Blade in - there is a nice little nod to it earlier in the film that implies it's physically similar or identical to Excalibur, which is shown to exist).


Eternals @ 2021/11/06 05:45:57


Post by: Lance845


Alright. Saw it.

Non Spoilers/opinion. I liked it. It's not Winter Soldier (and none of the other Marvel movies are) but it's good. Top... 40-30%? Pretty good considering there are now almost 30 movies. The Celestials are treated with the awe inspiring size they deserve. There are little details I missed in the trailers like... Arisham has rings of asteroids around him. It's pretty sweet to treat them as being so big that they collect debris in orbit around them. The acting all around was pretty great. The history and mythology they build is pretty neat. Some characters are under used.

Spoilers.

Spoiler:

I never thought they would ACTUALLY go with the Earth X explanation. I fully thought the Emergence was the emergence of the x gene and the threat was going to be a celestial host/judgement. I was shocked it was a baby celestial story. Pretty amazing. However they do set up a Celestial Judgement from Arisham the Judge and that is pretty cool. Kro (the deviant who is never named in the movie but it's totally Kro) is under used. He acts as a red herring threat and he is threatening and dangerous but he is mostly background noise. More could have been done with him, but there was already a lot going on in the movie.

The X gene is semi eluded too in a very vague way. Talking about how humans are different and their potential in several spots in the movie. But nothing in this movie directly relates to it. Again, very unexpected. Shocking really. This was a perfect way to place the seed and it just never happened.

Post credits introduces Starfox (as Thanos's brother - comic accurate. Never thought they would do that) and Pip the Troll. What a crazy ass thing to introduce.


Glad this movie was made. I enjoyed it. Looking forward to where this all goes next.


Eternals @ 2021/11/06 08:43:45


Post by: Turnip Jedi


Spoiler:
Pip ? Means we're only one baldly psyker off a full infinity watch...hmmm


Eternals @ 2021/11/06 10:02:02


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Booked in to see it at 1pm. Big comfy seat, too. With no-one either side.

Rather looking forward to it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So….

Spoiler:
Its pretty good. And nice there isn’t a Big Bad as such.

Not at all sure what the point of Jurrn Snurr was though?

Didn’t stay to the very end, as someone was allowing their child to shriek really quite shrilly. Saw the Pip bit, but wondering if perhaps I missed another sting?


Eternals @ 2021/11/06 22:47:14


Post by: ccs


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Booked in to see it at 1pm. Big comfy seat, too. With no-one either side.

Rather looking forward to it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So….

Spoiler:
Its pretty good. And nice there isn’t a Big Bad as such.

Not at all sure what the point of Jurrn Snurr was though?

Didn’t stay to the very end, as someone was allowing their child to shriek really quite shrilly. Saw the Pip bit, but wondering if perhaps I missed another sting?


All you missed was Dane Whitman opening a box containing the Ebony Blade & reaching for it.
as he does so someone unseen asks him if he's ready for that.

Apparently, according to something I read in an interview with the director, that's the voice of the guy cast to play Blade. But, if like me, you don't know who that actor is, or what his voice sounds like, that moment doesn't mean anything.

The whole point of having Whitman in this movie was to introduce the character & give him a reason to pick up the Ebony Blade.
Looks like he's going to go after his GF..... Though I think taking on a Celestial is a bit out of the Black Knights weight class.

Oh, and there was the tagline promising that The Eternals Will Return. Yes, yes, of course they will....


Eternals @ 2021/11/07 06:47:11


Post by: Baragash


I wouldn’t have recognised his voice, but I suspect most people know who someone that headlined a series of True Detective, had more than 30 episodes of House of Cards, appeared in several epsiodes of Luke Cage, and has 2 Best Supporting Oscars in the last 4 years (as well as a bunch of all the other awards on the circuit) is.


Eternals @ 2021/11/07 10:14:27


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Saw it earlier today. It's a lot to unpack. Overall I think I liked it.

 Baragash wrote:
Spoiler:
Deviants were also created by the Celestials, I don't think the reason was given, but I felt it was implied that they were an earlier Eternal variant that found out the truth.
Spoiler:
The Deviants are the first wave, so to speak, sent to a world to remove the 'apex predators', allowing the populations to grow to aid in the emergence, except that they started eating everything, thereby defeating their actual purpose, so the Celestials created the Eternals to stop them.


Eternals @ 2021/11/07 11:04:44


Post by: Baragash


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Saw it earlier today. It's a lot to unpack. Overall I think I liked it.

 Baragash wrote:
Spoiler:
Deviants were also created by the Celestials, I don't think the reason was given, but I felt it was implied that they were an earlier Eternal variant that found out the truth.
Spoiler:
The Deviants are the first wave, so to speak, sent to a world to remove the 'apex predators', allowing the populations to grow to aid in the emergence, except that they started eating everything, thereby defeating their actual purpose, so the Celestials created the Eternals to stop them.


Yes, thanks! I remember that scene now you've described it


Eternals @ 2021/11/07 12:44:32


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Spoiler:
There’s also the oddity of this one being pretty stand alone. For the first time in a long time (quite possibly not since Hulk? Perhaps GotG?) there’s no actual crossover.

Yes the dialogue takes pains to point out this is part of the MCU, but there’s no outside team up. Not even a cameo. Kingo does mention he knows or at least knew Thor, but that’s about it.

It creates an oddly insular film, which actually suits the characters quite nicely. For 7,000+ years, they’ve been their own family. Them and no-one else, because nobody else lives as long as them,

It also helps show how seriously they took their charge of non-interference. And it’s pretty much a character driven film, even during the fight scenes which are fairly few and far between.

It’s definitely a bold breaking of the mold, and I suspect it will be equally cursed and blessed by that. Some will love its Otherness, some will loathe its Otherness.

But it’s still a perfectly well made movie.


Eternals @ 2021/11/08 11:22:09


Post by: ccs


 Baragash wrote:
I wouldn’t have recognised his voice, but I suspect most people know who someone that headlined a series of True Detective, had more than 30 episodes of House of Cards, appeared in several epsiodes of Luke Cage, and has 2 Best Supporting Oscars in the last 4 years (as well as a bunch of all the other awards on the circuit) is.


{shrugs}
I pay little-to-no attention to the Oscars etc, never have, never saw True Detective, and there's a vast # of actors of all skill lvs whom I never remember their names. I'm sure when I see him in Blade though I'll think "Oh, that guy - from (House of Cards)".


Eternals @ 2021/11/08 12:09:42


Post by: Pacific


 Lance845 wrote:
None of what I am about to say comes from the movie outside of the trailers.

 MDSW wrote:
I guess it will be explained, as I have many questions...

If this is part of the MCU and after Endgame, why did they not intervene in a universal baddie looking to wipe out half of the universe (and Earth)? It does not get much more deviant than that.


The Celestials told them not to. It works like this. The celestials travel around or appear in places in groups called Hosts. They do things to planets and on planets and to the things that live on planets for reasons that are not particularly clear and have different explanations depending on continuity. In a non-canonical series called Earth X, for example, the molten core of earth is a nascent Celestial. Most planets with molten cores and life are. They are basically celestial eggs. Galactus devouring planets is a galactic predator that keeps celestial numbers in check. The celestial modify the genetics of the species on the planet to create basically an immune system to protect the baby. Thats why earth has mutants and so many super powered people. They are a white blood cell system to attempt to protect the baby till it "hatches".

In 616 (the main universe in the comics) The Eternals are taken from prehuman stock, modified greatly and tasked with overseeing the experiment until the next Celestial Host arrives. They are given strict instructions on what they can and cannot interfere with because doing otherwise would tamper with the experiment. Other bits of the Prehuman stock are modified in a bunch of ways so that certain evolutionary paths are available and things are likely to occur in certain ways. Basically it results in the X gene. (An aside to this. Apocolypse's "survival of the fittest" is about ensuring that the population of Earth is deemed worthy and survives the next Celestial Host.His tech is actually some celestial tech and his ship is a celestial ship.) But also, later, the Kree come along and see how genetically capable humanity are and tamper with them further creating the off shoot that is the Inhumans as an experiment to make weapons for the Kree Skrull war.

The Deviants are just like the Eternals in the comics. Taken from pre human stock, modified greatly, except they are monstrous. Thanos is actually a descendant of the Deviants in the comics which explains why hes so damn tough and hard to kill. Thats right. Thanos is actually distantly descended from Earth.

In the comics, are they also part of the greater MCU universe? After the human super-heroes evolved, was there just no reason for the Eternals to get involved in anything and just went against their legacy to sit back and watch?


Yes, but very rarely if ever used for much. The Eternals in the comics are literally immortal in a way that is stupefying and would make them suck the tension out of any conflict. You could atomize them and they will reconstitute.

Why was it necessary to make them part of the MCU? Might have been a better set up for this to be an unconnected group and movie - sure, made by Marvel, but separately.

I guess I will need to see the movie after all!!


My guess is we are digging into the MCU version of all that history and mythology to bring things forward. Mutants are tied to this. The celestial Hosts are a big deal. The Black Knight is in this movie and I am sure thats so he can go do some stuff in future movies as well. This whole movie is going to be like introducing the Tesseract or the power stone. Except it's not one trinket. It's a swathe of trinkets in the shape of people and foundational events that shape why things are the way they are.


Thanks for taking the time to write this - really interesting to know!


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 02:28:59


Post by: Voss


Does the Black Knight ever do anything in the comics? I realize this is setting up for something, but I remember him as a C-list Avenger with a magic sword (and maybe the sheath from excalibur?), a curse (turning into stone, or something) and a penchant for wearing actual chainmail (as imagined by comic book artists) as his costume.

That's... literally it. I don't remember if he was involved with Marvel universe Merlin the way Captain Britain was or not, but... maybe?

But when I read Avengers in the late 80s it was Black Knight, Dr Druid, cat lady #?? (Tigra, Cheetara, something like that), maybe Wasp, She-Hulk sometimes and... a couple cameos from Cap or Thor when they weren't busy elsewhere. Maybe some other nobodies, but... I'm not exactly invested in this guy being the set up for later films.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 03:58:59


Post by: Lance845


Voss wrote:
Does the Black Knight ever do anything in the comics? I realize this is setting up for something, but I remember him as a C-list Avenger with a magic sword (and maybe the sheath from excalibur?), a curse (turning into stone, or something) and a penchant for wearing actual chainmail (as imagined by comic book artists) as his costume.

That's... literally it. I don't remember if he was involved with Marvel universe Merlin the way Captain Britain was or not, but... maybe?


I know very little about the Black Knight except that the Ebony Blade is cursed to drive you closer to madness every time it draws blood, and that it gives you a bunch of protections. Your basically immune to magic (neat with Dr. Strange and gak out in the universe. Maybe even being a weapon against a power mad Scarlet Witch. And it can cut through anything but some metals (adamantium) and other magic swords. He also had a bunch of gadgets and gak ala sky cycles and a lance that shot lasers. I doubt that gak is going to make it into the MCU.

But when I read Avengers in the late 80s it was Black Knight, Dr Druid, cat lady #?? (Tigra, Cheetara, something like that), maybe Wasp, She-Hulk sometimes and... a couple cameos from Cap or Thor when they weren't busy elsewhere. Maybe some other nobodies, but... I'm not exactly invested in this guy being the set up for later films.


His most recent big thing is the Ebony Blade being an effective weapon against Knull the God of the Symbiotes. But I suspect his roll is going to have more to do with magic gak. Team up with Blade. Fight Scarlet Witch. Maybe participate in reigning in a Ghost Rider or something.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 04:17:25


Post by: Just Tony


Voss wrote:
Does the Black Knight ever do anything in the comics? I realize this is setting up for something, but I remember him as a C-list Avenger with a magic sword (and maybe the sheath from excalibur?), a curse (turning into stone, or something) and a penchant for wearing actual chainmail (as imagined by comic book artists) as his costume.

That's... literally it. I don't remember if he was involved with Marvel universe Merlin the way Captain Britain was or not, but... maybe?

But when I read Avengers in the late 80s it was Black Knight, Dr Druid, cat lady #?? (Tigra, Cheetara, something like that), maybe Wasp, She-Hulk sometimes and... a couple cameos from Cap or Thor when they weren't busy elsewhere. Maybe some other nobodies, but... I'm not exactly invested in this guy being the set up for later films.


In the late 80's to late 90's he also grew out a mullet with the obligatory Sawyer from Lost style five o'clock shadow, took to wearing a leather Avengers team jacket over his chainmail, and swapped out the cursed Ebony Blade for a lightsaber that stunned his opponents rather than kill them.


No, seriously.


He also went through this cloying "Gann Josin" toxic relationship garbage with Sersi until he was flung into the Ultraverse where he was deified and given leadership of the team for... reasons, I suppose?


Damn it, now I realize that "Gann Josin" garbage is going to be crammed into the movies too. Damn it...



To the movie itself? I'll watch it when it's free, I suppose. I have a nice litmus test to tell if I'm going to be flat out bored or bitterly disappointed in a comic story, and it usually involves seeing Eternals, Inhumans, or New Gods are part of it. Grant Morrison's JLA comic was pretentious fethery, but became painfully intolerable the second Orion showed up. I actually had that death scene of his as my wallpaper for years because I detest the character so much.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 04:34:03


Post by: Ahtman


I don't really know Black Knight either as I only vaguely recall him in a few West Coast Avengers comics but that is about it. I have a better grasp of Ironheart and I've never read a single comic she was in. He feels like a non-existent character; a thing imagined more than actually existing with all the weight of a mercurial memory.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 05:22:13


Post by: gorgon


Voss wrote:
Does the Black Knight ever do anything in the comics? I realize this is setting up for something, but I remember him as a C-list Avenger with a magic sword (and maybe the sheath from excalibur?), a curse (turning into stone, or something) and a penchant for wearing actual chainmail (as imagined by comic book artists) as his costume.

That's... literally it. I don't remember if he was involved with Marvel universe Merlin the way Captain Britain was or not, but... maybe?

But when I read Avengers in the late 80s it was Black Knight, Dr Druid, cat lady #?? (Tigra, Cheetara, something like that), maybe Wasp, She-Hulk sometimes and... a couple cameos from Cap or Thor when they weren't busy elsewhere. Maybe some other nobodies, but... I'm not exactly invested in this guy being the set up for later films.


Yeah, the MCU is really testing its brand power with F-listers like Black Knight and really even the Eternals themselves. Still, I wouldn't count that brand out.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 07:36:26


Post by: Blackie


Saw it yesterday, honestly I thought it was worse but still one of the weakest MCU episodes.

Acting was good though, the indian guy was my favorite character.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 12:36:49


Post by: Lance845


 gorgon wrote:
Voss wrote:
Does the Black Knight ever do anything in the comics? I realize this is setting up for something, but I remember him as a C-list Avenger with a magic sword (and maybe the sheath from excalibur?), a curse (turning into stone, or something) and a penchant for wearing actual chainmail (as imagined by comic book artists) as his costume.

That's... literally it. I don't remember if he was involved with Marvel universe Merlin the way Captain Britain was or not, but... maybe?

But when I read Avengers in the late 80s it was Black Knight, Dr Druid, cat lady #?? (Tigra, Cheetara, something like that), maybe Wasp, She-Hulk sometimes and... a couple cameos from Cap or Thor when they weren't busy elsewhere. Maybe some other nobodies, but... I'm not exactly invested in this guy being the set up for later films.


Yeah, the MCU is really testing its brand power with F-listers like Black Knight and really even the Eternals themselves. Still, I wouldn't count that brand out.


Guardians of the Galaxy was this before the movie came out. Remember, nobody knew jack gak about Groot.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 14:52:00


Post by: gorgon


Yeah, that's why I said it. However, I'd argue that the chemistry that happened on GotG was pretty unique.

Chloe Zhao is a very talented director, but basically no one thinks she nailed it like Gunn did. It'll be really interesting to see if the studio backs Zhao and the Eternals franchise with sequels or backs away. It's pretty clear they *wanted* a new franchise out of this.

It could be telling that the producer recently said an Eternals sequel isn't 'a must-have'...? I'm not following the BO numbers closely but it seems to be doing fine in that aspect.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 15:28:48


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


If nothing else, Eternals is very much a necessary experiment for the MCU.

Whilst definitely part of the same universe, it’s probably the most Stand Alone in terms of content and feel of the entire franchise. And it’s been a long old time since an MCU has existed in such a comparative vacuum.

I think it did a bang up job of introducing a new faction type thing to the wider MCU, all the more so because we don’t exactly get cameo type appearances. And given the intended non-interference nature of the Eternals themselves, I think that was kind of appropriate.

Yet the ending does kind of open them up to being more involved in the wider picture stuff - without writing any specific narrative cheques it’d have to cash further down the line.

I can definitely understand folk not necessarily enjoying it, but I think it’d be a stretch to say it’s a bad movie.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 15:52:53


Post by: Turnip Jedi


Are we sure its not just a planned lowering of expectations so we can cope better with Leto...


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 15:54:32


Post by: Lance845


Leto has nothing to do with Marvel Studios. Thats Sony.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 16:44:28


Post by: Ouze


With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 16:48:44


Post by: LunarSol


 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


That's kind of to be expected. Eternals are largely a second try and making Inhumans work.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 16:49:00


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


 Lance845 wrote:
Leto has nothing to do with Marvel Studios. Thats Sony.


I’ve a horrible feeling he’s been cast in an MCU role as well.

I won’t check. I don’t want to Google his name. For it is offensive unto Nuggan!


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 17:04:43


Post by: gorgon


 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


Inhumans, Eternals and Titans, oh my!





Eternals @ 2021/11/09 17:39:18


Post by: Lance845


 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


So few Inhuman characters get any kind of play anyway. At this point the most famous and popular is Ms Marvel, Kamala Khan.


Eternals... Nobody knows any of them.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 18:04:07


Post by: LunarSol


 Lance845 wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


So few Inhuman characters get any kind of play anyway. At this point the most famous and popular is Ms Marvel, Kamala Khan.


Eternals... Nobody knows any of them.


And lets be honest, if Marvel hadn't been throwing a hissy fit about supporting characters owned by other studios when she was created, Kamala would have just been a Mutant.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 18:41:05


Post by: Lance845


 LunarSol wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


So few Inhuman characters get any kind of play anyway. At this point the most famous and popular is Ms Marvel, Kamala Khan.


Eternals... Nobody knows any of them.


And lets be honest, if Marvel hadn't been throwing a hissy fit about supporting characters owned by other studios when she was created, Kamala would have just been a Mutant.


I doubt it. Her origin is rooted in some fairly major events. She was born out of needing a point of view character who was a consequence of those events.

Not to mention the mutant population of Earth had been getting whittled down for years at that point. House of M that really put them on the path to extinction came out in 2005. Long before Marvel Studios got the ball rolling with Iron Man 1.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 19:03:38


Post by: LunarSol


 Lance845 wrote:
 LunarSol wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


So few Inhuman characters get any kind of play anyway. At this point the most famous and popular is Ms Marvel, Kamala Khan.


Eternals... Nobody knows any of them.


And lets be honest, if Marvel hadn't been throwing a hissy fit about supporting characters owned by other studios when she was created, Kamala would have just been a Mutant.


I doubt it. Her origin is rooted in some fairly major events. She was born out of needing a point of view character who was a consequence of those events.

Not to mention the mutant population of Earth had been getting whittled down for years at that point. House of M that really put them on the path to extinction came out in 2005. Long before Marvel Studios got the ball rolling with Iron Man 1.


They had already resolved the House of M stuff at the end of Avengers vs X-Men and created a whole arc where "new lights" were appearing on Cerebro after "No More Phoenix". Khamala was introduced as a character not long after, but this was also the year Avengers was released... and Amazing Spider-Man.

2013-2015 was where the Sony/Fox purge took shape. Inhumans got a huge push at the executive level, being brought in as part of the event that was clearly geared towards testing out Phase 2 with the introduction of stuff like the Black Order. Khamala was created along with Agents of SHIELD using Inhumans as a mutant replacement and the annoucement of the movie. A year later they were cutting as much X-Men and Fantastic Four and the like as they could manage.

I think Khamala would have been created with or without Infinity/Inhumanity. I just don't think she would have been an Inhuman if Marvel hadn't been trying to replace the X-Men with them at the time.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 20:25:09


Post by: gorgon


 LunarSol wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
With the exception of Black Bolt and the giant dog, I couldn't tell you who was an Inhuman and who was an Eternal at gunpoint.


So few Inhuman characters get any kind of play anyway. At this point the most famous and popular is Ms Marvel, Kamala Khan.


Eternals... Nobody knows any of them.


And lets be honest, if Marvel hadn't been throwing a hissy fit about supporting characters owned by other studios when she was created, Kamala would have just been a Mutant.


That whole episode was incredibly ridiculous. Bad editorial decisions are one thing -- and both Marvel and DC have made plenty of those. But that was a company temper tantrum wrapped in the cloak of a business decision.


Eternals @ 2021/11/09 21:55:16


Post by: Lance845


I agree with the company temper tantrum.

I am just saying Kamala's origin is tied to the terrigen bomb. She was a point of view character of what happens to all the people that suddenly manifest their inhuman abilities in the aftermath of that.

They might have made another Pakistani-American character without that story arc. But they made HER and her circumstances and initial issues in the wake of that very inhuman event.

Not that there is much of a point in speculating on the What If... Marvel wasn't being weird about Fox properties? time line of comics. But I suspect that if there was an entirely different set of world events in the comic the character we would have gotten wouldn't be the same character.


Eternals @ 2021/11/10 04:10:58


Post by: Grimskul


This pretty much highlights the majority of my issues with the movie:




Eternals @ 2021/11/10 05:11:06


Post by: Voss


He really did hit the series idea really hard.

Its not quite that easy, but I can see why that seems like a more rational approach to an... 8? member ensemble of characters few people care about.


Eternals @ 2021/11/10 07:07:13


Post by: Grimskul


Voss wrote:
He really did hit the series idea really hard.

Its not quite that easy, but I can see why that seems like a more rational approach to an... 8? member ensemble of characters few people care about.


The movie could have definitely been more scaled back in terms of cast so they could have more time to breathe with some of the more central characters rather than being forced to split it up between everybody.


Eternals @ 2021/11/10 16:18:19


Post by: Ouze


That is something I think Shazam did really well; paring down the related characters to focus.


Eternals @ 2021/11/10 17:31:45


Post by: gorgon


 Grimskul wrote:
This pretty much highlights the majority of my issues with the movie:




This was gold (and a spoiler):

Spoiler:
"An alcoholic troll pops out of a space portal and introduces one of the guys from One Direction!"
"I mean...yeah, okay, that may as well happen, sure."


Eternals @ 2021/11/10 18:29:15


Post by: Grimskul


 gorgon wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
This pretty much highlights the majority of my issues with the movie:




This was gold (and a spoiler):

Spoiler:
"An alcoholic troll pops out of a space portal and introduces one of the guys from One Direction!"
"I mean...yeah, okay, that may as well happen, sure."


Haha, right? They really did nail that part since that was basically my sister's reaction when she saw that part of the movie, "Hey, isn't that guy..."


Eternals @ 2021/11/11 02:01:30


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Yeah, I was confused and then [/i]"Oh that's right. Harry Styles is in this."[/i]

Still, of all the characters to introduce to the MCU...
Spoiler:
Pip the Troll?


Eternals @ 2021/11/11 02:24:53


Post by: Voss


Eh. Tie in character for the character in the end credit sequence for GotG2. And the GotG in general, and possibly bouncing off Strange in his 2nd film.


He does bring the disturbing implication that we'll be seeing Thanos again, and also maybe Infinity Watch and Infinity Crusade is in the cards for future 'phases'. But since the MCU rather skipped over everything inside the Soul Stone, some of that may not apply.


Eternals @ 2021/11/11 02:31:12


Post by: Lance845


I doubt very much Thanos is coming back any time soon. That was a pretty definitive end to him. Unless the beheaded version reconstitutes due to his Eternal ancestry.

And as far as Pip goes. Compare it to Howard the Duck.


Eternals @ 2021/11/11 02:46:57


Post by: Voss


 Lance845 wrote:
I doubt very much Thanos is coming back any time soon. That was a pretty definitive end to him. Unless the beheaded version reconstitutes due to his Eternal ancestry.

Soon is relative. Future phases could go on for a decade plus, and then... wham bam Eternal ma'am. Very comics, and they barely scraped the surface of Thanos, and honestly misused him in a lot of ways. (Not that I want to see him again, but Hollywood is very big on reuse and recycling)

And as far as Pip goes. Compare it to Howard the Duck.

/shrug. Howard was clearly a joke and homage. Pip has a lot of ties and storylines tied up with major characters in active film projects.


Eternals @ 2021/11/12 20:05:33


Post by: MarkNorfolk


Finally got to the pictures to see this. I thought it was.... ok. (and I thought Black Widow was pretty cool).

It certainly felt a different kind of MCU movie. Gemma and Kit on a mid-winter London park looked the most 'un-Marvel' Marvel Movie scene ever. More like a Richard Curtis romcom.

The 'getting the band back together' scenes were the best part of the movie. 'Pitch Meeting' had it right that a Disney+ TV show might have been better.

Spoiler:
I guess with all the Eternals on the Domo or kidnapped by the Celestials (except maybe Sprite? - does she still have her powers) they belong with 'space marvel' rather than [earth marvel] stories - only coming together for an end-of-phase climax.

Sprite's Pinocchio plot sorta came out of nowhere, it was obvious Ikaris was going to be a douche (although I didn't peg him as 'traitor'), Kingo as Bollywood star (after Ajak's 'go and be your own person' speech) was fun, and the wife and I thought the end title sequence was cool (had a Stargate vibe).


Eternals @ 2021/11/15 15:38:14


Post by: Easy E


I have not read any of this thread, but I did just go see the movie. I know nothing about the Eternals or Celestials, or anything like that.

It is no GoTG, but it is a fine ensemble piece that does what it says on the tin. It is pretty to look at, and I think the character's are written just deep enough for you to get a feel for all of them and a simple motivation for each of them. With a cast this large, that is enough.

The movie moves along at a good pace, and the story is put together in a logical way. What unfolds in front of us makes sense and is logically consistent.

Overall, this one did not feel like a genre movie with a cape on it, like many Marvel movies do. This felt like an honest to goodness attempt at an ensemble Super-hero movie. Strangely, it is this very straight forward approach to supers that ultimately leaves the movie a bit lacking. It really needed some sort of genre trappings to give it the illusion of more than it is.

Ultimately, I liked that the Eternals/Deviant conflict only took place in pre-historic/archeological past. The final deviants are taken care of during the fall of the Aztec Empire. They also lean hard into the idea that super-heroes are just modern myths. There are some ideas to work with here, about the nature of myth, religion, and the circle of life. However, I do not think they are touched on quite enough to shine through the super-hero genre.

Ultimately, I would call it workman like and well-put together with the occasional flourish or sign of greatness, that never shows itself consistently. I enjoyed it, but I liked Shang-Chi better even if Eternals had better world building.

Not bad, and I could see these folks and the GOTG/Thor crossing paths at some point. Now I will go read the rest of the thread to learn how wrong I am about the film.



Eternals @ 2021/11/22 14:17:48


Post by: Necroagogo


I didn't think it felt like a 'typical' MCU effort but wasn't any the worse for that. Beautifully filmed.

Was this the first MCU movie to directly reference DC properties (Batman, Alfred and Superman)?


Eternals @ 2021/11/22 19:20:22


Post by: Lance845


Yes. Also the first to have a "sex scene".


Eternals @ 2021/11/22 19:57:01


Post by: Grimskul


 Lance845 wrote:
Yes. Also the first to have a "sex scene".


A rather dubious honor for the latter. I guess the GoT actors carried that vibe over to the MCU lol.


Eternals @ 2022/01/08 13:09:40


Post by: AduroT


So having just rewatched Infinity War because I was bored at work… was Thanos right? His comic version has origins and ties to the Eternals/Deviants, and the movie supports that with Eros showing up and calling himself Brother of Thanos. Mayhaps we come to find out his real motivation was decreasing the populations to prevent worlds from being destroyed via Emergence, as that requires certain levels of high population to trigger.


Eternals @ 2022/01/08 20:45:18


Post by: Voss


That would seem like the kind of thing they would need to say out loud, and given his tendency to be a wordy brat, I think he would have actually mentioned it.

Besides, it still runs into the same problem as the 'resource availability' argument- we've seriously done studies on major population loss (modeled on the Black Death recovery and Industrial age growth rates). If our population got cut in half, it would take only about a century or so (give or take a decade) to recover. (though obviously it would horrific and traumatic at the time)

So his solution would delay things, but the whole 'its done and can't be undone' stance (let alone that it actually fixes anything) is still absolute twaddle.

Amusingly, it also might accelerate things in some cases- if a world that happens to have a nascent Celestial incubating in it* has a successful recovery and gets an influx of refugees from neighboring systems (like in the Kree empire, not necessarily Earth), it could push past the population trigger even faster.

*presumably there aren't actually a lot of those.


Eternals @ 2022/01/08 21:08:10


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


It’s coming to Disney+ on the 12th if anyone fancies watching it without paying specifically to watch it.


Eternals @ 2022/01/08 23:45:30


Post by: Lance845


The infinity gauntlet could do ANYTHING. If Thanos's goal was to stop the celestials he could have made them turn to dust. given them another way to reproduce. Done their job for them and vastly increased the scale of the universe to include infinite resources.

Thanos is the mad titan because in his mind the only solution is death. It's not about fixing the problem. It's about being "right".


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 15:21:56


Post by: Shadow Walker


 Lance845 wrote:
The infinity gauntlet could do ANYTHING.

In Marvel comics but is it true in MCU?


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 15:25:54


Post by: Voss


 Shadow Walker wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
The infinity gauntlet could do ANYTHING.

In Marvel comics but is it true in MCU?


Seems to be. Kill half of everything, restore them back exactly the same. Alternate Thanos seemed convinced he could just destroy and recreate the entire universe.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 15:32:44


Post by: AduroT


They’re so powerful they can destroy themselves!


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 15:35:08


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Yeah, Thanos’s solution, not the problem he perceives is his madness.

With the Infinity Gauntlet completed he could simply have magicked all existing resources on all existing planets to become infinitely and instantaneously replenishing.

One click, and everyone, universe wide, now lives in a world of utter abundance. Theoretically, that’s pretty much an end to war, as there’s no scarcity to drive desire and greed.

If no one is concerned where their next good meal or clean water is coming from, it’s gonna be much harder to create an argument for war. The removal of scarcity or other limitation of resources might make a helluva difference.

Though I genuinely look forward to other Dakkanauts pointing out my own madness in that, for it is from such things good and interesting discussion stems.

Anyways. Eternals. Watched it again today and appreciated it a lot more. Whilst I enjoyed it in the cinema, it’s “only tangentially related to the MCU” nature caught me somewhat off guard. Knowing to expect that left me to simply soak up the visuals and the plot.

It’s not perfect, but it’s enjoyable all the same.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 16:14:02


Post by: MarkNorfolk


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Anyways. Eternals. Watched it again today and appreciated it a lot more. Whilst I enjoyed it in the cinema, it’s “only tangentially related to the MCU” nature caught me somewhat off guard. Knowing to expect that left me to simply soak up the visuals and the plot.

It’s not perfect, but it’s enjoyable all the same.


Their nature would see to fit the 'Space Marvel' rather than 'Earth Marvel' so we might see them pop up in GotG Vol.3 - although that is a bit of a wait.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 16:48:57


Post by: Turnip Jedi


MarkNorfolk wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Anyways. Eternals. Watched it again today and appreciated it a lot more. Whilst I enjoyed it in the cinema, it’s “only tangentially related to the MCU” nature caught me somewhat off guard. Knowing to expect that left me to simply soak up the visuals and the plot.

It’s not perfect, but it’s enjoyable all the same.


Their nature would see to fit the 'Space Marvel' rather than 'Earth Marvel' so we might see them pop up in GotG Vol.3 - although that is a bit of a wait.


And of course Eros being the Purple Man of space


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 17:10:32


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Can we not mention that character?

I mean, there are actual actors out there. You don’t need some scrawny get from a god awful manufactured boy band from barrel scraping reality shows.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 17:25:20


Post by: John Prins


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Yeah, Thanos’s solution, not the problem he perceives is his madness.

With the Infinity Gauntlet completed he could simply have magicked all existing resources on all existing planets to become infinitely and instantaneously replenishing.

One click, and everyone, universe wide, now lives in a world of utter abundance. Theoretically, that’s pretty much an end to war, as there’s no scarcity to drive desire and greed.



There were even lower tier solutions, like drastically increasing the empathy and responsibility of every sentient creature such that resources were conserved and shared equitably and populations managed themselves to their available resources. A bump in intellect would allow all sentient races to move into space where effectively infinite resources were available for population expansion.

Like killing off half the population at random would probably result in another third or more just straight up dying as the disruption of infrastructure causes societal collapse. You can't support the same level of infrastructure with half the population!

But I doubt an abundance of resources would put an end to war...a lot of the war in human history was driven by a desire for power or the pride of some ruler being offended.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 17:34:17


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


But power comes from restricting resources, or at least controlling access to them.

Imagine if precious minerals are suddenly abundant. If fossil fuels were a sustainable resource, if not a sustainable source of fuel.

Right now? Britain could reopen the mines, because there’s still coal down there. Likewise the North Sea Oil Fields. If those seams/oil beds instantly replenished the goodies? Britain for one becomes self providing. The same with crops and food animals.

It would no longer matter who had all the gold, silver etc, because it would never run out.

The complete lack of scarcity would very likely end economics as we understand them.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 17:38:02


Post by: LunarSol


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But power comes from restricting resources, or at least controlling access to them.

Imagine if precious minerals are suddenly abundant. If fossil fuels were a sustainable resource, if not a sustainable source of fuel.

Right now? Britain could reopen the mines, because there’s still coal down there. Likewise the North Sea Oil Fields. If those seams/oil beds instantly replenished the goodies? Britain for one becomes self providing. The same with crops and food animals.

It would no longer matter who had all the gold, silver etc, because it would never run out.

The complete lack of scarcity would very likely end economics as we understand them.


NFTs have taught me otherwise. People are willing to go to impressive lengths to invent scarcity for the purpose of exploiting one another.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 17:41:37


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Ah, but when the very basics are abundant? People can do what they like with their spare money/time.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 18:59:44


Post by: John Prins


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Ah, but when the very basics are abundant? People can do what they like with their spare money/time.


Like fight over the non-basic things.

Keep in mind that the entirety of the Illiad revolves around who has one single, specific woman. There will always be things that are unique, and people will fight over them.

Abundance inspires decadence, which leads to callousness and ruin. The post-scarcity society falling apart due to its own indolence is a trope (the Silver Surfer's homeworld is an example).

That's why I suggested changing how sentient life thinks, because it's a long term solution.



Eternals @ 2022/01/12 19:22:27


Post by: Grimskul


Yeah, this kinda ties into same naievte that makes people who believe that somehow communism can actually work as intended in the real world. There's this bizarre idea that once everyone has all the wealth they need that we'll become an enlightened and pain-free society, even though it very easily ignores the core, often selfish aspects of the human condition and how we seek out conflict. Look at what people do when they play in open world sandbox games. Once you've basically done everything and built or accumulated all the stuff you can in the game, most people just start breaking or killing NPC's out of boredom. Without a clear or given focus or purpose to move towards that involves some kind of struggle, people will make up their own perceived conflicts to fight against.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 19:58:03


Post by: LunarSol


 Turnip Jedi wrote:
MarkNorfolk wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Anyways. Eternals. Watched it again today and appreciated it a lot more. Whilst I enjoyed it in the cinema, it’s “only tangentially related to the MCU” nature caught me somewhat off guard. Knowing to expect that left me to simply soak up the visuals and the plot.

It’s not perfect, but it’s enjoyable all the same.


Their nature would see to fit the 'Space Marvel' rather than 'Earth Marvel' so we might see them pop up in GotG Vol.3 - although that is a bit of a wait.


And of course Eros being the Purple Man of space


Something he shared with his brother humorously.


Eternals @ 2022/01/12 21:09:26


Post by: Voss


So, watched it this afternoon.

Definitely one of the weaker MCU films, just for the need to gloss over... pretty much everything to fit in the (still excessive) runtime.

The moral arguments between the characters deserve little more than a side-eye, and most of the characters amount to a super power with a single personality trait or feature. Including the lead characters, which doesn't help anything.

A couple of them (Phastos and Druig particularly, since they have more complex relationships and outlooks) might be more interesting in a tighter film, but I'm not sure what they'd do.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 02:32:20


Post by: ccs


 Grimskul wrote:
There's this bizarre idea that once everyone has all the wealth they need


How much I need & how much I want are very different things.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 03:56:40


Post by: trexmeyer


I really, really hate plot points that involve giving humans technology. It is so incredibly lazy and renders any attempt by said stories to tell morality moot.

Edit:
I'm glad Paper Boi (Atlanta) got a big role. It wasn't the best showcase of his talents.
Salma Hayek had a surprisingly minor role.
Sprite was just...odd.
The actress who played Sersi somehow had a more impactful role to me in Captain Marvel. She and Icarus were very bland leads.
Blonde Jolie as a warrior-goddess worked well, but she was probably the most talented actor in the movie.
Kumail was fine.
The rest of the Eternals were forgettable or grating. Why one was mute (and deaf?) was very odd.
The action scenes, especially the FTL combat was vastly inferior to Man of Steel.
The movie doesn't do much beyond lore dump and set up future plot threads. It's instantly forgettable. On par with Thor 2 and Iron Man 3 for me. Worst MCU film in a while, but not necessarily the worst. I didn't love Far From Home either, but at least that had a couple of visually interesting moments. Captain Marvel had better action and better comedy.

I think Eternals biggest issue wasn't the ensemble cast. It was just bland. Unsalted. Strangely devoid of conflict and stakes.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 04:50:18


Post by: Voss


trexmeyer wrote:
I really, really hate plot points that involve giving humans technology. It is so incredibly lazy and renders any attempt by said stories to tell morality moot.

It depends on the stories and the moral focus. If you're moralizing about honesty and integrity, for example, 'here is laser gun' doesn't render anything moot. It might even make a story about 'don't kill people' easier to tell, if you focus on the moral problems with being able to easily kill.

And 'giving technology' can be kind of weird as a concept. You could say that about any form of schooling, really, as students didn't in any way earn or understand the implications of what they're being taught. It doesn't matter if you're teaching them to make bows, rifles or lasers. And for Eternals specifically, better farming and medicine would have helped the real goal (pure pop growth), and not really caused much in the way of problems.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 09:55:37


Post by: Shadow Walker


trexmeyer wrote:
It's instantly forgettable. On par with Thor 2

How tastes vary. Thor 2 is the best Thor movie IMO.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 10:40:10


Post by: ccs


trexmeyer wrote:


I think Eternals biggest issue wasn't the ensemble cast. It was just bland. Unsalted. Strangely devoid of conflict and stakes.


Ahh, so very comic accurate.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 17:44:09


Post by: John Prins


ccs wrote:
trexmeyer wrote:


I think Eternals biggest issue wasn't the ensemble cast. It was just bland. Unsalted. Strangely devoid of conflict and stakes.


Ahh, so very comic accurate.


Yes, and it really makes you wonder why they bothered making an Eternals movie. This is probably the most boring corner of the Marvel IP. At least the Inhumans had royal infighting and funky looking people.

I mean, geez, they could have done a Power Pack movie and made all the moneys, because that's basically a bog standard Disney kids movie in a Marvel wrapper.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 18:03:58


Post by: AduroT


To be fair much the same could have been said about the Guardians and look how well that one turned out?


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 18:08:55


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Well, whilst this movie was pretty stand alone within the MCU, it’s introducing an entirely new super powered and heroic race, plus potential future antagonists.

Plus Inhumans was tried on telly and was cack


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 19:59:26


Post by: LunarSol


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Plus Inhumans was tried on telly and was cack


Well, it was supposed to be a movie originally and announced as such after Ultron before they learned not to plan quite that far ahead and take a more experimental approach to things.


Eternals @ 2022/01/13 20:20:13


Post by: Voss


 AduroT wrote:
To be fair much the same could have been said about the Guardians and look how well that one turned out?


Guardians at least tied into the main storyline and hit the right tone for the brand (and honestly had better name draw for MCU films, at least in terms of target audience).
Eternals had to take time out of their own story to apologize for not giving a crap about the end of the world. Or any other major crisis for the entire history of humanity.
At least with new heroes, there's no need to excuse their existence.



Eternals @ 2022/01/14 01:30:49


Post by: Lance845


 LunarSol wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Plus Inhumans was tried on telly and was cack


Well, it was supposed to be a movie originally and announced as such after Ultron before they learned not to plan quite that far ahead and take a more experimental approach to things.


Thats not what happened.

Universally horrible person and head of Marvel Ike Pearlmutter wanted to make Inhumans to spite Fox for having the Mutants. He forced the Inhumans movie onto the slate before Kevin Feigie went to the Disney suits and got himself freedom from the Marvel Council headed by Ike. Then Kevin canceled Inhumans, a movie he never wanted to do, and went forward with plans that didn't suck. Ike Pearlmutter, took his toys and went home to Marvel TV where he shoved Inhumans into every corner of Agents of Shield and that fething awful TV show.

Feige is always planning ahead. Inhumans was a plan made by committee that he disagreed with.


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 01:54:09


Post by: John Prins


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Plus Inhumans was tried on telly and was cack


Not exactly the fault of the Inhumans. I mean, giant teleporting doggo! THINK OF THE MERCH! But they tried to do it on a shoestring budget when it should have been Shakespearian Epic.

Guardians at least was always full of characters with character, and you're off in space so you have all the aliens to draw from for villains/cosmic entities. The Eternals have always been pretty wooden. Heck, they all have the same power set, they just vary in how well trained/practiced they are with each of the powers.

And geez, they could have done the entire Eternals movie "Pre-Snap" and set up a reason for them not being on Earth during that period (like they re-settled on Titan to avoid Asgardian attention or something).


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 07:16:17


Post by: AduroT


I was fine with the Inhumans in Agents of Shield. I thought that worked just fine. The separate Inhuman series itself was just Bad. Medusa in particular was done hella dirty.


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 08:51:55


Post by: Lance845


 AduroT wrote:
I was fine with the Inhumans in Agents of Shield. I thought that worked just fine. The separate Inhuman series itself was just Bad. Medusa in particular was done hella dirty.


You were fine with them being treated wholesale as Mutant replacements? "Concentration camps" and all?


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 10:58:43


Post by: Pacific


I enjoyed the film a lot more than I thought I would, given that I knew very little about it and wasn't too sure what to expect.

I liked that there were some really quite powerful subtexts between the different characters, and the moral ambiguity of the protagonists. I liked Ikarus in particular; he was the obviously intended to be the 'muscles' of the group, but he wasn't suited for leadership and was unable to process the decision that Selma Hayek's character had made after holding onto that secret for so long (the one that had cost him the chance to live his life with his love) and his anger at that betrayal lead him to murder his master. A decision he could no longer live with, when it ended with him being unable to kill the person he loved, even though that then removed his reason for being. So all of that physical power but actually quite vulnerable, I found that moment quite powerful.

I thought as well - was Sprite placed there deliberately as a child, so she would never be comfortable in that world and so wouldn't become attached to it? And then ultimately do what needed to be done when the time came - if that was a deliberate activity by the Celestial that was an interesting move. If this had happened millions of times on millions of worlds, presumably they would become quite proficient at it.

I thought something that detracted slightly was the evolution of the Deviants and the "oh look I'm sapiant" and then not really getting a chance to explore that before being killed by Angry Angelina Jolie (although the relationship between her and Gilgamesh was again quite heartfelt). That plotline perhaps could have had a film of its own.

And not something I ever thought I would find myself writing on a forum, but the costumes (and sets in general) were beautiful. Someone had really given thought to the colour co-ordination, and Gemma Chan in that emerald green getup just looked - wow.

My better half didn't enjoy it that much because it felt disconnected from the other Marvel films, didn't have the same level of humour, and perhaps was a bit too wishy-washy. But that was perhaps exactly why I liked it; it showed the MCU can create a thought provoking, actually quite emotionally powerful film, without it just needing to be humorous quips and explosions (as much as I enjoy those films).

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Can we not mention that character?

I mean, there are actual actors out there. You don’t need some scrawny get from a god awful manufactured boy band from barrel scraping reality shows.


I'm gonna say that final clip probably dropped the film half a star in my rating - really felt out of place.


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 12:23:30


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


I definitely appreciate this wasn’t Marvel By Numbers. But I can see why that might be offputting for others.

For instance, let’s say Marvel is a really good Burger. Nothing too fancy, but you know the franchise is going to deliver something to scratch that itch.


Eternals is more….a Steak Sandwich. Same basic ingredients, but if you’re craving a burger, it may not quite do it for you, but the next buyer might appreciate the change.


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 14:09:14


Post by: Voss


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I definitely appreciate this wasn’t Marvel By Numbers. But I can see why that might be offputting for others.

For instance, let’s say Marvel is a really good Burger. Nothing too fancy, but you know the franchise is going to deliver something to scratch that itch.


Eternals is more….a Steak Sandwich. Same basic ingredients, but if you’re craving a burger, it may not quite do it for you, but the next buyer might appreciate the change.


Wait... it wasn't Marvel By Numbers? Run-time eating origin story, weak and irrelevant villains, shallow character relationships... hmm. A little less banter, I guess, but I think it really seized on the weakest parts of the Marvel formula and ran with it. Some great cinematic landscape pans don't save it from its standard take on the usuals.

And then went a bit further with some really weaksauce moral 'arguments:'
Ok boss, I'm on board with letting 7 billion people just die. Its fine.
Murder and mass murder for the 'love of ages' because its just so... whatever and stuff.
Life-long (centuries-long!) dependency is a positive relationship! (And not an utter horror)


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 14:53:28


Post by: trexmeyer


It had all the moral complexity of sitting on a nail.


Eternals @ 2022/01/14 16:41:09


Post by: Grimskul


The only thing Eternal about this movie will be how forgettable it is.


Eternals @ 2022/01/17 15:07:36


Post by: Easy E


To me, it was the most "Superhero" of all the MCU so far.

That is why it is so funny to me to see some many fans hate it.


Eternals @ 2022/01/17 16:19:13


Post by: Voss


What makes it 'superhero' to you, out of curiosity? It almost feels like a deconstruction to me.

None of these characters are particularly heroic- they trip over the most basic morality, there's no 'rise,' no inspiration of others, no call.

They accidentally found out one of their own got killed, and some of them stumbled into doing vaguely the right thing just before their 'between jobs' hiatus was over. They were all pretty content just ignoring the world.
Half of them didn't even have a motive. The mostly-not-in-this-movie speedster was bored, flashbacks lady was simply pointed in the correct direction, mind control guy just... kind of went along with it?
The lead character kind of did it out of sympathy, maybe, but mostly out of an accidental 'hey, my powers do what?'


Eternals @ 2022/01/17 22:31:26


Post by: Easy E


A group of capes get together for the purpose of protecting people, but eventually fall apart due to personality disputes, but are then reluctantly forced back together to face a common threat. However, not all of them are who they seem to be. The true enemy ends up being much closer to home.

That is a by-the-numbers Superhero team story that you read in X-men, Avengers, JLA, etc all the time.


Eternals @ 2022/01/17 23:52:34


Post by: Tamereth


Saw it today. At no point did I care about any of the characters.
And the ending was garbage of the highest order.
What was the point of the deviant having the ability to absorb their power / memories? It felt like it was building up to it being the hero, and killing the eternals would cause it to be the omni mind thing and stop Tiamat. Then it’s cut in have with a sword for no reason.
And the part emergence, that would have been a planet killing event in its own right. Ripping its way out of the earths core to the surface. Turning it to stone doesn’t change the fact the earths core is now gone, and a giant section of the mantle is rock. Every volcano on earth would be erupting and earth quakes planet wide. Mega ash clouds, nuclear winter level stuff. Hell the change to earths mass alone would F up the planets rotation / orbit.

The whole thing felt disconnected from reality. Remember when tony built an armoured suit in a cave, that level of believability has long since gone.


Eternals @ 2022/01/18 03:03:25


Post by: Voss


What was the point of the deviant having the ability to absorb their power / memories? It felt like it was building up to it being the hero, and killing the eternals would cause it to be the omni mind thing and stop Tiamat. Then it’s cut in have with a sword for no reason.


I think the point was to illustrate that they were the same kind of monsters, but they could choose to be better and it... couldn't?
Because it was ugly and had a bad-association-word name.
But it wasn't ever going to be the hero.

\shrug
Really its another case where the comics version is a LOT more nuanced. They were a pre-humans (experimented on and 'improved' by the Celestials) with an extensive civilization that went wrong. But they were capable of logic and reason and truces, not just animal-level killers to be killed in turn.


Eternals @ 2022/01/18 03:36:00


Post by: Lance845


Arguably a lot of what is in the comics can still be in the mcu. The opening crawl is full of misinformation and lies, and arishem isn't exactly a reliable narrator in that he would be fine lying to its servants.

The robots bit is more likely to be genetic creations. More replicants than androids.


Eternals @ 2022/01/18 15:16:55


Post by: Voss


 Lance845 wrote:
Arguably a lot of what is in the comics can still be in the mcu. The opening crawl is full of misinformation and lies, and arishem isn't exactly a reliable narrator in that he would be fine lying to its servants.

Eh. Unreliable narrator doesn't work when we see the Deviants as animals, acting like animals and only animals until they start in on Eternals in the present day.
That's a pretty far cry from the comics' ancient empire that subjugated early humans, warred with Lemuria and Atlantis (and vaguely/questionably responsible for the sinking of both) and made peace treaties with the Eternals.

Maybe the Celestials reduced an ancient Deviant empire to animals off-screen in the long long ago, but I can't see any way that would matter.


The robots bit is more likely to be genetic creations. More replicants than androids.

Yeah, I figured that. They went with 'living robots' or whatever as shorthand for the audience. Replicants are (potentially) a lot more interesting, but the movie was already dragging with Too Much Stuff.


Eternals @ 2022/02/22 19:35:28


Post by: LunarSol


Finally got the time to watch this and was quite pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed it. Really enjoyed the characters, how they were built up and woven really quietly all things considered. The plot grew to an organic and character driven conflict conflict with some of the visual spectacle at the end having some fantastic camera work to capture the scale of it. Really enjoyed this one. Not likely to revisit it, but found it far more engaging than I expected.


Eternals @ 2022/02/25 10:10:29


Post by: Slipspace


Finally watched this yesterday. It was fine, I guess, but could have benefitted from having about 30 minutes cut from the runtime.

It did take itself a little too seriously for the most part and suffered from character overload. There were quite a lot of eternals but only maybe a single personality between them. Maybe it's just me, but I did find the casting of two brothers from GoT, alongside a character called Sersi, a little distracting. Maybe that says more about the merits of the film. Could have been worse, I guess. Harry Styles could have had more than just a cameo.

The villains and plot were pretty poorly conceived/borderline nonsensical, the fight scenes annoyingly badly shot and I thought there was a lack of chemistry between any of the leads. The Indian eternal at least seemed to be having fun. It says a lot that I can only remember half of the character's names...


Eternals @ 2022/02/25 11:31:17


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 Shadow Walker wrote:
trexmeyer wrote:
It's instantly forgettable. On par with Thor 2

How tastes vary. Thor 2 is the best Thor movie IMO.


Tastes do indeed vary


Eternals @ 2022/02/27 08:08:21


Post by: ccs


Slipspace wrote:

The villains and plot were pretty poorly conceived/borderline nonsensical, ~~~ It says a lot that I can only remember half of the character's names...


Yup, that's Comic Accurate concerning an Eternals plotline.


Eternals @ 2022/02/28 15:55:03


Post by: LunarSol


It does not help that the names are both overly familiar and JUST off enough that you never quite feel like you got it right.