Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Saw it. Can't say I liked it, but can't say I didn't like it either. It seems to sit in the bog standard Marvel origin movie category. Maybe it's just superhero boredom setting in, but I feel like I've seen the same movie 5 or 6 times previously.

 Frazzled wrote:
Rotten Tomatoes is posting that it made $153mm over the weekend. Thats a lot of hamberders!

Huh. Not bad for what was predicted to be "the lowest grossing marvel movie to date" if I recall.

Predicted by whom? I completely missed that stuff.

Saw it on Friday. I enjoyed it more than Thor or Dr Strange's first outings, and if the CGI had iffy moments, I wasn't sufficiently uninterested to notice them.

I admit, I was half expecting the cat to turn out to be .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
How does the timing work out between this film and Peter Quill being picked up from Earth? And the main body of GotG? By the time of that film, the Kree have apparently ended a war with Xandar (were they fighting them at the same time as the Skrulls?) and disavowed Ronon and Korath, yes?

Another thing I forgot to mention....




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:


How does the timing work out between this film and Peter Quill being picked up from Earth? And the main body of GotG? By the time of that film, the Kree have apparently ended a war with Xandar (were they fighting them at the same time as the Skrulls?) and disavowed Ronon and Korath, yes?

Quill was picked up in the late 80's/early 90's if memory serves? Pretty sure he's canonically around the same age as I am (38). 1988, according to a source I can't be bothered to particularly verify.

Seems the Kree/Xandar war likely kicked off

I saw it with my wife and daughters yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. I'd easily place it in the top third of the the 21(!) MCU movies so far. Even my wife, who is not at all into comic book movies, enjoyed it.

 Peregrine wrote:

If it's a case of being tired of the genre that's fine, but your original complaint sounded like the same old double standard people have for female characters where it's all "they should be careful about making her more than a secondary character" and "they need to justify her powers more" and such while male characters with the exact same development path are just fine and even praised for how awesome they are.

While I am at agreement, I also think that Avengers: Endgame should be mostly about original Avengers and all their newer allies (Rocket, Okoye, Cpt Marvel) should play smaller role. What the characters deserve and I believe audience wants, is a proper closure and sendoff for the old core Avengers.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Another thing I forgot to mention....

Spoiler:

I for one found it a nice touch that the Kree Ships all resembled Ronan's ship in GotG. It's nice to have that consistent design language - though it did make the shooting down of Mar-Vell a bit obvious to those of us who could tell a mile off 'that's a Kree ship...'.

Just a little touch which could've been left out.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:


How does the timing work out between this film and Peter Quill being picked up from Earth? And the main body of GotG? By the time of that film, the Kree have apparently ended a war with Xandar (were they fighting them at the same time as the Skrulls?) and disavowed Ronon and Korath, yes?

Quill was picked up in the late 80's/early 90's if memory serves? Pretty sure he's canonically around the same age as I am (38). 1988, according to a source I can't be bothered to particularly verify.

Seems the Kree/Xandar war likely kicked off

Spoiler:

because the Skrull got away, so the Kree needed a new whipping boy. Which, again, sailing close to politics, is something we've seen on earth, where nations always seem to need a bogeyman of some kind

So, Peter is picked up around the same time as Carol is recruited by the Kree. Give or take a couple of years either way. If the sequel is Carol vs Ronanover the fate of the Skrulls, there's room for some GotG easter eggs. Hopefully just the odd thing in the background, and not some cheesy crossover moment, though.

Yup. More or less.

Though I suspect we may see some of the other Ravagers come into play. Would be nice to see Sly Stallone actually in action!

They subtly implied that the kree were busy with the kree skrull war in gotg.

The kree empire doesnt disavow ronan. They just tell xandar that they didnt tell him to do that so hes not their problem. If ronan was successful he probably would have gotten some acolades.

Hmm; on the subject of the Kree, the Skrulls and Xandar ...

As mentioned, many Marvel films use a doppleganger of the hero as the main villain. This is to represent the hero "overcoming themselves" to be a hero. This movie also understands that a hero must overcome themselves to be a hero, but goes about it in a very different way. Her battle is to overcome her Kree programming and remember who she really is. It is the same "heroic Journey" but done internally instead of externally. Clever of Marvel to re-use/re-think their own origin cliche and do it differently.

I would like to say that I was completely wrong about my theory of Marr Vell (though i still think that would have been good). However what they did do was pretty good.

I'm definitely a little worried about how she's going to be integrated into Endgame. I don't know if the rumours that she was shoe-horned in by Disney are hogwash or not, but if they're true that absolutely makes me a little skittish about that film. I have faith in the Russo brothers but there's only so much a director can do when the studio meddles. Case in point, Avengers vs. Avengers: Age of Ultron. One of those was easily among the best the MCU had to offer, while the other I would put really far down the list. Same director, wildly different outcome in terms of narrative satisfaction. At least for me anyway, can't speak for other MCU fans.

Of course her being shoehorned in is hogwash.

Mid-credits, full movie. Then Endgame.

That’s not a shoehorn.

I don't really have a problem with Ultron. Thor's vision quest is definitely not a good part of it, but its a pretty small diversion in a film that otherwise works for me. Plenty to like; Hulkbuster fight, the Mjolnir sequences, the focus on rescuing people. Lots to like as far as I'm concerned.

Just got back from CM. Really enjoyed it. One of the better solo origin films. Felt like its own thing rather than a retread of Iron Man and overall left me feeling like I'd seen something less disposable than Ant Man or Strange. Little too much CG at the end, but mostly because so much of the film was built on character dynamics over action beats. Good stuff, I'd have to put some thought into where I'd put it in the pack. The top 10 is getting cluttered.

I hope that the sequel is set long before the "current" timeline of the MCU, and shows us more of the Kree/Skrull/Xandar stuff.

Then the third film can be post Endgame with her on Earth finally and having to seek help to deal with all she's been through, perhaps even turning to one doctor Karla Sofen for support.

 Ouze wrote:
Huh. Not bad for what was predicted to be "the lowest grossing marvel movie to date" if I recall.

No one in the film industry made such a claim.

I don't know if it beat the official projections, but the idea that it's projections were anything other than stellar doesn't seem to track for me.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And I think I hear the soft crying of MRA's....I think it's coming from 4chan

And I think labelling people who didn't like the film as "MRAs" is extremely unhelpful.

And by 'shoehorned' I think he meant that she shows up and solves every problem instantly because she's basically invulnerable and unstoppable by the end of her own film. If she does a Superman at the end of Justice League, she'll rob the film of any pacing/stakes.

We don't want a "This guy still bothering you?" moment ala Superman's curbstomp of Steppenwolf.

Its possible that he strips her of much of her power on account of having the Infinity stone that her power is tied to.

Or the stones just don’t have the power they did. They appear very damaged post snap.

I don’t think her power level really matters that much though. The snap isn’t a problem that’s likely to be solved by brute force. Even then Thanos is on par with Darkseid, not Steppenwulf. Had JL2 happened Supes could have had a worthy foe.

Quite enjoyed it. Probably makes the top half at least, sitting around the Dr. Strange/Black Panther level.

I do agree with the sentiment that it will need to be a delicate balance to fit her into Endgame. The strength of the MCU is that it has been a slowly built ensemble, and chucking in an extremely powerful character during the finale seems like it could easily end up either coming across as a deus ex machina, or jobbing.

For me avengers 1 and 2 are two of the WORST the mcu has to offer, equally. And its the director/writers fault. Joss wheddon is an over rated hack who can write snappy dialog and thats about it. Those characters are never more one dimensional then when they were in those movies.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I hope that the sequel is set long before the "current" timeline of the MCU, and shows us more of the Kree/Skrull/Xandar stuff.

Then the third film can be post Endgame with her on Earth finally and having to seek help to deal with all she's been through, perhaps even turning to one doctor Karla Sofen for support.

This would be awesome.

And by 'shoehorned' I think he meant that she shows up and solves every problem instantly because she's basically invulnerable and unstoppable by the end of her own film. If she does a Superman at the end of Justice League, she'll rob the film of any pacing/stakes.

We don't want a "This guy still bothering you?" moment ala Superman's curbstomp of Steppenwolf.

Bingo.

Shes not invulnerable and unstoppable any more than Thor is. She just so happened to be fighting people she greatly outclassed. The kree are tough and strong compared to humans but so is Groot and every other alien race.

She was fighting what amounted to regular people. If she got into a fight with say... Hela. Well i don't think she would have fared any better then thor. And i imagine her photon blasts would get turned into something awful and thrown back at her just like dr stranges magic.

Carol fighting the Kree is like Thor rocking up at the beginning or Thor 2 and just smashing some dudes. We haven't seen anything that makes her out to be like DCEU supes on any level.

Saw it today, and really enjoyed it, even if I'm a bit origin-movie'd out. There was a nice buddy-cop dynamic, some bits that really made me laugh (the Nerf gun!), and some clever stuff with the storytelling. One scene that stood out for me was

 Ouze wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
It's definitely better than Wonder Woman. The third act nearly ruined that film.

You're not wrong there. I've never seen such epic miscasting as they did with Ares. It was only the awesomeness of the the first 2/3rds of the movies that lets people forget that.

I remember when The Mummy Returns came out, people were disappointed that we had a big CGI monster in the final battle, instead of Dwayne Johnson kicking ass. WW kind of had the opposite problem.

 Elemental wrote:

Spoiler:

the final confrontation in the desert. It's an empowering "hell yeah!" moment, of course but it also avoids an anticlimax after she solos a battleship, it's an entirely logical thing for him to try (play on her pride so that he has a chance in the confrontation), and it makes a nice capstone to her emotional arc. It's a neat and elegant bit of storytelling.

Probably my favorite serious moment from the film. It's the only way that the guy stood a chance, and they both know it.

Wonder Woman really deserved a more poetic “they do it to themselves “ ending. They tried to have it both ways but I’d rather have Ares be the broken old man version who humanity has outgrown.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Huh. Not bad for what was predicted to be "the lowest grossing marvel movie to date" if I recall.

No one in the film industry made such a claim.

Nor did I claim they did.

 adamsouza wrote:
Dude, you want to get pumped and White Knight for this movie go ahead, but there is no way you can convince me this movie has the general populace or critics expectations high.

Captain Marvel is on track to be the lowest grossing Marvel movie to date.

Obscure Character that most people don't know? Check!
Character underperforming in comic sales? Check!
Character reboot divisive amongst comic fans? Check!
Movie's star actress pushing identity politics? Check!
China, a huge share of the movie market, not a fan of identity politics? Check!
Movie's star with the same "fart face" in every promotional material? Check!

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
I do agree with the sentiment that it will need to be a delicate balance to fit her into Endgame. The strength of the MCU is that it has been a slowly built ensemble, and chucking in an extremely powerful character during the finale seems like it could easily end up either coming across as a deus ex machina, or jobbing.

Yes, I thought it would be cool to have her come out of left field and wreck Thanos, at least when they first started talking about how she would be the most powerful character in the MCU or what have you. Over time though I started thinking that was actually sort of lame, that they spent all this time building up an epic conflict - pulling her out of a hat like a rabbit cheapens a lot of what came before. But who knows if that is what happens at all. We'll see in 2 months or whatever.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And I think labelling people who didn't like the film as "MRAs" is extremely unhelpful.

Nobody is doing that. Just like with TLJ, there are valid reasons to dislike the movie and nobody is going to label you an MRA for them. For example, "origin story fatigue" is a legitimate reason to criticize the movie. Concerns over how adding a major (and powerful) new character at the last second in a two-part movie will work are legitimate. But let's not pretend that there weren't MRAs whining about stuff like "it's not realistic to have women beating men in combat" or "SHES A FEMINAZI SJW THIS WILL RUIN MARVEL". 4chan/incels/etc exist, whether we like it or not, and it is entirely fair to laugh at how absurd their claims look now that the box office numbers are coming in.

Inquisitor Gideon wrote:Saw it. Can't say I liked it, but can't say I didn't like it either. It seems to sit in the bog standard Marvel origin movie category. Maybe it's just superhero boredom setting in, but I feel like I've seen the same movie 5 or 6 times previously.

I think too many people walked into this thinking this film was going to be lifechanging, either good or bad, but on that level regardless. THAT is what is leading to the "meh" reviews more than anything, I think.

Lance845 wrote:For me avengers 1 and 2 are two of the WORST the mcu has to offer, equally. And its the director/writers fault. Joss wheddon is an over rated hack who can write snappy dialog and thats about it. Those characters are never more one dimensional then when they were in those movies.

Anybody notice that the only time MCU Hawkeye actually acts like Hawkeye is in the non-Whedon films? Yeah, mark me as someone who would actually love to see the JL movie that has Whedon's stuff taken out and be able to watch it like Snyder intended.

A.) How is Hawkeye Supposed to act?

2.) You wanted Cyborg to be killed?