Movies & TV The Hangar Film Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Lord Nicholson I haven't seen it yet and haven't clicked your spoilers but it's interesting you mention civil war.

Agree that it was one of the more dramatic films in the series that took itself seriously, with success. But the biggest gripe for me in that film was the huge fight with everyone in it. The means it took to get everyone in the same room was like a plot device explosion. I'm expecting a bit more of the same from this one...
 
DapperJong said:
Agree that it was one of the more dramatic films in the series that took itself seriously, with success. But the biggest gripe for me in that film was the huge fight with everyone in it. The means it took to get everyone in the same room was like a plot device explosion. I'm expecting a bit more of the same from this one...
Click to expand...

Yeah, that fight while technically spectacular and great fun but is fanservice to the extreme.

The concluding fight engineered by Zemo is the best final showdown Marvel has had, though.
 
Last edited:
Lord Nicholson said:
an actual character would have been welcome, yes

Ebony Maw is awesome though, have to say.

dead tho
Click to expand...

When you say, an actual character, is your main complaint that no one was developed in the film itself?

Because we have had 18 preceeding films, we know the characters.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Mercurial89 said:
When you say, an actual character, is your main complaint that no one was developed in the film itself?

Because we have had 18 preceeding films, we know the characters.
Click to expand...

We do know the characters; how do they grow in this story?
 
Jade said:
Nah loved it. Or my complaints are very minor.

Thanos was ******* boss. Loved the brutal smackdown of the Hulk, really established how truly powerful he was.

The conflict between the Guardians and Stark/Strange/Parker was a little forced, but thankfully didn't last long.

You had to accept that real development with such a large cast was never going to happen, so as long as you were comfortable with 2+ hours of 'splosions, it's a cracker of a film.

Overall it was nice to see a 'culmination' film FINALLY live up to the hype - where movies such as Matrix Revolutions, LOTR - Return of the King had failed.
Click to expand...

How dare you say RotK failed as a culmination.
 
Lord Nicholson said:
I just can't get behind all this. Thor: Ragnarok has more personality and verve in 5 mins of its runtime.

The MCU's build-up has been problematic though. So many of these films are just another brick in the wall, and it's all meant to lead to this. There are two problems with this though:

They allowed themselves bottle episodes at the worst possible time. So Thanos is poorly set up and this film does a kind of con-job to establish him well, which is that they bury about 5 minutes of actual development in there. It's clever and effective in the moment but doesn't really hold water, doesn't answer the "Why now?" question and also doesn't jive at all with whatever he was trying to do in The Avengers. As it stands this film leans heavily on the first GOTG and even then the vital development from that part of the timeframe was off-screen:
Gamora learning the location of the Soul Stone
.

The film flirts with the concept of emotional terrorism but corrupts and countermands the development of its heroes to do so - it's almost like 2 and a half hours of Bruce making the selfish choice to save Rachel rather than Harvey but without... any reversals? Each hero apart from Dr. Strange has kinda learned nothing from their past experiences and stand for... nothing? Other than "I will stop baddie"?

As a result the whole thing is a really elaborate Mr. Squiggle exercise, and I don't envy the writers or the Russos for having to sort all this s**t out, and I think they made as good a fist of it as they could, but I'm perplexed by how anybody can be seriously thrown by the ending considering
No, Peter Parker and T'Challa are most certainly not dead. Having spent so long not killing anyone and then killing off characters with contracted sequels is a really bizarre decision, and the fact that people are really affected by it is a testament to Feige's sleight of hand, I guess. I was totally on-board with a brutal, futile, and lonely death for Tony but then they pull that punch. Vision dying is a major case of "so what" considering he only cropped up in the 3rd act of the previous instalment.

I guess part of my disappointment stems from the fact that I thought Civil War was really robust drama and posed interesting questions that are totally neglected by this, a spiritual successor. And I don't mean trivia questions in the Force Awakens sense, I mean questions of relationships and conflict, and how does that affect outcomes. As it stands we have a story that thus far plays out no differently no matter what happened in Civil War. And on that point I acknowledge that this is just Part 1. But to me it's serious Matrix Revolutions-itis, with less questions raised, but rather a bombardment of mostly witless action and endless repetition. Contrast with Empire which thematically and emotionally resolves itself while leaving two plots (one practical, one emotional) to conclude.
Click to expand...

You’re crazy! ...and a clock-work contrarian.

We kind of know Black Panther and Spidey aren’t really dead, but it’s the empathy of the Avengers’ experience that kicks us in the guts.

The fact that so many people are suspending disbelief is testament to how immersive this film is, and if you aren’t blown away by its power then IMO you’re doing yourself a disservice.
 
Summer Nights said:
You’re crazy! ...and a clock-work contrarian.

We kind of know Black Panther and Spidey aren’t really dead, but it’s the empathy of the Avengers’ experience that kicks us in the guts.

The fact that so many people are suspending disbelief is testament to how immersive this film is, and if you aren’t blown away by its power then IMO you’re doing yourself a disservice.
Click to expand...

I'd be far more on board with it if some blood had hit the deck in the preceding set of films. Clark Gregg, Michael Rooker and Rene Russo really don't cut it. I got a good laugh out of the demise of the Warriors Three, but when you've made a stack of films that hardly if at all stand alone and are more of a protracted serial, the promise of lasting change has to be delivered on.

Also I've defended the MCU up till now, but immersion was never its strong suit, as a series that lampshades to absurdity and leans so heavily on bathos (which is at its most inappropriate in this film).

It's a con job, it always has been and I don't disrespect that - much of mass entertainment is. I guess I've been spoiled by the smattering of franchise films that are substantial and are just good cinema, and I'm more amused that something that's less than that is being bought hook, like and sinker.
 
Lord Nicholson said:
I'd be far more on board with it if some blood had hit the deck in the preceding set of films. Clark Gregg, Michael Rooker and Rene Russo really don't cut it. I got a good laugh out of the demise of the Warriors Three, but when you've made a stack of films that hardly if at all stand alone and are more of a protracted serial, the promise of lasting change has to be delivered on.

Also I've defended the MCU up till now, but immersion was never its strong suit, as a series that lampshades to absurdity and leans so heavily on bathos (which is at its most inappropriate in this film).

It's a con job, it always has been and I don't disrespect that - much of mass entertainment is. I guess I've been spoiled by the smattering of franchise films that are substantial and are just good cinema, and I'm more amused that something that's less than that is being bought hook, like and sinker.
Click to expand...

If there’s a few things I’ll give you, (1) I learn a helluva lot of new words from you [“bathos” - straight to my list of dictionary look-ups-for-later] and (2) you’re a formidable critic.

A point of distinction I’ll make is that immersion is a unique quality to this film; Totally agree that the MCU series of films has been moreabout successfully fun romps than captivating and compelling stories, but I think you need to look at IW in the context of its predecessor films and appreciate what it’s delivering for that same audience: it’s blowing minds. People are walking out of theatres with dropped jaws and that’s no exaggeration. If you don’t see it for what it may do for you then can you see it for what it’s giving so many others? Can you look at it through others’ eyes?
 
Lord Nicholson said:
I guess I've been spoiled by the smattering of franchise films that are substantial and are just good cinema, and I'm more amused that something that's less than that is being bought hook, like and sinker.
Click to expand...
That's how I feel about all of these Marvel films. I get popcorn films, but these are generally really boring and not something I'm able to care about.

Bathos is a great word, by the way; I agree. The perfect word for a lot of films and TV shows.
 
Summer Nights said:
A point of distinction I’ll make is that immersion is a unique quality to this film; Totally agree that the MCU series of films has been moreabout successfully fun romps than captivating and compelling stories, but I think you need to look at IW in the context of its predecessor films and appreciate what it’s delivering for that same audience: it’s blowing minds. People are walking out of theatres with dropped jaws and that’s no exaggeration. If you don’t see it for what it may do for you then can you see it for what it’s giving so many others? Can you look at it through others’ eyes?
Click to expand...

I can understand how it does it and that it does it (my own reaction to the cut to credits was an amused chuckle), and it's mostly a fun ride, but for my money it doesn't hold up to the scantest scrutiny and lacks the "personality" for want of a better word of Marvel's 3 or 4 most recent features.
 
I still don't get why Dr strange spared Tony Stark as I am getting sick or RDJ's face
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

DapperJong said:
I still don't get why Dr strange spared Tony Stark as I am getting sick or RDJ's face
Click to expand...

strange has seen 14million possible outcomes, where they only win 1.
That 1 outcome, Tony is obviously alive or key to it. So the only way to win was to give up the time stone and hope that they got a chance ti win.
Its also why he didnt stop starlord from waking up thanos, when they do get the glove off (according to the possible futures he has seen) they still lose.
 
Mercurial89 said:
strange has seen 14million possible outcomes, where they only win 1.
That 1 outcome, Tony is obviously alive or key to it. So the only way to win was to give up the time stone and hope that they got a chance ti win.
Its also why he didnt stop starlord from waking up thanos, when they do get the glove off (according to the possible futures he has seen) they still lose.
Click to expand...

yeah but
 
Lord Nicholson said:
The saddest thing is that they missed the opportunity to say to each other "No s**t, Sherlock" which would have been the MOST MARVEL THING EVER
Click to expand...

I had no idea i wanted this until now.

I now hate this movie.
 
Did anyone see downsize me? (Matt Damon)

its generally the fare I would revel in..

about a third of the way in I thought, im really enjoying this, such a good idea, so many possibilities!

then all of a sudden it just seemed to lose pace, and get all muddled, worse still it got waaaay too big for itself and answered nothing.

big disappointment in the end, after a good build up.
 
Howard Moon said:
Did anyone see downsize me? (Matt Damon)

its generally the fare I would revel in..

about a third of the way in I thought, im really enjoying this, such a good idea, so many possibilities!

then all of a sudden it just seemed to lose pace, and get all muddled, worse still it got waaaay too big for itself and answered nothing.

big disappointment in the end, after a good build up.
Click to expand...
Yep same.

Fantastic idea that could have gone so many different ways but the problem is it never settled on one direction. There were about 3 different plotlines in it that never really ended. Was just strange.
 
Loonerty said:
Yep same.

Fantastic idea that could have gone so many different ways but the problem is it never settled on one direction. There were about 3 different plotlines in it that never really ended. Was just strange.
Click to expand...

they didn't even explain how all the poor people ended up in there?? were they shrunk down to be the cleaners and porters?

did local governments try to shrink away their homeless problems? (that would have been my idea)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top