MovieChat Forums > FilmBuff > Replies
FilmBuff's Replies
Not a film I'd buy, but it was interesting to see it in a theater. It's a pretty lousy film, to be honest. The most enjoyable parts were when I could see the old LA of my childhood, most of which is now gone.
Shithouse luck
It was on a pretty good-sized screen. This was the third time I've been able to watch it in a theater, and it never disappoints.
On Monday I'm seeing the 4k restoration of Lawrence of Arabia. I've only seen that once in my life-- on a 70mm curved screen in an old-fashioned dome theater that no longer exists. THAT was amazing. I hope Cinemark plays it in 70mm. I know the theater I'm seeing it at has one 70mm screen... fingers crossed that's where they're playing it!
I watched the 4k restoration last month, and it's a fabulous restoration. What did you think? Had you seen the film before?
Do you think they'll go with any aspect of that for the film? When they base MCU films off of comic story plots they seem to take only the smallest kernel. If they do pull anything from Demon in the Armor, I wonder how much it will be.
I don't remember any other than Captain America: Brave New World.
One time in the '90s I was record shopping in New York and Wesley Snipes was right across from me sifting through music. He was a lot shorter than I expected. I just looked it up, and he's listed at 5'9, but he looked more like 5'6.
Obvious troll is obvious.
They'll have him at it until he's 90.
You're worried about what people in 20 years will think of it? Who cares? Since when is that a valid critique of a film? All sorts of great films were products of their time, and as long as they pleased the audiences that watched them, they did their job. Outside of a handful of films, nearly nothing from the silent era works at all for modern audiences. Do you dismiss that entire 35 years of filmmaking because of that, or is it reasonable to say that because audiences at the time packed theaters to watch them, and came back to watch them again and again, they can be considered successful films?
I have no idea what audiences will make of Deadpool & Wolverine in 2044. I know audiences today love it. I enjoyed the hell out of it. And seeing as it has pulled in something like $824 million dollars in 10 days I'm clearly not alone.
It's an extremely well-written film, and one in which the actors nail the comedic timing. When I saw it on opening night the audience was laughing nearly the entire time, and not one joke fell flat. As far as I'm concerned, that's a home run.
Physically he's a good match as the stunt double. I haven't seen him enough to have a worthwhile opinion on his acting chops.
Probably MCU first, because they still have a large core audience. Many of them now stream the films at home, but the mitigating factors that got them to see this in a theater were no doubt that it was Marvel's first Deadpool film, they brought Jackman back as Wolverine, and that it had buzz.
After that, it was the hype around the film. More than anything in post-COVID times, a film has to have a buzz. Something has to capture the nation's attention and make it the see-it-in-a-theater movie of the year. Most of the people who used to see a movie every weekend now see a movie every year, and they choose the one that has that buzz. It was Barbie last year, it's probably Deadpool this year.
Chris Evans shouting "Flame On!" as Deadpool announces he's about to shout "Avengers Assemble" brought down the house in my theater.
Didn't he say "new mask, same task?"
Those were the best episodes.
The space probe scared the hell out of me when I was toddler.
Go back to the beginning and you'll see he was a power-mad guy out to steal money and be bad. He later evolved into something more nuanced.
Who says we won't? We have zero idea what the Russos have planned. For all we know this is a massive fake-out to get Downey on set to reprise his Iron Man role while fooling us into believing he'll be Dr. Doom. Or he's one of many Dr. Dooms in the multiverse who flips sides and helps the Avengers. Or he's simply the voice of Doom, whose face we never see.
Of course he can work. I'm not saying that at all. My point is that he'll work if they make him interesting, engaging, and threatening yet understandable. Comic book Dr. Doom just did evil things to be evil. He wanted wealth and power. That's a recipe for a boring film. They need to make him someone we can understand, even if we're rooting against him, like Loki for example. That's the genius of casting Downey. He can give us a Doom that is multi-layered, flawed yet someone we can empathize with, and ultimately a villain whose defeat will truly satisfy the audience, a la Thanos.
This reads almost like satire, but if you're serious-- why?
We had Obama, a far left radical as president for 8 years, and he tore the country apart.
We currently have a far left radical agenda guiding a senile president, and have for the past 4 years, and look where we are now.
The debt has spiraled out of control to the point where currently 76% of all tax dollars raised are used to pay just the interest on the debt. The interest. Only 24% of what we pay in tax goes to anything tangible, and that number will shrink as the debt grows. Very soon it will ALL go to paying the debt-- i.e. to China and Wall Street primarily-- and nothing else.
Wages are flat again. While Trump was in office, wage growth outpaced inflation for the first time since the '70s, but that's far from the case now. Rampant inflation destroyed that, and prices have nearly doubled since 2020. Gas was 1.61 in October 2020, it's 3.13 now. A trip to the grocery store that cost $50 then is $99 now.
Immigration is out of control, and illegals are taking jobs away from legals citizens.
Crime is out of hand.
How much more do I need to write. Can you possibly make the case that things are better in 2024 than they were in 2019?
What exactly do you think putting a socialist into office, whose clear and stated goals are to transfer even more power and wealth away from the people and to the government, will accomplish?
I think evil Iron Man is a great idea, rife with amazing possibilities.
What comic book fans, and often the studios who make comic book movies, forget is that what works in a comic book rarely translates directly to the big screen. One of the most brilliant things the MCU did was to tone down the costumes of most of the heroes. Lurid drawings with bright colors and flashy costumes are perfect in a comic, especially one aimed at a child, because you never stop to imagine how that would play out in real life. If you want hundreds of thousands of grown-ups to pay to see your movie, you have to tone down the childish elements. That's why Loki looks like Tom Hiddleston in a suit and not the outlandish character drawn by Kirby, Heck, Sinnott and the rest. Thor, too, was given a subdued costume, and everyone, even Spider-Man and Iron Man, took on a muted color palette.
There's a reason almost everyone laughs when they watch the 1994 Fantastic Four movie, and it's because it is aimed at an 8-year-old. Most all adults are too intelligent and sophisticated to be drawn into something so simple, and any faithful adaptation of a comic is going to fail for that reason, unless it is created specifically as a film for kids.