Only Season 1 and Season 3 are listed here !!!
loading replies
@ambrosinter they are, but they’re re-edited from the last 5 or so episode from the original first season. The original episodes in that season are about 70 minutes long, and Netflix re-edited it to squash 2 seasons out of it.
Make the show a little more streamlined, dial down the pretentiousness (for example, no more shifting aspect ratios), turn up the philosophical complexity (which I felt was completely lacking in this season, except from a few speeches by Anthony Hopkins), and keep the emotional reasonance (Dolores/Bernard, William/daughter and Maeve/daughter relationships), and we might just return to the greatness of the first season.
loading replies
@alantroll that’s the only deeper aspect in this season, which is also what I referred to with the speech by Anthony Hopkins (as he reveals their purpose towards Bernard in the seventh episode or so). It doesn’t compare to all the bicameral mind /self concious talk of the first season.
And on the action scenes: no they don’t distract me, I actually think they’re some of the best on tv. And you care about the people that are in those scenes, so no, they’re not hard to get invested into. What I don’t like, is that they’re using those scenes to hide and distract from the story that isn’t as deep this season. In intself, that’s enough for me to like something (most Blockbusters aren’t very deep, yet you care because the characters work) , which is why I still ended up liking this season, I just found it a vast step down from the previous one.
Succession is a strange show.
Sometimes you watch it and it's pretty good and the next moment it's childish, badly written and just crap, then it's OK again.Not 100% sold on it going into the 3rd season. Episode 1 is a mess.
NONE of the characters are the type of people you'd want to sit down and have a cup of coffee with, let alone spend any amount of time with.
Not sure how long I'll watch this season - it's hanging in the balance right now - 4/10
loading replies
@speeddemon This show is in part meant to be satirical, they’re intentionally written to be nails on a chalkboard. That’s also why it can get childish, the show’s poking fun at how entitled they are.
I do love how this show shits on millennials/zoomers for being too much without earning anything.
loading replies
@pd_review It shits on boomers just as much, if you’re paying attention
This is one of Marvel Studios’ riskier projects, the hyperlink structure combined with the villain being the main character immediately makes it stand out in the genre. It’s because of those two aspects that the film works as well as it does. Thanos is a great character with an interesting motivation. The animation is so detailed and lifelike that it never fails to bring out the emotion, in fact I’d argue that the scenes between him and Gamora have the most emotional punch (courtesy of Zoe Saldana and Josh Brolin, who both put in a really solid performance). The balancing of all the different plot lines is also quite well done as there’s a relevancy to each one, nor does the tone feel too disjointed at any point. Some transitions or the sudden pop culture riffing during serious scenes can be awkward, but it’s handled about as well as it could. The exposition is handled tastefully and kept to a minimum, it instead chooses to focus on unexpected interactions between characters from different branches of the Marvel universe, which is the more exciting part. I’m less into the action and filmmaking, however. Not a lot about the camerawork or score jumps out to me, I feel like what little vision the Russos brought to their previous MCU projects is completely lost here. The washed out colour palette (which for some reason is slightly more vibrant during scenes in space) and obvious music embellishments don’t evoke all that much. The staging and editing of the action is a little too quick for my liking, the moments that are meant to be memorable don’t leave much of an impression because the editing doesn’t take its time to punctuate the stunts properly. Some of the CGI also feels a little weightless, for example Stark’s suit looks and feels like its made from paper. The resulting scenes, such as the final battle on Titan, feel more like small scale, digital mush than the big epic scenes they’re aiming for. Once the film decides to slow down for the dramatic conclusion, I find its intent to be manipulative and disingenuous. I felt that way after watching it the first time in the cinema, and after every ‘death’ in this movie having been retconned in one way or another, it turns out I was right. Even in its riskier films, Marvel will find ways to take most of the edges off. Overall, it’s still decent but it’s lost a lot of its flavour for me over the years.
6/10
loading replies
@bsrbara alright, cool, that’s your opinion. I just think the toned down, Joss Whedon version of the character works a hell of a lot better.
This is one of Marvel Studios’ riskier projects, the hyperlink structure combined with the villain being the main character immediately makes it stand out in the genre. It’s because of those two aspects that the film works as well as it does. Thanos is a great character with an interesting motivation. The animation is so detailed and lifelike that it never fails to bring out the emotion, in fact I’d argue that the scenes between him and Gamora have the most emotional punch (courtesy of Zoe Saldana and Josh Brolin, who both put in a really solid performance). The balancing of all the different plot lines is also quite well done as there’s a relevancy to each one, nor does the tone feel too disjointed at any point. Some transitions or the sudden pop culture riffing during serious scenes can be awkward, but it’s handled about as well as it could. The exposition is handled tastefully and kept to a minimum, it instead chooses to focus on unexpected interactions between characters from different branches of the Marvel universe, which is the more exciting part. I’m less into the action and filmmaking, however. Not a lot about the camerawork or score jumps out to me, I feel like what little vision the Russos brought to their previous MCU projects is completely lost here. The washed out colour palette (which for some reason is slightly more vibrant during scenes in space) and obvious music embellishments don’t evoke all that much. The staging and editing of the action is a little too quick for my liking, the moments that are meant to be memorable don’t leave much of an impression because the editing doesn’t take its time to punctuate the stunts properly. Some of the CGI also feels a little weightless, for example Stark’s suit looks and feels like its made from paper. The resulting scenes, such as the final battle on Titan, feel more like small scale, digital mush than the big epic scenes they’re aiming for. Once the film decides to slow down for the dramatic conclusion, I find its intent to be manipulative and disingenuous. I felt that way after watching it the first time in the cinema, and after every ‘death’ in this movie having been retconned in one way or another, it turns out I was right. Even in its riskier films, Marvel will find ways to take most of the edges off. Overall, it’s still decent but it’s lost a lot of its flavour for me over the years.
6/10
loading replies
@jarvis-3326813 That’s actually a result of several reasons. I felt that the conflict in Civil War wasn’t properly set up, nor explored. Therefore, I didn’t feel all that much during the airport or final battle. The second reason, which isn’t nearly as substantial as the first, is the fact that everything looks so washed out and bland, which doesn’t exactly add a flavour to the film. It’s a style that worked for TWS, but I feel like CW should’ve been more grand and operatic in its style.
It’s not the worst example though. There was a certain movie released around the same period (that had the same plot as CW) that one could describe as the definition of soulless.
Black Panther is MCU attempt at saying something important but it ended up as a very superficial product tapping into the zeitgeist of black empowerment only at skin deep. MCU movies seem to touch the feelings of a many kind of people regardless of age and culture, and that's why their products trying to tackle difficult subject like colonialism and racism, such as Black Panther, fail as a movie. They're close to saying something yet they have to appeal to audience as broad as possible that they ended up not saying anything at all.
In this film they wanted to take a jab at colonialism, racism and all but they also have to play it safe so it ends up with the black guy winning because of good heart but didn't say anything at all about how Western development aid has turned Africa for the worse. "Colonialism" only ends up as a catchy buzzword for the characters to shout at the white dudes. The antagonist seemed to want to do "the right thing" but ended up as a power hungry lord because of "bad heart". The problem of colonialism/structural racism is simplified into "we have to make peace with the rest of the world" like in the ending scene when T'Challa "open borders". Really, structural violence can be ended with a good heart? Very safe liberal take about colonialism. They only wear this black empowerment stuff in surface level only, perhaps due to their limited liberal understanding of violence or perhaps in fear of hurting the ego of some fragile white manchildren which they have to cater to. Compared to The Mission or especially The Expanse, Black Panther fails to say anything about colonialism.
Similarly, their portrayal of "good Africa" ends up with Wakanda having high tech, sleek white aesthetic just like in typical Western vision of tech, some cool kids tinkering with stuff so it appeals to startup geeks, and some pseudo-African tribal-esque motif that's familiar enough to be recognized by Africans but foreign enough to the rest of the world so that it doesn't convey the more indigenous parts of Africans, such as their kinship system (e.g. different familial structure, motifs). In the world of Wakanda, people just happen to be there, strolling, tribal but modern people doing their tribal but modern thing (like ritualistic battle to decide a leader). They're playing the classic orientalist trope people usually put on Japan: being "traditional" and "modern" at the same time, at the receiving ends of Western culture but still molding them into their own. There's nothing indigenous Africa in Wakanda - it's just how Western people imagine if they created Africa in their own image. The world-building is horrible. Compared to Altered Carbon, the world of Wakanda is the world of purely distilled sterile version of United States that just happen to be set somewhere not-in-the-USA with black folks doing some cool American but also tribal-ish stuff.
In short, MCU won't be able to be complex because of the exact reason many people like it. It has to appeal to audience as many as possible. It has to be "universal", not culturally specific, not having a certain strong message. They have to figure out the safest way of telling a story and keeping the childlike feeling alive.
Their only saving grace is some cool cinematic shots of Michael B. Jordan and Chadwick Boseman. Good performance also. But that's it.
loading replies
@xaliber No, the primary theme of this film is protectionism. The main question of the conflict is about whether we should share our resources with other countries if we have the means to do so. It does make a specific statement about that, one that you might think is safe, but I can guarantee that a lot of people don’t agree with (even if a lot of them probably don’t realize that). The racism and colonial angle is just there to flesh out the character of Killmonger, it’s not what the film is trying to make a statement about.
Would be a ten but im taking away a point for Imagine Dragons.
loading replies
@jokismalokis Yeah it’s very strange that for a show this bold and different they decided to put such normie music over the intro
I’ve seen two episodes now and I’ve got to ask: what’s the point of watching this?
There’s nothing inherently satisfying about the show itself.
Just putting a twist on existing lore and calling it a day isn’t enough to hold my attention for 30 mimutes, nor any sane person, I imagine.
Are people only watching this because it sets up future stuff?
Why would anyone watch something that’s just set-up?
Projects are always supposed to function as an isolated piece of art, and not just as a piece of a larger machine.
This show is so empty, it’s the kind of format that lends itself for short 4 minute videos on Youtube.
But a feature series? Come on.Edit: alright so there is an attempt to tie the loose ends together in the final episode, but still, it kinda fails to justify its existence.
loading replies
@adonael Thanks, I’ll take that as a compliment.
Dear Loki writers. When creating an infinite multiverse that shows us infinite possibilities thus making everything pointless, then it's time to talk to Rick and Morty writers.
At least they make fun of themselves and the irony of presenting an interesting storyline in a multiverse where nothing really has any point.
If Rick Sanchez showed up with a nine-gauge plasma pistol and started killing everyone I would literally rate it a 10.
loading replies
@perisdr The main writer on this actually worked on Rick and Morty ;)
Makes me want to cancel my Disney subscription. Quality over quantity! Do remember when Disney had the best movie storylines... what happened? Can make an interesting TV show story? Seems not... Please don't ruin a successful franchise.
loading replies
@daniel-e-jones-me-com I’d definitely cancel my Disney subscription over this if I were you
Competently made, but it gives you nothing interesting to set your teeth in. The storyline has zero complexity, and all of the characters are highly uninteresting, because none of them are properly developed. Cutting to a cute muppet every now and then doesn’t really distract from that. Just do something interesting for the next season, because this isn’t the way.
loading replies
@lordmayo It doesn’t need to have a lot of depth. I’m not expecting this to be Watchmen, or Mr Robot, or anything like that. But, you have to give me at least something to chew on. Even the old and the new trilogies gave us some interesting characters.
So many Star Wars races in a short episode did not make a worth while watch and for me overall just made it a poor drawn out experience of what in my opinion is Disney milking the franchise a little more.
loading replies
@nabster Well prepare yourself, there are 5 more Star Wars series coming your way this year, none of which are worth giving a shit about. Disney will just keep pumping them out for as long as the world doesn’t run out of teenagers and adults with underdeveloped taste, which won’t be the case for a very, very long time.
Review by Jordy
VIP8These new Disney+ series are developing into the the modern, overbudgeted equivalent of direct-to-video films from the ‘90s.
In an age where popular and accessible television is continuously pushed to new and exciting heights (Daredevil, Money Heist, Ted Lasso, Stranger Things, Arcane to name a few), these recent shows banking on the Star Wars and Marvel brands feel amateurish, schlocky, and often read like bad fan fiction.
Look, Boba Fett in the original trilogy is nothing more than a visual.
He’s not really a character, I think he has about 4 or 5 lines, but he became popular because of his look.
You can’t just throw me in a story where he’s the main character and expect me to care without putting in the work.
It’s a show that operates in Disney’s new business model of throwing references, ‘member berries and empty spectacle on the screen, while the important and engaging stuff (character, story, drama, emotion, filmmaking) are reduced to an afterthought.
Granted, that’s pretty much the same problem that I have with a lot of IP related content from the past couple of years, but this show in particular feels so calculated, focus tested and cynical, it’s gross.
Even the production kinda sucks this time around (compared to The Mandalorian), it looks really ugly and washed out, more like Marvel than Star Wars.
Where is the voice of Jon Favreau?
Where is the voice of the director of Iron Man, one of the most character driven and vibrant blockbusters of the past 20 years?
This show is not even close to being up to par in just about every sense.loading replies
@vaderfilms Look, I don’t want to come across like a dick, but you need to improve your understanding of film and the English language if you want this to be a meaningful conversation.
I’ve seen two episodes now and I’ve got to ask: what’s the point of watching this?
There’s nothing inherently satisfying about the show itself.
Just putting a twist on existing lore and calling it a day isn’t enough to hold my attention for 30 mimutes, nor any sane person, I imagine.
Are people only watching this because it sets up future stuff?
Why would anyone watch something that’s just set-up?
Projects are always supposed to function as an isolated piece of art, and not just as a piece of a larger machine.
This show is so empty, it’s the kind of format that lends itself for short 4 minute videos on Youtube.
But a feature series? Come on.Edit: alright so there is an attempt to tie the loose ends together in the final episode, but still, it kinda fails to justify its existence.
loading replies
@wolfkin I expect to be entertained? You can make an anthology series without making it feel like boring filler, just look at Black Mirror. The great episodes in that show actually leave a lasting impression. Also, I pretty much agree with everything you said in the second half, but that’s exactly what works against the series in my opinion. Yes, it’s throwaway filler, which is why a 30 minute format is way too long (and the HISHE format works much better). I just expect a lot more out of a show like this. Something like stakes, drama, or maybe delve a little deeper into how the characters would be different given their new situation. Just do something interesting, besides giving me the occasional chuckle. Riffing on the existing lore is fun for a few minutes, but it gets stale and boring if it has nothing else to offer.
Review by Jordy
VIP8These new Disney+ series are developing into the the modern, overbudgeted equivalent of direct-to-video films from the ‘90s.
In an age where popular and accessible television is continuously pushed to new and exciting heights (Daredevil, Money Heist, Ted Lasso, Stranger Things, Arcane to name a few), these recent shows banking on the Star Wars and Marvel brands feel amateurish, schlocky, and often read like bad fan fiction.
Look, Boba Fett in the original trilogy is nothing more than a visual.
He’s not really a character, I think he has about 4 or 5 lines, but he became popular because of his look.
You can’t just throw me in a story where he’s the main character and expect me to care without putting in the work.
It’s a show that operates in Disney’s new business model of throwing references, ‘member berries and empty spectacle on the screen, while the important and engaging stuff (character, story, drama, emotion, filmmaking) are reduced to an afterthought.
Granted, that’s pretty much the same problem that I have with a lot of IP related content from the past couple of years, but this show in particular feels so calculated, focus tested and cynical, it’s gross.
Even the production kinda sucks this time around (compared to The Mandalorian), it looks really ugly and washed out, more like Marvel than Star Wars.
Where is the voice of Jon Favreau?
Where is the voice of the director of Iron Man, one of the most character driven and vibrant blockbusters of the past 20 years?
This show is not even close to being up to par in just about every sense.loading replies
@vaderfilms I didn’t, I said that this show looks bland and washed out compared to The Mandalorian and the other recent Disney Star Wars movies. Therefore, it reminds me more of the flat Marvel style than recent Star Wars.
I’ve seen two episodes now and I’ve got to ask: what’s the point of watching this?
There’s nothing inherently satisfying about the show itself.
Just putting a twist on existing lore and calling it a day isn’t enough to hold my attention for 30 mimutes, nor any sane person, I imagine.
Are people only watching this because it sets up future stuff?
Why would anyone watch something that’s just set-up?
Projects are always supposed to function as an isolated piece of art, and not just as a piece of a larger machine.
This show is so empty, it’s the kind of format that lends itself for short 4 minute videos on Youtube.
But a feature series? Come on.Edit: alright so there is an attempt to tie the loose ends together in the final episode, but still, it kinda fails to justify its existence.
loading replies
@ekiza You can set up future projects in a film or series, that's fine, but you need to get something out of the project itself as well. That isn't a 'personal expectation', that's how art works. Imagine being in a museum and watching a painting that only says: the next painting will blow your mind. Do you stop by and watch that painting, or do you walk to the next one? Even projects that are heavy on set up (first Harry Potter film, the new Dune, even a lot of Marvel movies like Black Panther) all have a progression that makes them work as pieces of art by themselves.
I have no problem with how the other Disney + Marvel shows are conceived, that's how you're supposed to do it. The point is that when the characters from this show are introduced in a movie, the context of this show doesn't matter, because it doesn't do much besides riffing on the lore. Same character from a different universe where a few minor uninteresting alterations happened? Got it, everyone is capable of understanding that concept, we don't need 9 30-minute episodes for that. So yes, it is in fact a Russian doll project. It's probably cool for Marvel fans who are really into it, but it's bad art.
Ms. Marvel episode 1 impressions: First of all, why is Disney shooting these Marvel shows with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio? Shows meant to be shown exclusively on 16:9 displays. It's rather annoying. Especially after they made their huge marketing push of having 16:9 open matted versions of the Marvel movies on Disney+ with the "IMAX Enhanced" label. Seems really backwards to have the Marvel movies in 16:9 and the shows at a wider aspect ratio.
Second biggest problem: WTF did they do to her powers? This isn't faithful to the comics at all. Why is her ability this weird energy crystal power instead of polymorphing? And instead of getting her powers from having Inhuman genes, they made her get her powers from magic bracelets? It's like if they made Spider-Man shoot lasers instead of webs. She might as well be a totally different character.
In fact, making the source of her powers come from magic instead of from a genetic modification is a hilarious blunder as magic is considered haram in Islam. They might as well have made her a super fundamentalist Christian superhero who gets her powers from witchcraft.
I could excuse the strange casting choices that made Kamala and Bruno look too young compared to their comic counterparts if it weren't for the fact they ruined her powers. The constant shapeshifting body horror of the comics was central to Kamala's character.
For me this is another hatewatch just like the Halo series. Like Halo, while it has some things that appeal to fans of the original lore, it has many other aspects that drag it down and make it difficult to fully enjoy the show.
MODERATOR EDIT: Be more respectful.
loading replies
@victoriaz Maybe try to appreciate films and series as their own artform, don’t compare things to the source material. It doesn’t need to be like the comic, because the comic isn’t some untouchable holy grail of perfection. Give artists the room to create and invent, try to be open minded.
Oh and shows don’t need to be 16:9, cinematic aspect ratios have been used in shows for nearly a decade now lol.
Even with the soapy melodrama, occasional bad acting and a considerably lower budget (probably 2% of the budget of this show per episode): Arrow managed to create better characters and more visceral, memorable and coherent action scenes in its first 2 seasons compared to this show. I’ll even go as far to say that it looks better, despite using incredibly basic set ups and filmmaking techniques. Getting Hailee Steinfeld was a great choice, but her character isn’t leaving a very strong or likable impression. In comparison, Joss Whedon managed to make you care about Clint’s character within 15 minutes of screentime. Well, enough to make you care as a side character.
Moreover, this feels like a studio giving their impression of a Marvel Netflix show, like Daredevil or Jessica Jones, but it doesn’t understand what makes those shows good. It’s so tame and uninspired. It seems to aim for 80’s cheese at points, but even those old action movies had some bite to them (despite how silly they could get). The comedy is mostly flat out lame and cringy, with the role playing scene probably being the lowest low of the entire MCU so far. The recent Marvel projects have had such a weird shift in terms of comedy. They used to be great at making mass product films that were at least a little bit clever and subversive. It’s no surprise that a lot of people who worked on Community also work behind the scenes at Marvel. It’s like they fired those writers after phase 3 ended, and hired the Friends team instead. Their quality control is spreading very thin.
loading replies
@exium It doesn’t really matter, there are a lot of movies that manage to create good characters in a layered story within 2 hours, and there are shows that can’t do any of that stuff in 24 episodes. Take a movie like Black Panther, that film has more compelling characters and a more detailed story than this show, despite only running for 2 hours.
Review by Jordy
VIP8The next chapter in Marvel’s struggle of bringing the MCU formula to television.
It sounds simple enough in concept, as they’ve built their brand around making simple, unpretentious, linear, streamlined stories with good characters and big spectacle.
I think they consistently check the character box, television shows included, and this thing is no different. It helps a lot that they got Oscar Isaac and Ethan Hawke, both of whom are phenomenal actors. They’re capable of adding so much life and colour to these characters, some of which probably isn’t even written on the page (could’ve done without the accent, though).
However, for as consistent as they are with nailing their characters, they’re becoming about as consistent with messing up in the story and spectacle department for these shows.
Marvel’s probably aware that they need to add some bells and whistles to their usual storytelling for a 6 hour miniseries, but so far the results have been mostly convoluted and messy (Falcon and the Winter Soldier, Hawkeye, Loki). Moon Knight is no different, because despite some serious attempts at experimentation, most of it doesn’t pan out due to the schlocky execution.
As for the spectacle, yeah it’s pretty bad. Scale has nothing to do with how impressive an action sequence is, as even evidenced by even the best moments in the MCU (for my money, the absolute highlight is still the highway shootout in The Winter Soldier ). So, you really don’t need to do a crazy car chase with CGI trucks, trees, George Michael and a plethora of green screen if your show can’t afford it. You don’t need to attempt fancy mirror visuals I’ve seen in countless horror films if they’re too expensive. Scale it down, focus on the choreography and make sure everything looks good. Again, taking a page out of the Marvel Netflix book would work a lot better for this character. Furthermore, the Moon Knight suit has the exact same problem as the MCU Spider-man suits. It looks like animation, not a man in a suit.
Add the usual uninspired filmmaking, flat lighting (as well as underlit scenes, I might add), boring shot/reverse shot framing and general lack of colour/style, and I’m seeing nothing but another boring, by the numbers show. Its only appeal are the two main actors, both of whom are way too good for this and deserve a lot better.loading replies
@kd6-3-7 I like a lot of what they’ve made in the past, but it’s abundantly clear to me that they’re running out of ideas at this point, and rushing from a production standpoint.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
- First and foremost, props to its ambition.
- There are major goosebumps, as well as emotional, moments.
- The acting is top notch. And especially the people who need to be top notch, are really top notch.
- The action has fantastic ideas at play.
- The amount of cameos in this film is unbelievable. Spoiler: Loved the fact that Jarvis from Agent Carter got a cameo!
- It celebrates the MCU in a good, and sometimes also very clever, way.
- The right characters are highlighted.
- A good score, and finally some more musical continuity.
- The villain is still great.
- It wraps up in a very satisfying way. Characters whose story ends here, get a great wrap up.
Cons:
- The first hour is a little hard to get through. It's very dialogue heavy, which in itself isn't a problem, but the Russos aren't good at directing long sections with just dialogue, while keeping you interested. And when that's a problem, you also start to notice the slow pacing, as well as flavourless direction of those scenes.
- The time jump feels like a lazy way to force inorganic changes into the story (e.g. The Hulk & Banner issue, a big plot point in the previous film, has been solved off screen; or the Civil War conflict that has been sort of resolved now, neither one of those feel earned. )
- The choreography and editing of the action aren't good. Moreover, the action that involves a lot of CGI feels weightless.
- Not a fan of the direction they took with Thor. They made him a tragic, but badass hero in the last film. I get that he's sad in this film, but did they really need to turn him into a joke again, like Thor: Ragnarok so annoyingly did?
- The time travel mechanics in this film don’t make enough sense. As a result, the continuity of the MCU is fucked now, because of the huge plotholes in this film. If half of the population is now 5 years older, do we just have to assume that the entirety of Peter's school got snapped? Do we have to assume that all the important Wakandans that play a future role in Black Panther sequels got snapped? What about any of the tv shows that are loosely (although not as loose as once before) connected? Also, how come we can't bring back anyone who died? If a past Gamora, Nebula and Thanos can come to the future, then why can't we bring back Natascha, Gamora, Pietro, Vision, etcetera? Also, going forward, anything that goes wrong can now be fixed with time travel (as long as they don't place restrictions on the Pym particles). It's issues like these that make a lot of time travel movies fall apart, and Endgame is no different.
6/10
loading replies
@gprivi So why not have Pym make some more in the present? Or have Cap steal some more in the past?
Review by Jordy
VIP8Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
- First and foremost, props to its ambition.
- There are major goosebumps, as well as emotional, moments.
- The acting is top notch. And especially the people who need to be top notch, are really top notch.
- The action has fantastic ideas at play.
- The amount of cameos in this film is unbelievable. Spoiler: Loved the fact that Jarvis from Agent Carter got a cameo!
- It celebrates the MCU in a good, and sometimes also very clever, way.
- The right characters are highlighted.
- A good score, and finally some more musical continuity.
- The villain is still great.
- It wraps up in a very satisfying way. Characters whose story ends here, get a great wrap up.
Cons:
- The first hour is a little hard to get through. It's very dialogue heavy, which in itself isn't a problem, but the Russos aren't good at directing long sections with just dialogue, while keeping you interested. And when that's a problem, you also start to notice the slow pacing, as well as flavourless direction of those scenes.
- The time jump feels like a lazy way to force inorganic changes into the story (e.g. The Hulk & Banner issue, a big plot point in the previous film, has been solved off screen; or the Civil War conflict that has been sort of resolved now, neither one of those feel earned. )
- The choreography and editing of the action aren't good. Moreover, the action that involves a lot of CGI feels weightless.
- Not a fan of the direction they took with Thor. They made him a tragic, but badass hero in the last film. I get that he's sad in this film, but did they really need to turn him into a joke again, like Thor: Ragnarok so annoyingly did?
- The time travel mechanics in this film don’t make enough sense. As a result, the continuity of the MCU is fucked now, because of the huge plotholes in this film. If half of the population is now 5 years older, do we just have to assume that the entirety of Peter's school got snapped? Do we have to assume that all the important Wakandans that play a future role in Black Panther sequels got snapped? What about any of the tv shows that are loosely (although not as loose as once before) connected? Also, how come we can't bring back anyone who died? If a past Gamora, Nebula and Thanos can come to the future, then why can't we bring back Natascha, Gamora, Pietro, Vision, etcetera? Also, going forward, anything that goes wrong can now be fixed with time travel (as long as they don't place restrictions on the Pym particles). It's issues like these that make a lot of time travel movies fall apart, and Endgame is no different.
6/10
loading replies
@rexton nitpicky? Seven years ago we all took issue with the supposed ‘plot hole’ of a broke billionaire returning to Gotham from a pit in the Middle East. Now granted, The Dark Knight Rises has a more serious tone, meaning that a Marvel film gets away with more nonsensical or unexplained stuff by nature. But the fact of the matter is: this plot and its mechanics fall apart as soon as you start to put any thought into it. That’s never a good thing, and certainly not a nitpick.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
- First and foremost, props to its ambition.
- There are major goosebumps, as well as emotional, moments.
- The acting is top notch. And especially the people who need to be top notch, are really top notch.
- The action has fantastic ideas at play.
- The amount of cameos in this film is unbelievable. Spoiler: Loved the fact that Jarvis from Agent Carter got a cameo!
- It celebrates the MCU in a good, and sometimes also very clever, way.
- The right characters are highlighted.
- A good score, and finally some more musical continuity.
- The villain is still great.
- It wraps up in a very satisfying way. Characters whose story ends here, get a great wrap up.
Cons:
- The first hour is a little hard to get through. It's very dialogue heavy, which in itself isn't a problem, but the Russos aren't good at directing long sections with just dialogue, while keeping you interested. And when that's a problem, you also start to notice the slow pacing, as well as flavourless direction of those scenes.
- The time jump feels like a lazy way to force inorganic changes into the story (e.g. The Hulk & Banner issue, a big plot point in the previous film, has been solved off screen; or the Civil War conflict that has been sort of resolved now, neither one of those feel earned. )
- The choreography and editing of the action aren't good. Moreover, the action that involves a lot of CGI feels weightless.
- Not a fan of the direction they took with Thor. They made him a tragic, but badass hero in the last film. I get that he's sad in this film, but did they really need to turn him into a joke again, like Thor: Ragnarok so annoyingly did?
- The time travel mechanics in this film don’t make enough sense. As a result, the continuity of the MCU is fucked now, because of the huge plotholes in this film. If half of the population is now 5 years older, do we just have to assume that the entirety of Peter's school got snapped? Do we have to assume that all the important Wakandans that play a future role in Black Panther sequels got snapped? What about any of the tv shows that are loosely (although not as loose as once before) connected? Also, how come we can't bring back anyone who died? If a past Gamora, Nebula and Thanos can come to the future, then why can't we bring back Natascha, Gamora, Pietro, Vision, etcetera? Also, going forward, anything that goes wrong can now be fixed with time travel (as long as they don't place restrictions on the Pym particles). It's issues like these that make a lot of time travel movies fall apart, and Endgame is no different.
6/10
loading replies
@finnquill Ah, but if future you would show up right now, saying that you can either come with him and live, or die in 1/2 years, what would you do?
I’m sure they don’t want to recreate it, but that’s only because the writing dictates so, not because it’s logical. Also, there is a time machine at the end, it’s the one they use to bring the stones back.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
- First and foremost, props to its ambition.
- There are major goosebumps, as well as emotional, moments.
- The acting is top notch. And especially the people who need to be top notch, are really top notch.
- The action has fantastic ideas at play.
- The amount of cameos in this film is unbelievable. Spoiler: Loved the fact that Jarvis from Agent Carter got a cameo!
- It celebrates the MCU in a good, and sometimes also very clever, way.
- The right characters are highlighted.
- A good score, and finally some more musical continuity.
- The villain is still great.
- It wraps up in a very satisfying way. Characters whose story ends here, get a great wrap up.
Cons:
- The first hour is a little hard to get through. It's very dialogue heavy, which in itself isn't a problem, but the Russos aren't good at directing long sections with just dialogue, while keeping you interested. And when that's a problem, you also start to notice the slow pacing, as well as flavourless direction of those scenes.
- The time jump feels like a lazy way to force inorganic changes into the story (e.g. The Hulk & Banner issue, a big plot point in the previous film, has been solved off screen; or the Civil War conflict that has been sort of resolved now, neither one of those feel earned. )
- The choreography and editing of the action aren't good. Moreover, the action that involves a lot of CGI feels weightless.
- Not a fan of the direction they took with Thor. They made him a tragic, but badass hero in the last film. I get that he's sad in this film, but did they really need to turn him into a joke again, like Thor: Ragnarok so annoyingly did?
- The time travel mechanics in this film don’t make enough sense. As a result, the continuity of the MCU is fucked now, because of the huge plotholes in this film. If half of the population is now 5 years older, do we just have to assume that the entirety of Peter's school got snapped? Do we have to assume that all the important Wakandans that play a future role in Black Panther sequels got snapped? What about any of the tv shows that are loosely (although not as loose as once before) connected? Also, how come we can't bring back anyone who died? If a past Gamora, Nebula and Thanos can come to the future, then why can't we bring back Natascha, Gamora, Pietro, Vision, etcetera? Also, going forward, anything that goes wrong can now be fixed with time travel (as long as they don't place restrictions on the Pym particles). It's issues like these that make a lot of time travel movies fall apart, and Endgame is no different.
6/10
loading replies
@rexton In my review, I very carefully wrote that the plot doesn't make enough sense. Do I need it to make perfect sense? No, I'm not that guy, and case in point: I certainly wasn't expecting this to be The Godfather.
The whole point of science fiction/fantasy is that you as a writer can create your own set of rules. However, those rules have to make sense in the universe that you created, and more importantly, you shouldn't continuously break from them. Look at a similar film with a similar plot, that is in my opinion superior to this one: X-Men: Days of Future Past. Does its plot perfectly add up? Absolutely not.
Does its plot make enough sense in order for you as a viewer to not get distracted by it? Yes, it does.
And that's the whole point. Not even all of the lightheartedness in Endgame, or them taking the piss out of time travel shenanigans, doesn't give the film a pass for its own lack of sense. Frankly, I don't even think the writers cared that it didn't add up, they wanted to use it as a vehicle for interesting character interactions (Tony & his dad; Thor & his mom etc.), and like you said, it helped us with giving a satisfying ending. And that's all right, but it comes with a cost.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
- First and foremost, props to its ambition.
- There are major goosebumps, as well as emotional, moments.
- The acting is top notch. And especially the people who need to be top notch, are really top notch.
- The action has fantastic ideas at play.
- The amount of cameos in this film is unbelievable. Spoiler: Loved the fact that Jarvis from Agent Carter got a cameo!
- It celebrates the MCU in a good, and sometimes also very clever, way.
- The right characters are highlighted.
- A good score, and finally some more musical continuity.
- The villain is still great.
- It wraps up in a very satisfying way. Characters whose story ends here, get a great wrap up.
Cons:
- The first hour is a little hard to get through. It's very dialogue heavy, which in itself isn't a problem, but the Russos aren't good at directing long sections with just dialogue, while keeping you interested. And when that's a problem, you also start to notice the slow pacing, as well as flavourless direction of those scenes.
- The time jump feels like a lazy way to force inorganic changes into the story (e.g. The Hulk & Banner issue, a big plot point in the previous film, has been solved off screen; or the Civil War conflict that has been sort of resolved now, neither one of those feel earned. )
- The choreography and editing of the action aren't good. Moreover, the action that involves a lot of CGI feels weightless.
- Not a fan of the direction they took with Thor. They made him a tragic, but badass hero in the last film. I get that he's sad in this film, but did they really need to turn him into a joke again, like Thor: Ragnarok so annoyingly did?
- The time travel mechanics in this film don’t make enough sense. As a result, the continuity of the MCU is fucked now, because of the huge plotholes in this film. If half of the population is now 5 years older, do we just have to assume that the entirety of Peter's school got snapped? Do we have to assume that all the important Wakandans that play a future role in Black Panther sequels got snapped? What about any of the tv shows that are loosely (although not as loose as once before) connected? Also, how come we can't bring back anyone who died? If a past Gamora, Nebula and Thanos can come to the future, then why can't we bring back Natascha, Gamora, Pietro, Vision, etcetera? Also, going forward, anything that goes wrong can now be fixed with time travel (as long as they don't place restrictions on the Pym particles). It's issues like these that make a lot of time travel movies fall apart, and Endgame is no different.
6/10
loading replies
@gprivi Wouldn't you to save someone who died, if you had the possibility? I could list several characters that would do that in a heartbeat. Wanda would go back instantly if she could save Vision with it. Same with Hawkeye/Nat and Starlord/Gamora.
Also, is it really that dangerous? At the end you have a stable timeline in 2014 with no Thanos, so you can take anything from there without time 'messing back' too much.
Look, I really don't feel like getting into the details of this. In the end, I think you can conclude that the writers constructed time travel in such a convoluted way that it is really easy to find the inconsistencies and holes in it. I think it would've been smarter if they'd kept it more simple, which is usually what the MCU does best anyway.
"I'm a slasher and I must be stopped."
With this film, being British is required, pretty much. Otherwise, it's barely going to be remotely funny, let alone hilarious. Based on how the majority of people seemed to have loved this film/think it was unfathomably funny, the powers that be, the powers of deduction, can be brought forth, concluding that most of the majority are British people. Then again, some people aren't: who still loved this film and think it's hilarious. As much as the difference of opinion is the apparent perpetrator here, I still don't get it.
I also don't get how I thought this film was super funny in the past when I watched it for the first time, whenever that was: I don't have it logged anywhere, so I'm clueless. Or so I seem to think I did. Maybe my present idea of how much I liked it is a bit more than it was back then, but I'm pretty sure the overall result was the same, in that I liked it and thought it was funny. That's mind-boggling to the 'me now.'
Unless I'm off the mark, most people found the comedy to be to the point where almost every instance got them laughing their asses off, and I'm left here baffled. Understanding that different opinions and tastes exist can only go so far, surely. Not to sound too crass, but I'm almost disgusted that I was somewhat looking forward to watching this because I seemed to recall having liked it before.
Aside from my more than personal feelings, the biggest thing that stood out to me regarding this film was the camerawork/editing. It was undoubtedly extremely efficient and well-done. That's Edgar Wright's film's for you. Of course, the actual editor(s) deserve some significant credit, too. In this film's case: Chris Dickens. Props to him.
But all of that grew repetitive quickly with the action sequences. It wasn't poorly done or anything like that. I think it was the complete opposite. You were able to tell what was happening and all that. Just like in The Bourne Identity. It's just that it can get annoying to watch.
The most entertaining aspect for me was by far Simon Skinner. Timothy Dalton's performance was stellar, and I took too long to remember where I know him from, and that's Doom Patrol. All of his lines were great and delivered great. At least this film had that going for it.
And as far as doing its job is concerned, this film only made me laugh once. I laughed when Danny groaned due to brain freeze. In the whole film, that's the only time I laughed. But everyone else seemed to have laughed at everything, pretty much. Weird. And I couldn't care less.
Overall, this film had some entertainment to it. But I don't think that was enough for me. And, of course, based on everything I've written thus far, most of the comedy was more miss than hit. So, yeah. I know most people will greatly disagree with that. But the majority-held opinion of a film doesn't mean I'll have that same opinion.
Other thoughts, or rather, 'thought':
- David Threlfall's performance, down to the way he delivered some of his lines; how he sounded, at times, was a lot like Roger Rees in Robin Hood: Men in Tights.
loading replies
@legendaryfang56 Well, whether you think it’s funny is up to you, but that’s definitely the intent and the reason why many people (including me) are laughing all the way throughout. But again, it’s a very different type of comedy compared to what you get in most American studio comedies, where there’s generally not a lot of attention paid to the visual stuff. Here’s a video that’s a lot more in depth, with also a few more examples about this film: https://youtu.be/3FOzD4Sfgag
"I'm a slasher and I must be stopped."
With this film, being British is required, pretty much. Otherwise, it's barely going to be remotely funny, let alone hilarious. Based on how the majority of people seemed to have loved this film/think it was unfathomably funny, the powers that be, the powers of deduction, can be brought forth, concluding that most of the majority are British people. Then again, some people aren't: who still loved this film and think it's hilarious. As much as the difference of opinion is the apparent perpetrator here, I still don't get it.
I also don't get how I thought this film was super funny in the past when I watched it for the first time, whenever that was: I don't have it logged anywhere, so I'm clueless. Or so I seem to think I did. Maybe my present idea of how much I liked it is a bit more than it was back then, but I'm pretty sure the overall result was the same, in that I liked it and thought it was funny. That's mind-boggling to the 'me now.'
Unless I'm off the mark, most people found the comedy to be to the point where almost every instance got them laughing their asses off, and I'm left here baffled. Understanding that different opinions and tastes exist can only go so far, surely. Not to sound too crass, but I'm almost disgusted that I was somewhat looking forward to watching this because I seemed to recall having liked it before.
Aside from my more than personal feelings, the biggest thing that stood out to me regarding this film was the camerawork/editing. It was undoubtedly extremely efficient and well-done. That's Edgar Wright's film's for you. Of course, the actual editor(s) deserve some significant credit, too. In this film's case: Chris Dickens. Props to him.
But all of that grew repetitive quickly with the action sequences. It wasn't poorly done or anything like that. I think it was the complete opposite. You were able to tell what was happening and all that. Just like in The Bourne Identity. It's just that it can get annoying to watch.
The most entertaining aspect for me was by far Simon Skinner. Timothy Dalton's performance was stellar, and I took too long to remember where I know him from, and that's Doom Patrol. All of his lines were great and delivered great. At least this film had that going for it.
And as far as doing its job is concerned, this film only made me laugh once. I laughed when Danny groaned due to brain freeze. In the whole film, that's the only time I laughed. But everyone else seemed to have laughed at everything, pretty much. Weird. And I couldn't care less.
Overall, this film had some entertainment to it. But I don't think that was enough for me. And, of course, based on everything I've written thus far, most of the comedy was more miss than hit. So, yeah. I know most people will greatly disagree with that. But the majority-held opinion of a film doesn't mean I'll have that same opinion.
Other thoughts, or rather, 'thought':
- David Threlfall's performance, down to the way he delivered some of his lines; how he sounded, at times, was a lot like Roger Rees in Robin Hood: Men in Tights.
loading replies
@legendaryfang56 Yes, for example the scene where Danny and Nicholas’ movie night is intercut with the killing of the rich guy, and how both those scenes in a very odd way complement each other. Or take that shot from Bad Boys 2 which you see in this film where you have the camera spinning around the characters in a very dramatic way, which is later mimicked in the final act.
"I'm a slasher and I must be stopped."
With this film, being British is required, pretty much. Otherwise, it's barely going to be remotely funny, let alone hilarious. Based on how the majority of people seemed to have loved this film/think it was unfathomably funny, the powers that be, the powers of deduction, can be brought forth, concluding that most of the majority are British people. Then again, some people aren't: who still loved this film and think it's hilarious. As much as the difference of opinion is the apparent perpetrator here, I still don't get it.
I also don't get how I thought this film was super funny in the past when I watched it for the first time, whenever that was: I don't have it logged anywhere, so I'm clueless. Or so I seem to think I did. Maybe my present idea of how much I liked it is a bit more than it was back then, but I'm pretty sure the overall result was the same, in that I liked it and thought it was funny. That's mind-boggling to the 'me now.'
Unless I'm off the mark, most people found the comedy to be to the point where almost every instance got them laughing their asses off, and I'm left here baffled. Understanding that different opinions and tastes exist can only go so far, surely. Not to sound too crass, but I'm almost disgusted that I was somewhat looking forward to watching this because I seemed to recall having liked it before.
Aside from my more than personal feelings, the biggest thing that stood out to me regarding this film was the camerawork/editing. It was undoubtedly extremely efficient and well-done. That's Edgar Wright's film's for you. Of course, the actual editor(s) deserve some significant credit, too. In this film's case: Chris Dickens. Props to him.
But all of that grew repetitive quickly with the action sequences. It wasn't poorly done or anything like that. I think it was the complete opposite. You were able to tell what was happening and all that. Just like in The Bourne Identity. It's just that it can get annoying to watch.
The most entertaining aspect for me was by far Simon Skinner. Timothy Dalton's performance was stellar, and I took too long to remember where I know him from, and that's Doom Patrol. All of his lines were great and delivered great. At least this film had that going for it.
And as far as doing its job is concerned, this film only made me laugh once. I laughed when Danny groaned due to brain freeze. In the whole film, that's the only time I laughed. But everyone else seemed to have laughed at everything, pretty much. Weird. And I couldn't care less.
Overall, this film had some entertainment to it. But I don't think that was enough for me. And, of course, based on everything I've written thus far, most of the comedy was more miss than hit. So, yeah. I know most people will greatly disagree with that. But the majority-held opinion of a film doesn't mean I'll have that same opinion.
Other thoughts, or rather, 'thought':
- David Threlfall's performance, down to the way he delivered some of his lines; how he sounded, at times, was a lot like Roger Rees in Robin Hood: Men in Tights.
loading replies
@legendaryfang56 I can guarantee that you don’t need to be British in order to like the comedy in this. But it’s a very different type of comedy compared to most American action comedies, lots of the gags come from the camerawork and editing, not the dialogue.
Shout by Logia
VIP2I've been holding back my comments until i'd seen at least 3 episodes of this. To begin with, so far, the shows only been good enough for a 7/10 from me. Good, not great or amazing, just good. It's clear that Disney has chosen to bring in a new face to replace another main character that a lot of us know from the Rebels animated series and cater more to the woke audience. While I don't have anything against the character there does seem to be an empty choir screaming out for some form of purpose from them. What that is, i have no idea. Will they get better at acting? that also remains unclear. Obi-Wan's character has mentally and physically regressed so much as to assume that he's completely neglected his principles and training resulting in a husk of his former self. Not worthy of the title of Master any longer, I wonder if this show will ever build into anything compelling enough to warrant giving an 8/10 - Which is where it should be aiming for from all parties to be honest.
loading replies
@logia You were doing so well for the first 3 sentences.
Review by Jordy
VIP8Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
- First and foremost, props to its ambition.
- There are major goosebumps, as well as emotional, moments.
- The acting is top notch. And especially the people who need to be top notch, are really top notch.
- The action has fantastic ideas at play.
- The amount of cameos in this film is unbelievable. Spoiler: Loved the fact that Jarvis from Agent Carter got a cameo!
- It celebrates the MCU in a good, and sometimes also very clever, way.
- The right characters are highlighted.
- A good score, and finally some more musical continuity.
- The villain is still great.
- It wraps up in a very satisfying way. Characters whose story ends here, get a great wrap up.
Cons:
- The first hour is a little hard to get through. It's very dialogue heavy, which in itself isn't a problem, but the Russos aren't good at directing long sections with just dialogue, while keeping you interested. And when that's a problem, you also start to notice the slow pacing, as well as flavourless direction of those scenes.
- The time jump feels like a lazy way to force inorganic changes into the story (e.g. The Hulk & Banner issue, a big plot point in the previous film, has been solved off screen; or the Civil War conflict that has been sort of resolved now, neither one of those feel earned. )
- The choreography and editing of the action aren't good. Moreover, the action that involves a lot of CGI feels weightless.
- Not a fan of the direction they took with Thor. They made him a tragic, but badass hero in the last film. I get that he's sad in this film, but did they really need to turn him into a joke again, like Thor: Ragnarok so annoyingly did?
- The time travel mechanics in this film don’t make enough sense. As a result, the continuity of the MCU is fucked now, because of the huge plotholes in this film. If half of the population is now 5 years older, do we just have to assume that the entirety of Peter's school got snapped? Do we have to assume that all the important Wakandans that play a future role in Black Panther sequels got snapped? What about any of the tv shows that are loosely (although not as loose as once before) connected? Also, how come we can't bring back anyone who died? If a past Gamora, Nebula and Thanos can come to the future, then why can't we bring back Natascha, Gamora, Pietro, Vision, etcetera? Also, going forward, anything that goes wrong can now be fixed with time travel (as long as they don't place restrictions on the Pym particles). It's issues like these that make a lot of time travel movies fall apart, and Endgame is no different.
6/10
loading replies
@emadrid I haven’t seen it. And you’re right, there are mechanics in place that can fix any continuity issues that exist now. But that’s all for the long term. I don’t expect the next Spider-Man movie to give us more of an explanation besides “well, everyone important just got dusted”, which to be fair is possible, but also lazy.
