Discussion in 'Classic Trilogy' started by LordGarthNader, Aug 23, 2013.
Captain America debuted in 1941 and was not an invention of Joss Whedon.
Uh.... I, uh, think that was kinda the point he was making....
That would make a lot more sense.
When it comes to "art", the only opinion that matters is your own.
Guys he didn't like the ending. He never said anything about not liking the movie itself. Who cares honestly?
thing is though the ot was already made so just focus on the future man because you cant bring what was already done back from the past.
weadon is contracted to do avengers 2 and 3 so i dont see him doing star wars anytime soon sinc emarvel has a cinimatic universe they are planning til the year 2021.
when disney or weadon himself confirm hes doing one ok the dicussion can come back but for now lets not even pretend for now.
I'm disagree completely with him. The end of the Empire Strikes Back was the highest point of this spatial opera of Star Wars, unbeatable to date.
Anyway, after directing the Avengers, I don't really think Whedon has any right to critize other people's words. He hit bottom.
Of course, that's only my point of view.
a $1.9 billion box office record says otherwise.
explain to me how avengers was terrible or how wheadon fell off
dont take this the wrong way but i think you only said that because you didnt like what he said.
opinions are like buttholes everyone has one
A bit off-topic but personally I found Avengers to be a movie full of mindless action, show off, one liners and bad jokes.
thats fine and all but any comic book movie can be mindless action
ever see kick @$$? as great as the movie is that movie in itself can be considered mindless action/violence and yet people dont bash it.
the important thing about movies wich i think lost currently is they need to be fun .
Yes, any of them can be only about that. But fortunately not all of them are.
Movies don't need to be fun. Movies can be fun. It all depends of the purpose. What movies need to do is entertain, grab the attention of the viewer.
when it comes to certain comic book movies yes they do. ever since nolans battrilogy comic fans are like since that was success every other comic hero needs to follow that same formula. in alot of cases it just wouldnt work.
the only movie imo for that to work is a daredevil reboot thats it. you cant do it with charachters like the xmen or guardians of the galaxy or the fantastic 4. like dc it cant be done with a wonder woman or a flash or even a aquaman or green lantern movie.
it just cant work because those particular charactrers are basicly written to be what they are and thats how fans for 50 60 years has seen them.
as bad as green lantern was and as a fan of the charachter my issues with it wasnt the cast because no me they were great as was the cgi but the story in itself is what really killed it for me along with lack of charachter build up ( sinestro ).
i rewrote the whole thing after seeing the midnight showing in 2011.
lucas himself stated when he did the ot he wanted something fun in the theatre for all age groups during that time when it was all about ww2 movies and movies he felt didnt really fit the fun idea.
people may agree or disagree why star wars was such a success and thats fine but try to invision yourself in that time when it first came out and try to imagine the feelings in that theatre after seeing it when something like that didnt exist around that time.
Empire has substance, it gives you more to consider and think about than just ' look at Thor and Hulk and all of teh super friends punch the bad guys'.
I love that people are now bashing The Avengers. Such passive aggressiveness makes me .
Joss Whedon currently has no commitments beyond Avengers 2, which is coming out in 2015, and even if he was doing Avengers 3, it will certainly be released sometime before 2021.
Given that he has made a truckload of money for Disney and has a good relationship with them, it is entirely plausible that he could be working on Episodes 8 or 9. And you know what? I'll even go so far as to say that if he wants the job, it's his. Now I have no idea how he personally feels about it. Doing a Star Wars movie may be a lifelong dream, or it may be something he wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. But unless Spielberg himself indicated he was interested, you'd have to look far and wide to find a more likely candidate with a more impressive resume to take the reigns from Abrams.
im expecting avengers 3 in 2018 ( i already have a theory of what it may be wich includes james gunns gurdians of the galaxy and marvel stated thanos is going to be in more films so thanos imparative perhaps?)
avengers came out in 2012 wile avengers 2 is may 1 2015 so whos to say marvel or joss would stop that release date schedule of having it out in 3 years?
I'm not bashing Whedon. I'm a big fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the serie that brought him to fame, and of other jobs like Angel. But I love comics movies as long as they are good written and with a elaborated dialogue, something more than stiff characters and white and black conflicts.
That's the best way to describe it. Undoubtedly he did a huge amount of money with that movie, but the quality of this is quite disappointing.
There's other comic movies, like X-Men First Class, which not only have a good amount action and special effects, but they also have a background very well stablished, a worked dialogue, and deep characters with inner conflicts and palpable bonds.
i know this may shock people but i found first class boring. it just didnt feel like xmen to me at all.
also after days of futures past next year i would like to see something new and have fox take a break from xmen and focus on the other marvel properties they have.
That's why going around saying that a film did better, because of inflation, is a bad idea. No matter what, the end result is going to be totally lopsided either way.
And this is a problem how?
And it did. Just because you didn't like it, didn't mean that it didn't do its job.
You obviously missed the substance in "The Avengers". Such as the conflict between Thor and Loki, continuing on from "Thor". That Loki's anger at his brother has driven him to go even further than just wiping out a small town in New Mexico, but wiping out the entire planet, because the humans had a negative effect on him, in his view. And Thor is still partially angry at him for that, but also sadden that his brother has let hate consume his very being and believes that he could be saved. That Steve Rogers is angry that the SHIELD has taken to creating weapons based off the Tesseract, just like HYDRA had during WWII. That Nick Fury agrees with him and believes that the Avengers is the better alternative than those weapons. That he believed in them so much that he used Colson's temporary demise to spur the team into getting their **** together. You've got Tony Stark still being the jagoff who can sense the cover-up from Fury, but also has a hard time adapting to the team dynamic, due to his being a control freak. You've got Natasha wanting to save Clint, because she owed him for not taking her out years ago and for all the work that they had done together.
There's also the fact that "The X-Men" films are all team films, save for the two solo films for Logan. A lot of the story has to be told in one film, each. Meanwhile, you've got multiple solo films for "The Avengers", which introduced the dynamics. Thus allowing more time to build off of what came and go forward with the story from there.
You're just guessing at a release date for Avengers 3 when there are countless factors that will come into play, some of which cannot be predicted this far out, none the least of which is the fact that, unlike comic book characters, the actors themselves don't stop aging. Furthermore, actors (and directors) often want to move on and do other things. 3 years between A1 and A2 does not imply 3 years between A2 and A3. Robert Downey Jr. is already pushing 50, and 2018 is a full 10 years after his initial appearance as Iron Man. If GotG bombs then they won't do a GotG sequel, so that could easily move A3 up. If GotG does well, that could easily push A3 back. Nothing is written in stone beyond 2015.
Regardless, like I said before, Whedon is not committed for anything beyond 2015. Putting him at the helm of E8 or E9 is 100% in the realm of possibility.
rdj got paid 100 million for two more avengers films. keep in mind hes already in his mid 40s and weadon himself stated during the rdj contract negotiations with marvel on reprising ironman he stated he wouldnt do avengers without rdj.
if marvel is willing to hand out rdj that much money you have to be crazy to think they wouldnt do anything to keep joss as the director for there very first 1 billion dollar box office franchise
Oh I agree with this statement 100%. Which is why I think if Whedon wants to do a Star Wars movie, he'll say "ok, I'll do A3 in 2017 if you let me do E9 in 2019" -or- "OK I'll do A3 in 2019 if you let me do E8 in 2017." (that sort of thing happens all the time in Hollywood)
Like I said, and you agreed, they'll do anything to keep him. Now I have no idea whether or not he actually wants to do a Star Wars movie, but I have no doubt that if he really wanted to, he would be able to get it. And I think it is very easy to believe that he would enjoy that challenge.
I have higher standards for "acclaimed" movies.
I was replying to sons_of_anakin_tatooine comment about movies needing to be fun.
High standards? Okay. Mindless action? There's like four action sequences which is about on par with "Star Wars" films. One liners? Every movie has them. Show off? What's that mean?