TV/Movies Megathread

[celedhring]

Well, Nolan was exec. producer of Man of Steel IIRC, so they clearly wanted to go for the same vibe.

I didn't like Zod at all, he seemed just a random brawler compared to Stamp's panache. But yeah, the film was rather dry and pretentious,  but at least it had engaging action scenes instead of Superman just lifting stuff like it happened in the previous one.

[Syt]

Yeah, it was typical Nolan. One thing I really dislike about his movies - Batman and this Superman at least (and that may just be my perception) - is how people talk about their emotions and motivations but rarely show them.

Agreed, the fight scenes were pretty cool and felt appropriately epic - it's unfortunately rare these days that major action set pieces are done without excessive use of shaky cam and zooms that leave you confused as to what's happening and where everyone is relative to one another.

I didn't care for that prologue, though.

[celedhring]

Yeah, the prologue was ridiculous. It was pretty much a remake of the prologue of Superman 1, which managed to say exactly the same in less than half the time.

I agree there was a potentially really fun action film in there marred by all the MORALITY!!!!111 speeches. I mean, I dig gravitas in popcorn fare, but do it in action.

[Sheilbh]

I didn't watch it, but a quick google confirmed my suspicions. 143 minutes long

[Syt]

I guess that's why I generally prefer the current Marvel movies. They're popcorn action flicks, but they're aware of that, and while they do have a degree of drama, they don't get, as you rightly say, pretentious. As escapism they work much better.

[celedhring]

I don't know what's up with this trend of making big action movies that are two hours and a half long... it's a chore to sit through most of them really.

I loved X-Men First Class, as an example. It managed to be fun and "important" at the same time.

[Ideologue]

I don't know what's up with this trend of making big action movies that are two hours and a half long... it's a chore to sit through most of them really.

I think it can probably be traced back to LotR, and Dark Knight certainly sealed it for superhero movies.

[Liep]

Is the new X-Men with the young cast, or is it more an X-men 4?

[Ideologue]

Is the new X-Men with the young cast, or is it more an X-men 4?

It has members of both casts since it takes place in two time periods: Ian MacKellan and Patrick Stewart are in the future, Michael Fassbender and James McEvoy are in the past.

[The Brain]

I don't know what's up with this trend of making big action movies that are two hours and a half long... it's a chore to sit through most of them really.

I think it can probably be traced back to LotR, and Dark Knight certainly sealed it for superhero movies.

LotR was 16 hours, and mostly shield-surfing and dwarf-tossing. Pain doesn't begin to describe it.

[The Brain]

Is the new X-Men with the young cast, or is it more an X-men 4?

It has members of both casts since it takes place in two time periods: Ian MacKellan and Patrick Stewart are in the future, Michael Fassbender and James McEvoy are in the past.

The irony is thicker than katmai.

[Sheilbh]

I think it can probably be traced back to LotR, and Dark Knight certainly sealed it for superhero movies.

Yep.

It really annoys me that summer blockbusters feel they need to have a point and want to take up to three hours of my life

Marvel are better at it than most because they manage to keep enough humour going.

[Queequeg]

I'm okay with that being my biggest contribution to Languish cant.

Your $2000 pants are a dairy factory.

Breach of TBR privacy.

[Eddie Teach]

LotR was 16 hours, and mostly shield-surfing and dwarf-tossing. Pain doesn't begin to describe it.

You watch "extended editions", you deserve what you get.

[Ideologue]

I'm okay with that being my biggest contribution to Languish cant.

Your $2000 pants are a dairy factory.

Breach of TBR privacy.

SANK TITTY.