SuikodenII
Where's Suikoden VI??????
Wheedon was indeed telling the truth.Yes or no without spoilers please. Was Whedon lying about there being no end credits scene and only a mid credit one, or is there both?
Wheedon was indeed telling the truth.Yes or no without spoilers please. Was Whedon lying about there being no end credits scene and only a mid credit one, or is there both?
that scene cracked me up we've all been thereLow-key that face he makes when he tells the War Machine story for the second time and gets the reaction he wants might be my favorite moment in the movie.
@TheGodling review was the most fan boyish dikk riding shyt ive read in a while here though. Shedding tears in the theatre like YEAH MARVEL! SAVE THAT OLD LADY!! YOU SHOW DC!!! (while ignoring that zod and his crew would destroy the avengers and avengers are fighting jobbers again)
gawdling you gonna let him shyt on your credibility breh
I don't want to spoil so I won't say much more but yeah that movie could take place right after Avengers 1 and have IM3, Thor 2 and CA:TWS after it and no one would blink any eye.
Breh, the movie very clearly takes place after TWS. Like that's where the whole plot starts. And the reason they're not addressing what's going on in Asgard (although you could say they're teasing it) is because Thor's been on earth trying to find Loki's Scepter alongside the Avengers. Which is specifically stated near the start of the movie. The only movie's events they don't mention or really carry over from is IM3, which is something I felt should've at least been addressed (this is what they invented throwaway lines for, Whedon, so you can gently shove aside the parts of the plot that cost too much time to implement properly into the movie but at least remind us you haven't forgot about it, like the throwaway lines you use in both movies to explain why Jane Foster isn't in the movie).
Yeah I'm exaggerating but I'm not talking in terms of events, they show that clearly but I think they dropped all character development that happened in those movies.
Now I'm not going to defend Marvel here because there are a lot of issues with the movie (which I want to emphasize are 'issues', not 'problems'), but it's funny to me how people are already making their mind up by selectively picking through reviews and opinions online when the general word of mouth (both critics and audiences alike) is still positive.
I'm not worried about my 'credibility' being harmed by a guy who has made more anger fueled threads shytting on Marvel Studios than I have posts on the gawdling altogether. :gawdling:
Breh, the movie very clearly takes place after TWS. Like that's where the whole plot starts. And the reason they're not addressing what's going on in Asgard (although you could say they're teasing it) is because Thor's been on earth trying to find Loki's Scepter alongside the Avengers. Which is specifically stated near the start of the movie. The only movie's events they don't mention or really carry over from is IM3, which is something I felt should've at least been addressed (this is what they invented throwaway lines for, Whedon, so you can gently shove aside the parts of the plot that cost too much time to implement properly into the movie but at least remind us you haven't forgot about it, like the throwaway lines you use in both movies to explain why Jane Foster isn't in the movie).
the movie sucked but figuratively brehAlso the. Will have to wait until a better bootleg emerges.gay love scene between iron man and thor was distasteful and forced