Captain Marvel (Official Thread) March 8th 2019: 7th Marvel Film To Cross 1B$

[Black Ball]

The whole 90's setting was underused in the film.Other than crashing into a Blockbuster, nothing necessarily felt 90's

in this flick.I know they played a couple songs, but it had no finesse or subtlety to it.Just tossed in lazily IMO.

I think Marvel made made this shyt as bare minimum/generic as possible.I think they see their origin films as

throwaway flicks.They normally improve on the sequel.The only origin flicks they knocked out of the park was IM1 &

GOTG.

You didn't think Black Panther was dope? Or you don't consider that an origin film?

I also thought the 1st Captain America was pretty damn good. Not elite maybe, but still really good.

 

[hex]

Give a damn who the person is, but he spoke nothing but facts on this how they did Monica Rambeau wrong and it being objectively racist they knocked her down to lift Carol Danvers up. It is like if T'Challa was introduced to the MCU as a black child and not as Black Panther and looked up to Steve Rogers as his great white hope. it's an insult.

Also, whomever is the admin. I did not violate any Coli rules. Critiquing the film and calling out its agenda shouldn't be a coli violation, nor trying to censor anyone for speaking their opinion. Isn't that the point of having a forum. I understand if it actually violated anything such as illegal content, pornography, trying to bully or insult any member or anything of that nature. I do not mind getting negg'd or dapped. But I do take exception when I get a warning for violating a rule when I feel I am within the guidelines or they did not specify what exactly what it is that's violated. Because posting a commentary and agreeing to it shouldn't be a violation, IMO.

You posted a video from a man that:

1. Argued against diversity.
2. Argued against the rise of white supremacy in post-Trump America.
3. Said racism don't bother him.

But nah, since you can cherry pick one topic you agree with him on, it's cool.

This is not TLR. Your post got Reported (twice, mind you) because posting videos like that derail the thread. Argue your points without co-signs from Youtube personalities that are completely idiots.

Fred.

 

[MooseMouthMthafuga]

You didn't think Black Panther was dope? Or you don't consider that an origin film?

I also thought the 1st Captain America was pretty damn good. Not elite maybe, but still really good.

BP is definitely one of the best origin films.I like how they finessed him in with Civil War.

I had no doubts about Coogler, tho.I knew he'd cook something up.I sometimes forget

it's a Marvel film.The first Cap had me

 

[NobodyReally]

So does anyone think that Goose did not blind Nick Fury, and that he is actually not "blind" at all? That Goose gave him something? He wasn't acting like someone who just had his eye ruined for life. He was actually rather too nonchalant about it. I think that he can see differently with that eye. He can probably see through a Skrull in disguise. Just like Goose did when he didn't attack Talos disguised as a Kree soldier. Just a theory.

I LOVE this theory! :::crosses fingers:::

 

[MooseMouthMthafuga]

Give a damn who the person is, but he spoke nothing but facts on this how they did Monica Rambeau wrong and it being objectively racist they knocked her down to lift Carol Danvers up. It is like if T'Challa was introduced to the MCU as a black child and not as Black Panther and looked up to Steve Rogers as his great white hope. it's an insult.

Also, whomever is the admin. I did not violate any Coli rules. Critiquing the film and calling out its agenda shouldn't be a coli violation, nor trying to censor anyone for speaking their opinion. Isn't that the point of having a forum. I understand if it actually violated anything such as illegal content, pornography, trying to bully or insult any member or anything of that nature. I do not mind getting negg'd or dapped. But I do take exception when I get a warning for violating a rule when I feel I am within the guidelines or they did not specify what exactly what it is that's violated. Because posting a commentary and agreeing to it shouldn't be a violation, IMO.

Yeah breh.It's poppycock how they put that "Low quality posting" bullshyt on your post.Just because they don't like that guys vids.


Even a broke clock is right twice a day.

 

[darealvelle]

Im about to go see this at the movie tavern for $5, hope this movie is enjoyable at best. I have not read the reviews you guys posted outside the initial reactions.

 

[hex]

Yeah breh.It's poppycock how they put that "Low quality posting" bullshyt on your post.Just because they don't like that guys vids.


Even a broke clock is right twice a day.

@gluvnast can appeal it with Houston911 but I seriously doubt it'll go the way he wants. Especially given the content of the rest of that guy's videos.

But hey, it's a free country.

Fred.

 

[MartyMcFly]

Completely disagree.

One of the best gifts of cinematic story telling is that you can show and not tell. How do we know Carol is going to be mind fukked through the movie or struggling with her identity because of the crazy memories embedded in her head? Flashbacks. Her making 'serious' faces and talking about being mind fukked is a lot less impactful to the story than us seeing the stuff she's trying to sort out in her head. This movie would have been much weaker if we hadn't seen Dr. Lawson or Maria Rambeau's face in Carol's head before she learned the facts. As a story teller, I like using flashbacks too because they can put you in the shoes of the protagonist. If you really want something that feels like the protoganist's POV, it's one of the best tools out there. Can it be misused or over used, yes. Was it here? No, it was use perfectly, IMO.

Yup. Show, don't tell

 

[Black Ball]

@gluvnast can appeal it with Houston911 but I seriously doubt it'll go the way he wants. Especially given the content of the rest of that guy's videos.

But hey, it's a free country.

Fred.

I'm not gonna co-sign that dudes videos, but nothing was wrong with Gluvnast post and the point being made in that particular vid. I thought maybe he had said something vile/personal to another poster and then edited it.

 

[hex]

I'm not gonna co-sign that dudes videos, but nothing was wrong with Gluvnast post and the point being made in that particular vid. I thought maybe he had said something vile/personal to another poster and then edited it.

That's cool.

But no offense, I'm not going back and forth with cats about it. It'll just derail the thread further. Like I said, two Reports were posted about it. It don't have much to do with the initial video, it's about the rest of dude's content. That's a thread derail waiting to happen.

Coupled with this statement:

Doesn't make it any less true... and if all you got from that is "it's a fictional dad", then your black card needs to be questioned.

Yeah....like I said, the thread can go left real fast.

If I'm in the wrong, Houston911 can fix it. But again....I doubt that'll happen.

Fred.

 

[Luke Cage]

Yup. Show, don't tell

the thing is i feel like flashbacks is essentially just telling you what happened. I want to figure it out myself by getting to know the character.
Not just straight tell us her background via flashback. If you want them to show and not tell then flashbacks should be last thing you want to see.

 

[gluvnast]

You posted a video from a man that:

1. Argued against diversity.
2. Argued against the rise of white supremacy in post-Trump America.
3. Said racism don't bother him.

But nah, since you can cherry pick one topic you agree with him on, it's cool.

This is not TLR. Your post got Reported (twice, mind you) because posting videos like that derail the thread. Argue your points without co-signs from Youtube personalities that are completely idiots.

Fred.

but again... who cares WHO HE IS? It is rather lame you want to discredit FACTS about what they did to Monica Rambeau due to you having issue to who's the messenger. It doesn't ignore the TRUTH of how messed up they did that character.

And posting a video of someone's commentary isn't derailing a thread or is that according too COLI RULES a violation. If you don't like someone's opinion then so be it. But to report it as if it's a threat to derailing the thread. All I did was posted something that was FACT about what the filmmakers did to Monica Rambeau and how they tend to tokenize black characters in the comic book genre. If speaking out on things that BLACK PEOPLE should take note... in relation to talking about characters in this movie... that is disappointing. You DO NOT have to agree. Even neg me if you like... but reporting when it did not violate any rule is BS.

 

[wire28]

Give a damn who the person is, but he spoke nothing but facts on this how they did Monica Rambeau wrong and it being objectively racist they knocked her down to lift Carol Danvers up. It is like if T'Challa was introduced to the MCU as a black child and not as Black Panther and looked up to Steve Rogers as his great white hope. it's an insult.

Also, whomever is the admin. I did not violate any Coli rules. Critiquing the film and calling out its agenda shouldn't be a coli violation, nor trying to censor anyone for speaking their opinion. Isn't that the point of having a forum. I understand if it actually violated anything such as illegal content, pornography, trying to bully or insult any member or anything of that nature. I do not mind getting negg'd or dapped. But I do take exception when I get a warning for violating a rule when I feel I am within the guidelines or they did not specify what exactly what it is that's violated. Because posting a commentary and agreeing to it shouldn't be a violation, IMO.

Damn y’all really let this shyt run y’all lives

 

[hex]

but again... who cares WHO HE IS? It is rather lame you want to discredit FACTS about what they did to Monica Rambeau due to you having issue to who's the messenger. It doesn't ignore the TRUTH of how messed up they did that character.

And posting a video of someone's commentary isn't derailing a thread or is that according too COLI RULES a violation. If you don't like someone's opinion then so be it. But to report it as if it's a threat to derailing the thread. All I did was posted something that was FACT about what the filmmakers did to Monica Rambeau and how they tend to tokenize black characters in the comic book genre. If speaking out on things that BLACK PEOPLE should take note... in relation to talking about characters in this movie... that is disappointing. You DO NOT have to agree. Even neg me if you like... but reporting when it did not violate any rule is BS.

Breh like I said, appeal it. It's warning points on a message board....they'll be gone in a month anyway. Who gives a fukk?

But this back and forth over it in the thread shyt, ain't happening. So yeah....appeal it. Otherwise just make your original points about the movie and KIM.

Fred.

 

[MartyMcFly]

the thing is i feel like flashbacks is essentially just telling you what happened. I want to figure it out myself by getting to know the character.
Not just straight tell us her background via flashback. If you want them to show and not tell then flashbacks should be last thing you want to see.

It's showing you what happened though through drama. I'd much rather see something than have a character tell me. Take Inception for example. We could just have a scene with Leo explaining to Ellen what happened between he and his wife. But it's more powerful to show it along with his narration. Had he just told her that she killed herself by jumping off a building because she refused to believe the truth and that she filed a court order to declare herself legally sane, thus framing him, that's a lot of info dump. But using the bits of dialogue interspersed with the scenes of them together, at a hotel, with her on the ledge, and the anguish on his face and fear? That's gold man. And that's a flashback