Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

X-Men Apocalypse


Sapper

Recommended Posts

Well, at least the reviews have picked up recently were they are nearly 50/50 between positive and negative. At least it's not going to be the poostain that was BvS.

I'll see it in theaters if only because I grew up on the Saturday morning X-Men and this is freaking Apocolypse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Promethean Forerunner said:

With Jackman leaving and Stewart/McKellen gone, they need someone who can carry the franchise. Fassbender isn't enough so it seems.

Singer's Apocalypse looks toothless. I didn't get otherworldly and badass vibes from him.

So you back on your real account now? Funny how you haven't said a word in the civil war thread but when I marvel brand movie doesn't do so hot you have something to say lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Promethean Forerunner said:

I'm sorry, I don't do troll accounts.

What the fug are you talking about? Antman was Iron Man 2.0, and it did well. So, no, I don't trash the "Marvel" brand when one doesn't do awesome. I can trash it at any time.

The X-Men franchise has always leaned on Jackman. This is not breaking news. Check out the statistics.

Come on man don't lie. And you shited on Ant Man when it dropped. 

 

If that wasn't your alt account in the Civil War thread I'm curious to find out what you thought of the movie given you extreme stances before it dropped to the overwhelming positive reviews and finical success it is seeing now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On May 13, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Promethean Forerunner said:

 

Meh, not a fan of it at all. I still hold Winter Soldier as the best Marvel Studios film to date followed by Guardians of the Galaxy and Ironman. The whole 'Disney' Civil War was watered down compared to the comics. If I hadn't read the comics, I'd probably would have enjoyed it a lot more but the whole idea behind why conflict started, and how Tony Stark went from "Kiss my ass" to "We need to be controlled" in such a short span was just as weak as why Batman and Superman stopped fighting in BvS. Bleh.

 

I thought this was an interesting take on Stark's actions in CW:

"Remember, all of this begins with Alfre Woodard at MIT, showing Tony a picture of her dead son - a son who is even older than Peter Parker. It’s the death of this innocent that starts Stark on a path towards the airport battle, one where he has no compunction against bringing another young innocent into harm’s way. Tony hasn’t learned a lesson, he’s just feeling crushed by personal guilt. The fact that he recruits 15 year old Peter Parker to fight Captain America only proves that Tony Stark is looking at the Sokovia Accords as a way of taking responsibility and guilt from his own shoulders. He's cutting the wire, not laying himself down on it, to go back to Tony and Cap's first argument way back in The Avengers. He's not interested in taking responsibility. He wants to shrug it off onto someone else.

This is vital for the balance of the film. Cap’s position is a little more vague than Tony’s - he’s arguing for larger concepts of freedom while Tony is arguing for nuts and bolts regulations that answer specific incidents and problems. Logically it’s hard to fault where Tony Stark is coming from, and emotionally it’s easier to be on Cap’s side (he’s trying to protect his best friend). By having Tony make this mistake the film undercuts his own position, bringing the two sides into closer balance in our minds. And that balance, I believe, is everything for this film - you should be able to argue passionately (and correctly) in favor of both Team Cap and Team Stark."

 

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/10/spider-mans-central-role-in-captain-america-civil-war

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/13/2016 at 9:29 PM, CarolinaCoolin said:

Come on man don't lie. And you shited on Ant Man when it dropped. 

 

If that wasn't your alt account in the Civil War thread I'm curious to find out what you thought of the movie given you extreme stances before it dropped to the overwhelming positive reviews and finical success it is seeing now. 

Lol did you really not see the "oh man that totally wasn't me!" coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Saw it yesterday and really enjoyed it. Don't know why the initial reviews were hating so hard on it. I really have liked the direction the most recent X men's have been. Fassbender and mcavoy are great actors and love their takes on professor X and magneto. Especially magneto. I get the complaints about mystique but at the same time, they reset their universe with days of futures past. She's a different character in this universe and they took her in a different direction. Obviously they are going to write the character for the actress. Can't really hate on that though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're grading it I'd give it a D+.

 

The story had potential, but it was just too incoherent and lazy. It's like a live action cartoon, logic be damned. The 12 year old me would probably love it. Too many unintentional laugh out loud moments, like Magneto after killing some dudes looking up at the sky on his knees screaming "IS THIS ALL I AM?!?!?".

For a 2.5 hour film, It's about an hour too long and not much really even happens. It goes from Point A to Point B to Point C in an absolute straight line.

There were some moments that gave me chills in a good way. I liked the Weapon X scene, maybe because I used to have that toy. The Phoenix scene. Quicksilver's scene was cool, but it was horribly misplaced in the film and probably went on too long.

Anyway, the movie is worth seeing at the $2.50 theater or redbox.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It amuses me how Goff's name the last few years is often used to compare to subpar or underperforming QB's. Now on the surface I get it. But when you look at his numbers he's been the same QB all along. He's improved his completion % but even with the Rams he averaged 63.4. And that Super Bowl he played in they should have won honestly. If we can get a QB as good as Goff I'll be pretty damn pleased.
    • And it remains to be seen if Goff has that ability or not. Plenty of very good QB's like Goff were not able to get over those playoff humps. Matt Ryan, Kirk Cousins, etc. You can still be an upper tier QB and never get over that hurdle. McVay just thought(and hasn't been wrong yet) Goff was never going to be that guy.
    • You literally simply have to think logically for either of those guys. Smith is locked up on a deal for 2025, so we would have to trade for him or he gets cut. Neither of those scenarios are likely in the first place.  Wilson will be 37 in 2025. Why on earth would he have any interest in a situation that is far worse than he was given in Denver and wasn't able to win there? He's a guy that can drop into any ready to win franchise in the NFL and immediately elevate their chances of winning(provided they already have QB issues).  Frankly, that is either speculation that even David Newton should be embarrassed by or it shows how disconnected with reality some people in our organization are.   I do agree with him on getting a veteran QB, however. That's our best chance to keep developing our talent.
×
×
  • Create New...