Don't remember all the negativity when Wonder Woman cane out.

Gal Gadot mostly kept her mouth shut. That seems to be the problem here: BL has the audacity to use her visibility as a platform. And some folks HATE when celebrities do that, unless the celeb is saying something they like.

It was still the same kind of shit in other ways, though. Instead of making fun of pics of Brie Larson's ass, dudes were complaining that Gal didn't have the right body for Wonder Woman (read: her boobs were too small).

Gal had also already shown up in BvS and basically stole the show, so there was something there upon which to base cautiously optimistic expectations. Well, that and Patty Jenkins. Whereas I don't even know who directed CM.

Answer: Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck.

(Yeah, still no idea who they are...)

Gina Carano should have been Wonder Woman. Period. The End.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/64/07/d6/6...rtial-arts.jpg

Sorry, but this is what the character SHOULD look like. And not just because she has a great rack - but because she looks like what an Amazon should look like.

Would you want a mousy Superman?

:shake:

Maybe if she could act well enough to carry a blockbuster. But she can't.

And Gadot IS Wonder Woman now. No question about that. Regardless of what or who anybody might have wanted, she owned the role and now she embodies it.

Oh yeah, acting ability is important in an overwrought live action cartoon. Too bad Meryl Streep wasn't available to play Wonder Woman. LMAO

I'm not gonna say that Gadot has spectacular acting chops or anything but she's a TON better than Gina Carano.

You cast Carano in that movie and it would've absolutely tanked. She couldn't even manage to play (essentially) herself worth a damn in Deadpool and in a Fast and Furious movie she still managed to look out of her element. She got blown off the screen by Vin Diesel, FFS...

This isn't about needing an Oscar caliber performance - but you can't have someone that friggen terrible carrying a $100 million marvel property.

I think Marvel made a weird call (made even stranger by the fact that Gadot's accent was so uncoachable that they had to make all the other Amazonians speak with that weird caricature of a vaguely Russian accent to make it 'part of the character'), but Carano would've been an even worse one and ultimately Gadot's done a nice job with the part.

Arnold Schwarzenegger says hello.

Wonder Woman is DC, not Marvel. nerdrage.gif

We have a difference of opinion as to the IS of Wonder Woman.

This movie is shitty and women are annoying and not funny.

Not sure what you're trying to argue here. This isn't the 70s. Marvel and DC have both taken their properties really seriously, actors and directors, since they started this push into mainstream movies. Nearly everybody is A-list at this point. Carano was fine for something like a secondary villain role in Deadpool, but there's no way she could've carried a tentpole spring/summer movie on her own.

I think she'd have done just fine. Obviously there's no way of knowing for sure. These movies are popular primarily because of the CGI and action scenes, not the actors displaying their alleged chops between CGI action scenes. Seriously, how many of the stars of these films are truly talented actors when you take all that shit away? It's not like everybody is Robert Downey Jr.

Gotcha....I remember the Gal is too skinny stuff/boobs but she definitely owned it. I'm hoping this movie does great cause CM is a badass. I just think people should give the movie a chance. There are assholes already flooding the Rotten Tomatoes Audience 'want to see' at a ridiculous 55%. No doubt people will try to butcher the audience score when released.

The star wants to make this movie a feminist battle cry, and basically demands that women take mens' jobs, and your mind is so twisted that you think the assholes in the scenario are the people who've gotten turned off enough by that that they don't want to see the movie?

:shake:

And, as for reviews, are you ****ing kidding me?

https://twitter.com/kaytiburt/status...rc=twsrc%5Etfw

You can't even trust the consensus of reviewers anymore because so many of them are just agenda drivers. Maybe it will be good; hell, the trailer doesn't look bad or anything. But I'm not going to go see it on the word of some raging feminist reviewer who'd just as soon see me castrated because I'm a man as say hello to me.

And for the record, my favorite sci-fi action movie is Aliens. I had no problem with strong female leads decades before legions of screeching twats demanded that I have no problem with strong female leads.

Terminator 2

Sarah Connor

Yeah, that's right up there, too.

Ah, the Nickleback of action actresses.

Let me guess - you would have picked Zoe Saldana, right?

Depends on if you like Nickelback or not. I think this needs a thread of its own. :D

Where did she say she wants women to take men's jobs? I read she just wanted more seats at the table.

I'm sure the people bitching will still go see it if they have seen other Marvel movies.

Not a cat person so I dgaf about goose

Nearly the entire Marvel Avengers cast or actors, and even some minor characters, are pretty well-respected actors.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

My perception is that Goose is a much more prominent character than we realized, so I don't think it's just an "OMG IT'S A CAT!!" thing. We'll see.

As for the rest of the "feminist" crap, it's just another example of people being too caught up in political BS to me. While I personally would prefer she shut her trap, I'm not going to let that interfere with my enjoyment of the movie.

I'm not a fan of Tyreek punching his girlfriend, but I still enjoy his play on the field. This is just a (much more mild) version of that.

That's how I am as well.

I mean Mark Ruffalo is playing the hulk, FFS.

Dude's politics are annoying as hell but he's a respected actor playing a slobbering monster.

Any 'anchor' character has been portrayed by someone who is at least a solid actor. Evans was fantastic in Snowpiercer, Hemsworth has actually shown solid chops outside of the MCU, Cumberbatch, Johansson, Renner, Boseman, Saldana; even less 'refined' actors like Rudd, Pratt and Samuel L. Jackson have held their own outside of the MCU. Even the secondary characters tend to be playing down; Michael Douglas, Glenn Close, Sebastian Stan, Anthony Hopkins, Idris Elba, Josh Brolin, Benicio Del Toro, Mads Mikkelsen, Chiwetel Ojiofer, Rachel Adams, Kurt Russell, Michael Keaton, Kate Blanchett, Michael B. Jordan, Angela Basset, Forest Whitaker, Lawrence Fishburn, etc, etc....

If they have a Drax the Destroyer individual property helmed by Dave Bautista the idea may have some merit. But every actor that has been a primary player in the MCU of late has had solid acting chops at the very worst.

I don't know what makes anyone think that these $100 million properties are just throwaway items for these production groups these days. No, they're not going to dilute their product by just throwing a bunch of B-Listers at it and pretending like these are Sci-Fi Originals going direct to cable.

It took a ton of effort (and raw dumb luck) to get these movies considered along the lines of 'serious' fare and they aren't going to send some wooden blockhead like Gina Carano out there to lead their major 'female empowerment' property. There's a threshold level of acting skills that they expect, especially from their primary characters, and Gina doesn't get there.

Oh for ****'s sake, let's stop pretending that this comic book bullshit is Citizen Kane just because it has expensive CGI. This stuff is popular because the ritalin-chewing millennial zombies that it's aimed at love the 'splosions.

I think you discount the impact that bad acting can have on a series. See the DC universe until recently.

There's not one of these $200M turds that I've enjoyed more than the original Conan the Barbarian, and when he made that Arnie could barely speak.

I think you guys are mistaking bad writing for bad acting.

Agree to disagree I suppose.

Yeah, I figure I'll get a lot of that today. :)

Just pointing out your affinity for people that look the part but are objectively f’ing terrible.

In a dumb **** comic book movie? Sure.

Michael Bay movies were popular because of CGI and 'splosions but they had nowhere near the staying power.

The MCU (and to a lesser extent DC) could've made a few big movies adhering to the approach you're championing here, but they'd have flared out like the Transformers movies did.

The reason the MCU has staying power is because the performances are generally credible. Not Oscar worthy, but not relying on little more than Megan Fox's abs and 'splosions to keep the film going.

That's why the Transformers franchise has faded away to obscurity while MCU can simply print money.

The biggest problem with Transformers is that it's just dumb. Cars that turn into big flying robots. WTF? It was dumb in the 80s and it's still dumb. The entire concept always reminds me of the "I don't get it" scene from Big.

Sure it is.

But the first 2 movies did exceptionally well - why? As you said, CGI and 'splosions will get eyeballs. For awhile.

But because it was ONLY CGI and 'splosions, their last 3 movies have done dick.

That's precisely the point - the premise of Transformers isn't all that much more ludicrous than your basic Superhero template and both properties experienced similar initial success for similar reasons. But the superhero properties have grown and gotten more successful while the transformers movies have fallen apart precisely because the Superhero folks took them more seriously and didn't lean into the camp.

In other words, they cast an actress who could play Diana Prince rather than one who looked like Wonder Woman. And they made a LOT of money because of it.

I would much rather see the same scatter plot with more recent years. Say 2013 and on, maybe even 2014 or 2015 on. I believe at some point RT critics started whitewashing movies, could have been because the movie studios learned how to control that a little better.

I wouldn't mind seeing the budget on the outliers as well to see if studios had a ton of money invested.

We'll obviously have to agree to disagree over Gadot. Again, don't hate her, and sure she's pretty, but I don't get the giant IT factor you see in her. She's Ziva from NCIS with super powers.

Gadot's work has been wildly overhyped. But, then, so has her Wonder Woman movie.

Again - not saying she's an excellent actress; I started from that very point. I'm saying she's simply passable - she doesn't actively detract from the movie (lets the CGI and 'splosions do their thing).

I simply don't think Carano could even get to THAT level. Like I said - they don't need Streep - but they need more than Carano. The only actress I've seen worse than her was Ronda Rousey (also in a F&F movie) - holy mother of God was she terrible.

Side note: Remember that thread where she could beat up Floyd Mayweather? Ah CP....good times.

Also agreed - I fell asleep watching it the first time and I friggen love silly period movies. WWI era idiocy should've been right up my ally. Just couldn't keep my interest despite how extremely attractive she is.

Speaking of World War I - did you by chance see They Shall Not Grow Old?

Hell yes - went to the Independence theater on the 27th and watched it. Really really enjoyed it.

I'm not sure they needed the 3D or were even well served by it. I also kinda wish they'd have put the 'making of' documentary on before it. Seeing the work that went into remastering some of those god-awful old film clips was just amazing and probably my favorite part. I wonder if I wouldn't have had a better appreciation for the effort in the creation of that thing if I'd have seen the making of first.

Then again, i wonder if that would've shifted some focus away from what the stories they were actually trying to tell.

It got a little tedious towards the very end of the documentary itself (prior to the 'making of') when it just seemed like a gratuitous re-hash without much new information, but it was definitely a worthwhile experience.

Cool. I'm glad somebody else actually saw it. I mentioned it in the movie thread and didn't get a single reply.

It was sold out throughout all of KC.

Peter Jackson is truly a mad genius. I don't think anybody else could've pulled that off given his love of the subject matter and film-making expertise.

When he was discussing the various possible incarnations of this movie, including all the film he couldn't use among the navy and 'air forces', I was pretty hopeful that he could pull together at least a couple more of these with slightly different focuses.

It seems doable if he can get the funding. Sadly, he was a producer on that piece of shit Mortal Engines movie so I gotta believe he lost a fair amount of money on that thing. Hopefully he still has enough loose change to make another actual GOOD product.

This.

About the time media all agreed it was ok to flat lie to people was about the time critics sold their credibility to Disney for woke points.

Forget weather you love or hate The Last Jedi anyone watching that thing knew immediately that it would be a film 1/2 the people would love and 1/2 the people would absolutely hate. That was obvious but critics ignored that to help push a big opening weekend.

And honestly it seems like that's all many studios seem to worry about anymore is that big 1st weekend splash. Even if there are diminishing returns it doesn't matter if we get enough asses there opening weekend...

And put aside the movie being good or bad: I don't think I've ever witnessed the public's desire to see a movie fall this much due to the star without them committing a crime.

Bris Larson is single handedly circumcising the profit right off this flick...

Misogyny among the nerd class appears to be rampant. It's understandable, I suppose. Goofy dudes who have been rejected by girls all their lives can't be expected to appreciate, admire and respect women.

What I don't get is the idea that you can "rate" or "review" a movie that you've never seen. That is bizarre and transparently stupid.

Personally, I look at it like this; Marvel deserves the benefit of the doubt. They aren't perfect and have whiffed on a couple, but for the most part, they have elevated the genre and created something historic in film. I wish we could start all over with Iron Man 1 and RDJ, but we can't. From this point forward, it's about something new and I'm all in. Marvel is a guaranteed presale ticket (or 3) from me. I never thought I'd see anything like this in my lifetime. When I sit back and think about it, I realize that I'm grateful.

FAX

"The public" is a pretty broad statement here. All the Marvel fans I associate with in real life are really excited about it. :shrug:

Yep. I don't know any one personally that won't see it other than that dgaf about cb movies

Congrats on not personally knowing any incels.

Tis a shame there a few of them on this website though.

Loon talking about itself is the definition of irony.

I saw it Super Bowl Sunday, part of my boycott of that entire shitshow. I thought the movie was fantastic. Even my wife liked it.

Same here.

Look at this dumbass trying to use an insult he doesn't know the definition for.

Again, Marvel has just nailed it so far with their movies. Their MCU is approaching old school Star Wars level of fandom and interest, and they've earned my not giving a damn about whatever quasi-political message people think they may be trying to send, even if the star of the movie is trying really hard to push that angle.

They've got the benefit of the doubt with at least me. If it sucks, or if Brie Larson ends up ruining it, I won't support this particular film again. It's that simple.

Guess it got review bombed by users on Rotten Tomatoes. Thats funny.

The only people complaining about Larson's politics are the same swinging dicks who are mad that CM is a woman, or that she doesn't smile, or that her costume isn't skimpy enough. Marvel clearly DGAF about those people's opinions or else they wouldn't have gone in this direction to begin with. They clearly think that for every one misogynist who boycotts the film, two women will show up.

This movie will do great or crappy depending upon how good a film it is, nothing more, nothing less. What, you don't think racists skipped "Black Panther"? That film seemed to do okay. You don't think sexists skipped "Wonder Woman"? Ditto. On the other hand, the SJW issues didn't hurt the new SW films; the fact that both TFA and TLJ sucked donkey balls did.

And about 30 people have "screened" the movie.

Captain Marvel has proven that ESP and Directed Astral Projection is prevalent in the nerd class. That's some superhero level stuff, right there.

FAX

LOL... Rotten Tomatoes has now disabled user reviews for all new releases, because of the negativity toward Captain Marvel.

I've always thought it was weird they allowed early reviews in the first place.

I'm not iffy on the movie because of her comments in the media or the fact that she's a female superhero. I'm iffy on the movie because every trailer I've seen so far has been the definition of meh. I don't even think that Samuel L Jackson looks good in these trailers. It's just weird.

I'll probably see it because my oldest twin daughter wants to see it but it might just wait until I can rent it.

I just think shes a VERY horrible actress....almost as bad as Megan Fox

No, they haven't...

That's a sensible response by the Rottens. Who'da thunk it?

FAX

Sometimes you have to take away the toy from the child.

I'm not sure what you mean. Your quote confirms the removal. They removed comments as well as the "Want to see" percentage.

What they did was stupid.

They didn't remove user reviews, which is what you had originally claimed and he had responded to:

They removed the "want to see" and the comments. It's stupidity on their part, but not the first time they have done things to block negative or potentially negative input about major releases.

Perhaps we're talking about two different things.

A lot of movie-goers use the "want to see" rating as an early indicator of a movie's potential. I don't think that's an arguable point.

In other news, the movie has been review-bombed on Google and a variety of other social media platforms. Reviewed before seeing the movie? That is absurd no matter what the movie is or might be.

Common sense will tell you that a Marvel movie (especially one that has a direct impact on the next Avengers film) isn't very likely to have a "want to see" rating well below 50%. None of them ever have, so why this one?

2 + 2, my friend. Review bombed all over the interweb and a "want to see" rating dramatically below reasonable expectations.

It makes perfect sense for the Rottens to pull the plug on activity until the bizarre bombers find something else to bitch about.

FAX

LOL ok then.

Chris Evans is even more political than Brie Larson, but no one cares because he slays it as Cap.

Marvel has earned a shot to do the same with Larson here.

Captain Marvel might do decently but it won't do well. IMO.

Really? I've never heard anything. Probably because he is a guy so the media doesn't promote it as much.

I've seen very little criticism of Larson in traditional media. It's been in the world of social media and blogs where people have been critical (or praising depending on the place) from what I've seen.

I shouldn't have used the term media. Just have not heard anything about Chris Evans until that comment.

Like Star Wars: A Solo Story if you piss off a quarter or more of your general audience you'll make less at the box office.

A lot of the trend started because people trolled Amy Schumer years ago without having seen her stand up special. I watched it, hated it, and thumbs downed it. But that's different from trolling. It defeats the whole purpose for anyone legitimately wanting to know about a movie.

It's clear what behavior they're trying to block. The sample is flawed. It would be like measuring the success of an Elway documentary because you aired it in Kansas city. You know trolls would rush out in droves to down vote it without knowing anything about the movie. Which would be funny for us. But if you're a casual eagles fan wanting to hear from sports fans about whether it's worth watching, it's totally unhelpful.

I mean... I think this movie looks boring. But I want to hear legitimately without the politics on either side if it's actually worth my time.

I’ll throw in that I have no idea what Evans has said off film.