Video: The Movie Trailer thread

[dsturgeon]

That would be a remarkable feat but not impossible. I must admit that I am more excited about Shang Chi & The Legend of the Ten Rings, based on the trailer alone, than the rest of the 2021 releases of Eternals, Spider-Man | No Way Home and even my own avatar (Black Widow).

i like martial arts and asian style fighting/fantasy movies. So, this looks really good to me

 

[Stash]

I have ‘concerns’ about this one. The Eternals have never been a huge property for Marvel and I’m skeptical that this one will be a huge hit on par with other Marvel franchises.

 

[DallasEast]

I have ‘concerns’ about this one. The Eternals have never been a huge property for Marvel and I’m skeptical that this one will be a huge hit on par with other Marvel franchises.

That is valid skepticism in my opinion. I believe much will depend on presentation and the type of origin format they will base it upon.

Although I considered it a very good title back in the day, Guardians of the Galaxy was very different back then from the revamped title that the MCU films are based upon. GOTG did not sell decades ago, which was good for me since I could always find an issue sitting on the comic book rack. Poor sales eventually killed the title but Marvel re-invented the group's origin for re-release. I do not have any numbers but I am guessing paperback and digital sales improved a great deal because it is a very popular title for the past one or two decades.

Perhaps The Eternals title underwent a similar transformation for which Marvel Studios will base its films? The trailer did not show characters as stiffly defined as I remember them.

 

[Stash]

That is valid skepticism in my opinion. I believe much will depend on presentation and the type of origin format they will base it upon.

Although I considered it a very good title back in the day, Guardians of the Galaxy was very different back then from the revamped title that the MCU films are based upon. GOTG did not sell decades ago, which was good for me since I could always find an issue sitting on the comic book rack. Poor sales eventually killed the title but Marvel re-invented the group's origin for re-release. I do not have any numbers but I am guessing paperback and digital sales improved a great deal because it is a very popular title for the past one or two decades.

Perhaps The Eternals title underwent a similar transformation for which Marvel Studios will base its films? The trailer did not show characters as stiffly defined as I remember them.

I’m hoping for a similar ‘course correction’ but I haven’t seen that in the trailer. I fear that they’re trying to do some diversity-driven, Greek gods mythology deal here and I have little confidence that such a ham-fisted approach will be well received.

The best part of the trailer for me was theAvengers reference because I think that’s what fans are more interested in

 

[dsturgeon]

That is valid skepticism in my opinion. I believe much will depend on presentation and the type of origin format they will base it upon.

Although I considered it a very good title back in the day, Guardians of the Galaxy was very different back then from the revamped title that the MCU films are based upon. GOTG did not sell decades ago, which was good for me since I could always find an issue sitting on the comic book rack. Poor sales eventually killed the title but Marvel re-invented the group's origin for re-release. I do not have any numbers but I am guessing paperback and digital sales improved a great deal because it is a very popular title for the past one or two decades.

Perhaps The Eternals title underwent a similar transformation for which Marvel Studios will base its films? The trailer did not show characters as stiffly defined as I remember them.

I am not a comic book reader so I can not look at it from that view, but the first GOTG knocked it out of the park. It was good visually, story wise, comedy wise, and all aspects. I really enjoyed it. I was surprised at how bad the 2nd one was

 

[Cowpolk]

I admit, childhood was a long time ago, but I don't remember them that way!

I always changed the channel when the banana splits came on

 

[DallasEast]

I am not a comic book reader so I can not look at it from that view, but the first GOTG knocked it out of the park. It was good visually, story wise, comedy wise, and all aspects. I really enjoyed it. I was surprised at how bad the 2nd one was

In what ways was GOTG: Vol.2 bad in your view? In my opinion, I agree that it was not at the level of the original but it had many strong points. I really enjoyed the introductions of Ego and Mantis into the MCU, for example.

 

[dsturgeon]

In what ways was GOTG: Vol.2 bad in your view? In my opinion, I agree that it was not at the level of the original but it had many strong points. I really enjoyed the introductions of Ego and Mantis into the MCU, for example.

The script for the most part. They overplayed char roles by taking the same jokes from the first one, and just hammering it over and over. That is my main problem with it, and it ruined it for me. I did really enjoy the racoons solo battle with the ravagers, and visually it was good.

 

[DallasEast]

The script for the most part. They overplayed char roles by taking the same jokes from the first one, and just hammering it over and over. That is my main problem with it, and it ruined it for me. I did really enjoy the racoons solo battle with the ravagers, and visually it was good.

My only hard negative was the film's first fifteen minutes. I thought it was too flashy and campy. The movie settled down and met my expectations from that point forward.

What I enjoyed most were the two contrasting father/son dynamics. Yondu and Quill continued their feuding that started in the first film. Peter did see Yondu as his father but one who took him away from his Earth family. The audience is then presented with a relationship between a son and the father he never knew. Peter was initially awed by Ego's acceptance of him as offspring.

Slowly but surely, the audience sees Peter accepting which of the two prove they were the his true loving father. Then we watch Quill lose him through supreme sacrifice.

GOTG: Vol 2 has plenty of laughs. I think practically all humor was spot on. For me, humor delivery was many times better than in, say, Thor: Ragnarok but I will not digress for everyone's sake. The movie has strong dramatic aspect intertwined also. Overall, I considered it as well-rounded entertainment and a solid MCU chapter.

 

[dsturgeon]

My only hard negative was the film's first fifteen minutes. I thought it was too flashy and campy. The movie settled down and met my expectations from that point forward.

What I enjoyed most were the two contrasting father/son dynamics. Yondu and Quill continued their feuding that started in the first film. Peter did see Yondu as his father but one who took him away from his Earth family. The audience is then presented with a relationship between a son and the father he never knew. Peter was initially awed by Ego's acceptance of him as offspring.

Slowly but surely, the audience sees Peter accepting which of the two prove they were the his true loving father. Then we watch Quill lose him through supreme sacrifice.

GOTG: Vol 2 has plenty of laughs. I think practically all humor was spot on. For me, humor delivery was many times better than in, say, Thor: Ragnarok but I will not digress for everyone's sake. The movie has strong dramatic aspect intertwined also. Overall, I considered it as well-rounded entertainment and a solid MCU chapter.

It is not on topic, but i can't figure out why they didn't do an offshoot series with the Gambit character that appeared in that one movie. That had the biggest potential in my view for a good series. I don't know the comics, but it seems like a bad move

 

[DallasEast]

It is not on topic, but i can't figure out why they didn't do an offshoot series with the Gambit character that appeared in that one movie. That had the biggest potential in my view for a good series. I don't know the comics, but it seems like a bad move

Is the film you referring to X-Men Origins: Wolverine?

 

[dsturgeon]

Is the film you referring to X-Men Origins: Wolverine?

yea, where they go to the island after striker

 

[Runwildboys]

It is not on topic, but i can't figure out why they didn't do an offshoot series with the Gambit character that appeared in that one movie. That had the biggest potential in my view for a good series. I don't know the comics, but it seems like a bad move

Gambit was one of my favorite X-Men, and I hope they include him more in future movies, but I'm not sure he's interesting enough to base a film around.

 

[DallasEast]

yea, where they go to the island after striker

In my opinion? Blame 20th Century Fox and anal tunnel vision for making money via Hugh Jackman only. Seriously. Give a movie and comic book fan like me one film title starting with X-Men Origins and I automatically assume there will be a series of films featuring the main mutant characters.

But no. That movie was a weak start to a Wolverine Trilogy only. Fox had zero plans showcasing other mutants in solo movies UNTIL Ryan Reynolds nickeled-and-dimed them into supporting Deadpool--which was a success despite its low budget.

I do not recall. Who was the actor who played Remy in X-Men Origins?

 

[John813]

I have ‘concerns’ about this one. The Eternals have never been a huge property for Marvel and I’m skeptical that this one will be a huge hit on par with other Marvel franchises.

Yea, didn't really catch my interest in that trailer.

Doesn't help I haven't really read too much about it in comic books but it seemed bland.

 

[Stash]

Yea, didn't really catch my interest in that trailer.

Doesn't help I haven't really read too much about it in comic books but it seemed bland.

Yeah. No ‘hook’ for me.

 

[dsturgeon]

In my opinion? Blame 20th Century Fox and anal tunnel vision for making money via Hugh Jackman only. Seriously. Give a movie and comic book fan like me one film title starting with X-Men Origins and I automatically assume there will be a series of films featuring the main mutant characters.

But no. That movie was a weak start to a Wolverine Trilogy only. Fox had zero plans showcasing other mutants in solo movies UNTIL Ryan Reynolds nickeled-and-dimed them into supporting Deadpool--which was a success despite its low budget.

I do not recall. Who was the actor who played Remy in X-Men Origins?

John Conner on mars guy

 

[DallasEast]

Gambit was one of my favorite X-Men, and I hope they include him more in future movies, but I'm not sure he's interesting enough to base a film around.

Just wait until the Marvel/Disney partnership have an opportunity to restart the mutant franchise for the MCU. I am betting they will get the casting right for Gambit and portray him correctly on screen. It would not surprise me if a stand-alone project with Remy got serious consideration.

That said, I can *see* a possibility of Marvel Studios doing solo movies with Wolverine (of course), Marvel Girl/Cyclops (kinda like Ant-Man & The Wasp) and Storm in an initial phase. Additional phases could bring in Rogue/Gambit and Magneto (another anti-hero for add with Wolverine).

All of the above may be a pipe dream. I am trying to keep it together for a couple more years until the FF show up, lol!

 

[DallasEast]

John Conner on mars guy

Yeah. That is the same guy isn't it? Did not connect the two films, which is sad. I am a John Conner on Mars fan.

 

[dsturgeon]

Yeah. That is the same guy isn't it? Did not connect the two films, which is sad. I am a John Conner on Mars fan.

I don't remember the name of it, but he was in a good movie, where he steals coke, kills cops, and the black panther catches and kills him