Are you excited for this one? - Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (2021) Discussion

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

Absolutely not.

The guy they got for this movie doesn't really look like a martial arts prodigy. This should have been a breakout role for the next Wu Jing, who would have looked fantastic in a film like this, or maybe the next gen Donnie Yen; someone who understands the fundamental philosophies of martial arts and also has a background in dance/choreography. This way they can actually HELP orchestrate proper fight sequencing and on-camera movement.

Too many martial arts films these days are being headlined by actors, and it shows. The most important part of the movie is the martial arts helping bring the story to life. This is literally why John Wick works, because Keanu Reeves literally became a bad-a$$ hitman tier martial artist/marksman for the film, on top of his training from The Matrix. So because he looked believable in the role, it made it easy to get invested in the action, and by proxy, the story, since the action was driving the story.

In this case, I don't think I've ever heard of the kid starring in this flick, and what little we saw in the trailers NONE of the choreography looks good. They really should have brought Donnie Yen in to do the action-choreography, and they should have hired someone who could have been the new face of an action-martial arts franchise.

Add to the fact that that Awkwafina chick is annoying as heck, and I have zero hope for this film being anything above mildly entertaining.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

what little we saw in the trailers NONE of the choreography looks good

For real though, I don't get why people were praising it or 'going wild' for it when the trailer came out. The fights just look decent.

I don't know, Maybe films like The Raid & shows like Warrior have given me unrealistic expectations of what an excellent fight scene should look like

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

I don't know, Maybe films like The Raid & shows like Warrior have given me unrealistic expectations of what an excellent fight scene should look like

Right. There was a time during the mid-aughts where an elevation occurred in movie martial arts. We had a string of high-impact, realistic looking, believable, entertaining fight scenes.

It was two-fold: One, we had The Raid. Two, we had a trilogy of Donnie Yen flicks that got everybody interested in Hong Kong movies, namely SPL: Killzone, Flashpoint, and Ip Man (the latter of which spawned like a hundred sub-par spin-offs).

At the same time South Korea was producing notable flicks like I Saw The Devil, Yellow Sea, and The Man From Nowhere, which were all sort of precursors to the John Wick phenomena, and this was coupled with the advent of the expertly made Daredevil Netflix series. So yeah, there was a clear elevation of expectations from some great directors and filmmakers who all -- nearly at the same time -- made some awesome, noteworthy action/martial arts properties.

But then it all went away for some reason, and now a bunch of dullards are "hyped" for what looks like one of the most by-the-books Marvel/martial arts films ever made. It reminds me a lot of that Snake Eyes abomination.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

Please don't remind me of Snake Eyes. What an absolute waste of time that was. As you said, we've come so far in terms of action films & fight choreography. The recent Bob Odenkirk film 'Nobody' had some very well choreographed & well shot action

So why the f*ck did we go back to the era of freaking Shaky cam? I hate Shaky Cam so damn much. It's nauseating to watch. Shaky Cam & quick cuts make the action so infuriating to watch

I don't get why they even did that. Iko Uwais is in the film. He's not just great in the Raid movies, he's also a great fight choreographer himself. And you've got Andrew Koji who plays Storm Shadow. He's absolutely Fantastic in the series "Warrior". Which I'm currently watching. Great series, amazing martial arts fights. He can actually do the fights

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 3 years ago

Much better than Donnie Yen: Yayan Ruhian. He was the one that choreographed The Raid and played Mad Dog. His fight scene with the brothers is probably one of the top ones in the history of action movies. And they got him in John Wick 3, best scene in the movie.

https://youtu.be/qMKTttckfS0?t=51
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXQsQxtkEEk

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

Oh that's a beautiful suggestion!

Could you imagine what this film would have been like Yayan choreography and Iko or Max Zhang as the lead? It would make Shang-Chi one of my most anticipated movies of the year.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 3 years ago

To be honest, I haven't paid much attention to Max Zhang. But yeah, he would have been a much better choice for the "young handsome martial hero" role than Simu Liu.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I'm not a martial arts fan, I'm just someone who's noticed that Marvel has been putting out a lot of fun movies.

I'm really looking forward to it, but not enough to risk going to a movie theater this fall. The pandemic is back, and it's meaner and more contagious than ever! So I'm going to wait for streaming on this one, and advise everyone else to do the same.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

In terms of going to theatres, the only films I wanna see on the big screen this year are Dune & Spider-Man 3. IF they're not pushed back. And that's about the.

I'm not really sold on The Eternals. The trailer was dull af

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I don't care if I have to wait for months to see all the good movies, shit is getting real with the pandemic and I'm just not going to theaters until this all dies down. And I live in an area with a high proportion of vaccinated people!

If you live in an area where most people aren't vaccinated, DO NOT GO TO MOVIE THEATERS OR ANY CROWDED PLACE THIS FALL. The Delta Variant is very contagious, and if you're unvaccinated, it's both deadly and incurable.

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

lol no it's not.

Did you know that COVID only kills 5% of the people it infects? You have a 3 in 1000 chance of dying to COVID, according to the CDC:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR3-wrg3tTKK5-9tOHPGAHWFVO3DfslkJ0KsDEPQpWmPbKtp6EsoVV2Qs1Q

That comes out to 30,500 deaths in total. That's about 5,000 fewer deaths than the amount of people who die every year from the flu.

If you're buying into all this nonsense about the Delta variant you're a blind, deaf, dumb lemming willing to listen to people who have no clue how basic math, science, or viruses work.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

"Did you know that COVID only kills 5% of the people it infects?"

Did you know that 5% is a horrific death rate? Especially as the Delta Virus is so nastily contagious that it can affect everyone in a town if they aren't extremely careful? The influenza death rate is something like .001% of cases, and influenza is considered dangerous enough that the medical authorities do their damndest to get everyone in the country a yearly flu shot to keep it from getting any higher.

Now imagine if the Delta Variant infects an entire town, as seems to be happening in a place I have dealings with, it's a town of about 10,000 people. That's 500 people dead in a single town under the best circumstances if your death rate is accurate, and if the local medical system is overwhelmed and there's no oxygen or help available to anyone, the death rate is going to be higher as people who could be saved die for lack of help. So say 800 people in a town of 10,000 die, people of all ages, and that'll definitely include some of your relatives, friends (if you have any), co-workers, neighbors, checkers at your local supermarket, and everyone in town is devastated because they've been through hell and have probably lost someone they loved.

Now imagine all that could be prevented with a simple shot, a little face mask and bottle of hand hygiene, and staying the fuck out of crowded places like movie theaters...

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

ROFL...

Dude, COVID alone killed 30,500 people in 2020, guess how much the flu killed in the previous year? 34,200:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

So yes, the flu is more dangerous than COVID. And COVID is just a variant of the common cold.

Fewer people would die if they just ate healthy, got plenty of sunshine, vitamin D, vitamin E, and some Zinc in their system.

The lockdowns and keeping people shut in does more harm than good, and that's why suicides and overdoses were up in the previous year:
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/opioid-overdoses-29-higher-2020-pandemic-study/story?id=75785104

Herd immunity would have already wiped out COVID had Demonrats not gone all in on their tyranny. Also, the death jab vaccines are becoming less and less effective. Even the pro-vaxxer researchers acknowledged Pfizer's vax is only 42% effective:
https://archive.is/SjvQy

Also there's a 62% chance you could develop an SAE from the mRNA vaccines:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChQwQBggc8TL/

So a little basic math rounding:
● You have a 3 in 1000 chance of dying to COVID if you're healthy (according to the CDC)
● You have a 4 in 10 chance of lessening the symptoms of COVID with the Pfizer shot.
● You have a 6 in 10 chance of developing an SAE or clotting from the Pfizer shot.

Which one seems safer in the long run?

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 3 years ago

No idea where you're getting your "30,500" figure from, but the same CDC site you're referencing states Very Plainly that 375,000 people died in the US from covid last year:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e1.htm

So NO, the flu is NOT "more dangerous than covid." Such a statement is ridiculous. It's tired misinformation that has been disproven repeatedly. As are the rest of your claims.

Bottom line: you're either stupid or willfully ignorant. Or both? Shrug. One thing is for Sure: YOU and yours are a large part of the reason this pandemic has been so persistently horrific. Nothing to do w/politics.

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

No idea where you're getting your "30,500" figure from

Literally the CDC.

but the same CDC site you're referencing states Very Plainly that 375,000 people died in the US from covid last year:

Actually, they cite 539,733 as the total deaths for the 2020/2021 season:
https://archive.is/FKUxW

I'm trying to find the form where they listed it as 610,000 but we'll go with the CDC's own 2020/2021 seasonal chart instead, using the update from April 7th, 2021: https://i.imgur.com/EeDMJ50.png

So first of all, the CDC openly states those are people who died WITH COVID, not FROM COVID.

The people who died from COVID are just over 6%. According to the CDC...

For 6% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death. For data on deaths involving COVID-19 by time-period, jurisdiction, and other health conditions,

So what's 6% of 539,733? Well, it's... 32,383. What was that flu number again? Oh right, 34,200.

Here's the link... again for reference:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

So according to the CDC, COVID is even less dangerous than influenza whether the figure is 610,000 deaths at 5%, or 539,733 deaths at 6%.

It's tired misinformation that has been disproven repeatedly. As are the rest of your claims.

Glad we can both agree the CDC are liars, since those are literally the links I'm using. Feel free to refute the CDC with the CDC, I'm sure that will really show the CDC who's boss. 😂

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 3 years ago

It's tough to know if you're really stupid, or a willful troll. In any case, neither your logic nor your figures track. The CDC, again, lists covid deaths as I stated already. You can try to parse the language as a "for/with" distinction, but any reasonably intelligent person can see that there's a virus, it's killing people, and the numbers are readily available.

One example of your bad faith, just because: You've arbitrarily selected that 6% figure, and attempted to skew its meaning, which is simply ridiculous. You could as usefully say that, of the ~2,000 people killed in car crashes in England, only X% were actually killed by the crash. The others just developed complications later on, in the hospital.

You're an ideologue for sure, an idiot by all indications, and you're spreading dangerous misinformation, couched as some sort of calculated data.

It's not. Nothing you've said is accurate.

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

"for/with" distinction, but any reasonably intelligent person can see that there's a virus, it's killing people, and the numbers are readily available.

There's actually a huge difference between dying FROM COVID and dying WITH COVID. Let me give you an example, some health authorities have been reporting suicides and gunshot wounds as COVID-related deaths because the people who died HAD COVID upon their time of death:
https://cbs12.com/news/local/uncovering-a-gun-shot-parkinsons-and-hip-fracture-as-mislabeled-covid-19-deaths

Now why would they do this? Government handouts:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/17/politics/federal-aid-covid-new-york-hospitals/index.html

You could as usefully say that, of the ~2,000 people killed in car crashes in England, only X% were actually killed by the crash. The others just developed complications later on, in the hospital.

No, I'm literally interpreting the 6% as the CDC has. Here is the passage you can read for yourself...

"The number of deaths that mention one or more of the conditions indicated is shown for all deaths involving COVID-19 and by age groups. For 6% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death. For data on deaths involving COVID-19 by time-period, jurisdiction, and other health conditions"

Highlighted the section for you in the link directly from the CDC website, here you go ace:
https://archive.is/FKUxW#selection-4559.153-4559.604

You're an ideologue for sure, an idiot by all indications, and you're spreading dangerous misinformation, couched as some sort of calculated data.

I agree that the CDC is definitely spreading a lot of misinformation, which is precisely where I got all of my data from. I'm glad we agree on that much.

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 3 years ago

I'll repeat: you're either being purposely disingenuous, or you simply don't know how to process information. Every one of your talking points has been EXHAUSTIVELY debunked/explained. On the off chance you're not simply an idiot ideologue, I've tried to explain why the numbers you (continue to) cite simply Don't Mean What You Say They Do. This is where I'd give up on most absurd arguments, but we happen to be in the middle of a Terrible Pandemic, and people like you are making it WORSE.

So: simply put, your "6%" figure ONLY MEANS THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE PRESENTING, when the person died. This does NOT mean that only 6% of the sample size "died from covid." A simple for instance: if you catch the virus, develop symptoms, have to go to the ICU, and die. . .They Will List Every Causative On Your Certificate. IDIOT. So if you die from pneumonia, from a heart attack, from a cascading failure in your immune system, etc, etc, ETC. . .it'll STILL BE REGISTERED.

Truly Terrible people like yourself then try and twist those numbers, and claim that there was "something else" responsible for those deaths. Which is, of course, ABSURD. To repeat; it's as if you're ignoring the car crash and claiming the person died from shock and sepsis, a week later at the hospital.

You're making it Worse For Everybody, spreading misinformation. In your warped worldview, there's no virus, 99% of the Doctors on the planet are in on a conspiracy, and you're a special snowflake that somehow sees the light. Sorry, exactly the opposite is true. You're either a very, very stupid person, or very, very terrible.

Or both.

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

Every one of your talking points has been EXHAUSTIVELY debunked/explained

No, actually they haven't, unless... again, you're saying the CDC are liars?

we happen to be in the middle of a Terrible Pandemic, and people like you are making it WORSE.

By quoting seemingly irrefutable statistics from the CDC? That sounds like someone on the tight-end of panic. The CDC literally said it has a 99.7% survival rate. So why are you being so frantic?

They Will List Every Causative On Your Certificate. IDIOT. So if you die from pneumonia, from a heart attack, from a cascading failure in your immune system, etc, etc, ETC. . .it'll STILL BE REGISTERED.

Actually... they're doing more than that. They're listing unrelated causes of deaths as COVID, so they're actually INFLATING the numbers:
https://cbs12.com/news/local/uncovering-a-gun-shot-parkinsons-and-hip-fracture-as-mislabeled-covid-19-deaths

Explain to me how suicide and gunshot wounds count as dying FROM COVID?

You're either a very, very stupid person, or very, very terrible.

CDC literally says it has an average 99.7% survival rate. Here is the information directly from the CDC:
https://twitter.com/GovRonDeSantis/status/1308824541104398337

So again, you're calling them liars?

Are you saying that it doesn't have a 99.7% survival rate? Are you saying everyone who has had COVID and survived are defying some kind of cosmic rule?

You're not making a whole lot of sense here.

If it was as terrible as the media claimed, then the Taliban would have been too sick to take back Kabul. If it was as bad as the media claimed, Florida would see tens of millions of people lying dead in the streets. Obviously, none of that is happening.

So, again, are you saying the CDC are liars with their 99.7% survival rate or not?

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 3 years ago

No, I'm not saying the CDC are liars. I'm saying You are. To repeat: you're quoting out-of-context information, and claiming the numbers you quote mean wildly different things than what they actually do.

Statements like "they're listing other things as covid" are absurd talking points; a couple outlier events HARDLY mean what you claim they do. Again: the collective medical community has NOT come together in a huge conspiracy to make people think there's a deadly pandemic. You have Not cracked some secret, diabolical plan. You are NOT special. You're a small minded, almost intelligent muppet, parroting tired talking points that anyone with basic intelligence and access to Google can easily disprove.

And linking to Ron Desantis' twitter feed in a tired attempt to prove your misinformation is *Not* evidence of some Deep Conspiracy. It just indicates where your head is at. Fact: there's a novel coronavirus that's Killing People Worldwide at an alarming rate. It's clear who the problem is: people like you and DeSantis.

Look at where the figures are the worst; it's Very Clear: People like you are the biggest part of why things are so bad.

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

Statements like "they're listing other things as covid" are absurd talking points; a couple outlier events HARDLY mean what you claim they do. Again: the collective medical community has NOT come together in a huge conspiracy to make people think there's a deadly pandemic.

LOL funny you mention that, because they have.

Check out the documents a nurse supplied from behind-the-scenes:
https://archive.is/AifKU

All those SAEs? Pfizer knew about them as far back as November, 2020.

You can see the ones they list in their document starting around page 66 or 67 here:
https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pdf

You can see those SAEs in real-life action over on this Telegram page:
https://t.me/s/covidvaccineinjuries

In fact, those SAEs have been known for mRNA vaccines since 2007 (FYI: mRNA technology has been in development for more than two decades): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17148587/

Also, the FDA, CDC, DOD, and WHO are prohibiting the tracking of vaccine-related fatalities and SAEs. You never stopped to ask why?

Facebook is also removing groups tracking SAEs:
https://reclaimthenet.org/facebook-removes-covid-19-vaccine-victims-group/

Paypal is banning groups tracking death rates:
https://thecovidblog.com/2021/08/09/breaking-the-covid-blog-and-covid-legal-usa-banned-from-paypal/

You never stopped to ask why?

And linking to Ron Desantis' twitter feed in a tired attempt to prove your misinformation is *Not* evidence of some Deep Conspiracy.

Okay, here's the CDC page showing an average 99.97% survival rate:
https://archive.is/kbxs0

Happy now?

Look at where the figures are the worst; it's Very Clear:

Australia... even with lockdowns, mask mandates, and forced vaccinations:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2021/aug/19/covid-australia-live-update-nsw-outbreak-vaccines-young-sydney-hotspots-melbourne-lockdown-queensland-border-army

...You were saying?

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

"Dude, COVID alone killed 30,500 people in 2020, guess how much the flu killed in the previous year? 34,200:"

First you say that COVID has a horrific 5% death-per-case rate, then you say that it only killed 30,000 people in 2020! Both statistics obviously courtesy of your own ass rather than peer-reviewed research.

Fuck off, go boil your head, you're going on "ignore", you ought to be stuffed with nails, etc. For the rest of you, here's the John Hopkins COVID information website, where you can get information from real scientists specializing in contagious diseases.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

reply

[–] cyguration (3945) 3 years ago

First you say that COVID has a horrific 5% death-per-case rate, then you say that it only killed 30,000 people in 2020! Both statistics obviously courtesy of your own ass rather than peer-reviewed research.

I'm glad we can both agree that the CDC is terrible at research, since that's where the data came from:
https://archive.is/FKUxW

Also, there's a correction, the CDC stated it's a 6% death-rate of COVID-only fatalities out of the 539,733 people, as of April 7th, 2021.

reply

[–] FilmBuff (6855) 3 years ago

It doesn't kill even close to 5% of the people it infects. The exact number is impossible to know, because we don't know how many people have been infected, but the best estimate is about 0.1%. That means for every 1,000 people who contract covid, 1 dies. Then you have to factor in that it primarily kills extremely old and/or people who are already weak for some other reason. If you're under 70 and don't have a significant illness, you're no more likely to die from catching the flu than you are covid-19.

reply

[–] AP (5261) 3 years ago

I’m interested. The fights won’t be on the level of most Asian martial arts movies but I like the MCU and the action sequences are generally good so I’ll give it a shot.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

Will you go see it on the big screen or just wait a month & a half when it hits Disney plus?

Personally, I've honestly not decided. I'm leaning towards just waiting for it to hit streaming for now. But I guess we'll see

reply

[–] AP (5261) 3 years ago

My wife and I have a toddler and an infant so going to the movies is tough. We’re vaccinated and everything so we aren’t opposed to going to the theatre but we might have to wait, too.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

Seems like a bunch of the major studios are shortening the theatrical run of the films. From the usual 90 days to 45 days.

That's good news to anyone who just wants to stream it from the comfort of their own home

reply

[–] TandyMan (10667) 3 years ago

Nope. I have no idea what this movie even is. The trailers are filled with vague random imagery. I've never read a single Shang-Chi comic. So.... it's something MCU I think? Is my impression from the marketing. Looks like it has kung fu in it I guess. The "hook" is eluding me completely as to what it makes it any different than all the other kung fu movies.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

It's basically a Kung fu movie set in the MCU. With some Alien tech. You know, the 'bracelet' thingies in the trailers.

I think It's basically Black Panther but with/for Asians. Or something like that.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Well, a kung-fu movie set in MCU sounds like a heck of a lot of fun, it's a pity I'm going to have to wait for the streaming release.

reply

[–] OuterSpace (114) 3 years ago

Not at all.

Unless word of mouth is really strong I'll just wait until it's free to stream or something.

reply

[–] enriquesingh (1781) 3 years ago

Couldn't care less... I just came here looking to read more about one of the lead actors vs the new Disney CEO.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

Dude just went absolutely nuts on a comment that wasn't even malicious or offensive. He was probably just looking to stir the pot

reply

[–] enriquesingh (1781) 3 years ago

Yeah... he totally interpreted it the wrong way... what a dumbass.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

i wasn't.
the trailers looked like cgi blandness.
but...
the early notices are really good.
now...the early notices are usually a good deal nicer than the actual hard reviews that come out. so we'll see.
the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
but i'm now going to see it opening day.
whereas before the notices, i was more in a 'i'll catch it at some point' mindset.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

Early reactions are ALWAYS positive for some reason. Even if the film is shite. Remember that time BvS got a 'standing ovation'?

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

true. however, this is different from that, in that it's coming from multiple people at multiple screenings.

when bvs actually screened for critics, the reactions were universally negative.

we're hearing lots and lots of critics say nice things coming right out of the screening on twitter.

certainly, i'm all on board for taking a wait and see attitude.

i remember there were some really good early responses to captain marvel, & i thought that film was numbing cgi blandness. one of my least favourite mcu films for sure.

but i think the uniformity of good early notices holds promise that this might be something different.

& at the very least, i am now willing to shell out for an opening night seat.

whereas before, i was fence-sitting, & likely to go during a weekday matinee, or even wait for d+.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

good summary here:

https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/shang-chi-first-reactions-fantastical-full-of-heart-and-blessed-with-epic-action/

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4088) 3 years ago

If you're sold & onboard, good. More power to ya. I really mean that

Personally, still gonna wait for a lil bit. I'm not just sold by first reaction...anymore. Even as recent as WW84. The first reactions were like me, "This is a feel good movie" & a lot of "this is the movie we need right now"

reply

[–] wrlord (1106) 3 years ago

No. They've eviscerated the character from the comic books in order to be woke.

reply