MovieChat Forums > Boazkoolrean1
Boazkoolrean1 (42)
Posts
Replies
SPOILERS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM:
I don’t understand how you can describe a film as being one joke, and when explaining what the one joke is, describe the movie’s plot. Like... an overconfident and condescending man gets cut down to size (literally) by getting turned into a pigeon. Why wouldn’t the jokes be based on that? That has a lot of comedic potential so they went with it, that’s what the movie is about. Not sure why someone would fault it for that.
The goons were generic and they didn’t have a reason not to be, they weren’t important, but I wouldn’t call the villain generic, other than his drone technology. He was more interesting because he assisted in the movies message of how good and bad in people were blurred and how violence just led to more violence and more pain. Though I have to say, he was exactly the same as Zemo from Captain America: Civil War, and predictable as such (innocent guy where “heroes” came into his country and saved the day carelessly causing destruction that killed his people and loved ones, sending him on a path of revenge against the heroes, turning into the bad guy) . The movie was quite predictable pretty often, it seemed they didn’t know how to foreshadow correctly and gave too much information. Killian’s interaction with the agent he had working for him mostly gave it away, then as soon as he said “Kyrgyzstan”, I knew it. What he said to that agent earlier gave it away and they just completely confirmed it, and yep. Was a great idea, I just don’t like how they made it obvious before the reveal. Subtlety was non existent when it came to hinting at later plot reveals in this movie.
I saw it earlier today, let me know how you like it!
Correction: it was never Walter’s idea nor intention to turn Lance into a pigeon. His original serum actually was to turn a person invisible. He was testing the serum out on a pigeon feather to turn it invisible, which it did. Lance mistook that mixture for a glass of water and drank it. That’s what turned him into a pigeon rather than invisible. Just setting that straight.
I agree that it had a lot of cliches and a lot of the major plot points were very predictable but I didn’t really mind because the movie was entertaining. I took it as a kid’s movie, meant to be fun and humorous, rather than complex or elaborate. The latter would be wasted on a younger audience. While I loved Spiderverse, I felt it was a more mature movie, it got quite heavy and dark quite a few times. Spies seemed more for kids. For movies like those, I don’t expect amazing writing, kids won’t care or appreciate it. I laughed, I felt for the characters, I cheered, so all in all it did its job, I was entertained.
Because no movie plot has directly called for it. This movie is about alternate dimension spider people. They didn’t just throw a black version Spider-Man in there for no reason. The movie is about alternate Spider-People, so they used alternate Spider-People from the comics.
Also, Deadpool is pretty pan...
Uh... in a movie about parallel universes lol how is that a cop out, they’re literally using actual alternate dimension spider-people from the actual comics, in a movie that’s about spider-people from alternate dimensions. The only way it could be a cop out is if the movie invented the character. All the spider people in it are from the actual comics
I actually liked the ending as it was, while I do see a set up for a sequel, but not in the ending itself. I also thought it ridiculous to kill off a whole plane of people too. But I doubt we’d see any of it. I don’t think any of that would be in the sequel, I think it just implies their power, shows they’re not done, and the audience can assume that the two survivors died on the plane thing between the two movies. I loved the ending as it was, gave that whole sinister, ambiguous, unhappy ending vibe, if you forget the whole killing a whole plane of people to kill 2 people thing. Highly doubtful they’d try to make a whole second movie based on that. First movie had all types of rooms to get through, a second movie about only one, would be very bland. I agree it seemed to set up a sequel, but a sequel having nothing to do with the survivors of this movie or their plane demise. I assume they’ll just do a different set of rooms with different “players” for a second movie.
I think hereditary was only good around the end. Then I was like, alright, that was a cool concept. But I feel like it’s a movie that I’d just tell my friends what happened rather than recommending them watching it, because most of it felt like a major waste of time. That’s the only time during a horror movie where I was constantly checking my watch in impatience, waiting for something to happen. Granted, when it finally did, it was good, but it sure felt like an hour+ of my time was wasted to get there.
I’m confused on which part of that comment is talking about the comics and which part is referring to the movie.
I disagree since peter Parker is always the main character in all of them. We already have a current movie series ongoing with Peter Parker as Spider-Man. They did something different. He was in it, and important to it, but he wasn’t front and center like he always is. People can have their Peter Parker by watching live action MCU Spider-Man. An animated peter Parker movie series coming out alongside a live action one just makes no sense.
Aladdin
Do I have to pick one? The movies I really loved this year are:
Into The Spiderverse
Venom
Avengers: Infinity War
Ralph Breaks The Internet
Teen Titans Go! To The Movies
Upgrade
Deadpool 2
Ready Player One
I think that’s it.
View all replies >