• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

on fleek [dLtMs0 v 5.5]

Status
Not open for further replies.
206

I just don't think he's a very good actor. I've seen worse, but I've seen better. Didn't much care for his Sherlock.

Desinishon said:
O! But it's based on something law right!
Click to expand...
Civil War comic event was about secret identities, which don't really exist at all in the MCU. Civil War movie is about superhero accountability and oversight. At least in terms of the law side of things.
 
207

I'm not mentioning civil war particular event.
though you're right but it's same thing in film. Who want everyone registered under the law is fighting against who don't want to be enforced under that law.
 
209

Only if you break it right down to "Cap vs. Iron Man", yeah. Otherwise, all they have in common is the name. Not that is a bad thing, as the MCU has always done things its own way, but...eh.
 
210

If it were a book, I'd be unhappy about it having a different story, since I always enjoy seeing my imagination come to life on a big screen. Comics books though; reading them is already like watching a movie, so I'm in favour of a different plot in the actual movie.
 
211

Honestly, I think a bit of creative license is to be expected, and should be encouraged, because movies based on books never capture the essence of the book properly. Things need to be cut, people are cast poorly, and generally people are not happy with it. Look at the Harry Potter films...or better yet, the Hobbit trilogy. Or, if you want an extreme example, look the Shannara Chronicles TV show. Watching that caused me near-physical pain...
 
212

While the Hobbit movies have a fair share of problems, I quite liked the way the Harry Potter movies went about it. They were great, and the tones, the atmosphere, evolved with the characters much better in the movies, to be honest. People complain about the Hobbit trilogy often, but most people love the Harry Potter films, as I do. Speaking of the Hobbit trilogy, LotR did it well. :p
 
214

The Hobbit really did not need three films...two perhaps, but not three. Whilst the LOTR films did screw about with things a little, I think overall they were brilliant. Cutting out Saruman was a mistake (and the extended cut didn't do him justice either) but cutting out Tom Bombadil is the best thing they could have done. Asides Eowyn, casting was pretty solid too. Good soundtrack, special effects were nice for the time...much more engaging than the books, which I found horribly tedious.
 
215

They did cut a lot of the not-so-exciting Tolkien stuff. The LotR trilogy did pretty well in leading you on lore-wise but telling you just the right amount for you to ponder on it and want to find out more.

Can't praise the Hobbit films the same way. Jolly dwarven antics, cool. Smaug, cool. Freeman is the perfect Bilbo. The rest? Big, sloppy, pointless clusterfuck.
 
216

I'd read the book beforehand, so I knew who the dwarves were, but I frequently forgot which one was which. It was fun watching them, but they were all pretty faceless and forgettable individually.
 
217

Yeah, definitely. Probably even more so in the book, where they were mostly differentiated by their lineage and backstories. A la Tolkien.

They went for visual distinction in the films, but forgot to create characters aside from the few that were focused on. Ah yes, the classic archetypes; the old one, the leader guy, and the one that didn't look like a dwarf whatsoever and is only memorable because of that cringey Hollywood romance subplot.
 
218

They were kinda like the Trumpten Firemen...I can rattle off their names, but I'll be damned if I can put faces to them. Which is a shame, because I can remember them being pretty interesting (well, some of them) in the book. Visual distinction doesn't really help as much when you've got such a massive cast and only a couple of hours to play with...and more important things to focus on besides that.

That they even went so far as to create a new elf and give her more character than the canon characters was quite irritating, too. Speaking of elves, about all I can remember of Thranduil from the movies is his eyebrows, too. Lee Pace was a good choice for him, but his design...wow. xD
 
219

It always irks me how canonically natural blondes in films tend to have super dark eyebrows. Just to rub it in that they're wearing a wig. The LotR elves and half of the cast in GoT come to mind.

Hey, at least the eyebrows weren't what first came to mind, here. I thought of that huge blooming elk mount of his.
 
220

It's always looked really, really strange to me when that happens...you'd think they'd invent wigs for eyebrows or something. Or at least dye them/makeup the hell out of them so it doesn't look quite so obvious.

Real men ride elks now.
 
222

Lads, I'm sad because of football. My husbando left me.

On the other hand, I like this image.
Spoiler:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top