49ers Forum Movie / Music / TV & General entertainment thread

[Ataal]

3 minutes ago, Chrissooner49er said:

 

 

I'll respect that and leave it alone as I already said plenty. 

I really wish we could have gotten an honest, true-to-the-comic Gambit. If not in his own flick, then in an X-Men movie. The one in "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" really wasn't him. The X-Men were always my fave group and Gambit my favorite of the series. I loved the storyline he was introduced (Nanny trying to save mutants from the Shadowking by regressing them to pre-adolescence) as well as the one that followed...Genosha! Now that story was amazing. 

Not sure if anyone's going to pull one of my cards here, but I'm 44 and have never read a comic book in my life.  Unless half an Archie book that was sold at the register of the grocery store counts?  Probably not...  Seemed like an expensive hobby and mom was already working 2 jobs to keep us off the streets.  By the time I was making my own money, I wasn't really interested.

So, I'm sure it makes a difference in how enjoyable the movies are.  I know from experience that having read everything by Michael Crichton, most of Tolkien's work, etc... made watching the movies....different.  Not always bad.   Definitely not always good.  More critical, for sure.  Disappointment, when something that was your favorite part of the book didn't make it to the big screen.  

So, while I may not agree with your assessment of this particular movie, I get it.  

[Chrissooner49er]

22 minutes ago, Ftn49 said:

Did you see the cartoon in the 90s? Was that a fairly close adaptation?

Oh yes. In fact, I had every episode recorded...of course, that was VHS and entirely unwatchable now. 😢

[Chrissooner49er]

17 minutes ago, Ataal said:

Not sure if anyone's going to pull one of my cards here, but I'm 44 and have never read a comic book in my life.  Unless half an Archie book that was sold at the register of the grocery store counts?  Probably not...  Seemed like an expensive hobby and mom was already working 2 jobs to keep us off the streets.  By the time I was making my own money, I wasn't really interested.

So, I'm sure it makes a difference in how enjoyable the movies are.  I know from experience that having read everything by Michael Crichton, most of Tolkien's work, etc... made watching the movies....different.  Not always bad.   Definitely not always good.  More critical, for sure.  Disappointment, when something that was your favorite part of the book didn't make it to the big screen.  

So, while I may not agree with your assessment of this particular movie, I get it.  

I have 6 boxes of comic books. About the time my wife and I had our 1st or 2nd child, I realized comics were decreasing in overall creativity--both story and art--but increasing in cost. This was 1995 and they were just getting up to $3 or $4 each issue. So, I quit. That was tough to do since I had been collecting for over 10 years. I was an avid X-Men fan most of all, so that is the bulk of my collection--yes, every single one is in it's own protective sleeve, too. We do pull them out every great once in awhile and have a fun time reading them. So, yes: preserving the characters in transition from comic to movie is very important to me. 

The more I re-read Tolkien (I cannot count how many times I have read them; those are some of my favorite books of all time!), the more I realize Peter Jackson interpreted the books rather than told Tolkien's story. I still watch them, countless times (my favorite of these is "Fellowship", both the movie and book) and enjoy them, but cannot help but be a little disappointed at the inaccuracies. 

[Ataal]

4 minutes ago, Chrissooner49er said:

I have 6 boxes of comic books. About the time my wife and I had our 1st or 2nd child, I realized comics were decreasing in overall creativity--both story and art--but increasing in cost. This was 1995 and they were just getting up to $3 or $4 each issue. So, I quit. That was tough to do since I had been collecting for over 10 years. I was an avid X-Men fan most of all, so that is the bulk of my collection--yes, every single one is in it's own protective sleeve, too. We do pull them out every great once in awhile and have a fun time reading them. So, yes: preserving the characters in transition from comic to movie is very important to me. 

The more I re-read Tolkien (I cannot count how many times I have read them; those are some of my favorite books of all time!), the more I realize Peter Jackson interpreted the books rather than told Tolkien's story. I still watch them, countless times (my favorite of these is "Fellowship", both the movie and book) and enjoy them, but cannot help but be a little disappointed at the inaccuracies. 

I forgave a lot of inaccuracies of The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings due to how well done the finished product was.  You could tell a lot of hard work and passion went into those movies.   Those movies are the only movies I have actually purchased(all extended editions) from Amazon Prime Video so I can stream them anytime I get the urge to do a marathon on a weekend or something.  I still have DVDs in a box somewhere, but I haven't owned a DVD player in probably a decade.

[Ftn49]

I liked the Hobbit but honestly Lord of the rings is just too dry for me. I did like his predecessor Robert Jordan who wrote the Wheel of time series which is being adapted (butchered) by Amazon at the moment. Some of it is a bit dated now, it started in the 90s and there are some other issues with it however its size and scope are unmatched in the fantasy realm. I've read (and listened) to that series probably 10 times over by now. The first book of that series is (rightly) criticized for being very Lord of the ringsish. It was an homage to Tolken from Jordan and after the first book quickly transitions away from it.

[rudyZ]

3 hours ago, Chrissooner49er said:

The more I re-read Tolkien (I cannot count how many times I have read them; those are some of my favorite books of all time!), the more I realize Peter Jackson interpreted the books rather than told Tolkien's story. I still watch them, countless times (my favorite of these is "Fellowship", both the movie and book) and enjoy them, but cannot help but be a little disappointed at the inaccuracies.

I understand why people can criticize movies for not holding up to the reading material, sometimes it's just outrageously wrong. But other times, I give the movie people some slack, because it's hard to go as deep in a 2-3 hours movie as a book goes in many many more hours. Movies often have to remove most if not all the inner monologue, the descriptions, and the emotions of a moment. It has the benefit of pictures, but often, if it wants to convey a feeling, it has to make a character say it. So it's definitely hard. 

One of my favourite books is also one of my favourite movies: Contact. I think it was amazingly written, with tons of details, tons of thought-provoking ideas, lots of perspectives. The movie had to cut down some of those perspectives, and I always felt it streamlined the ideas of the book, often merging two characters within one, and creating a romance that didn't exist in the book just to had tension and a little bit of conflict to the movie. Most of the ideas of the book were in the movies, but rearranged in different ways. And the other big elements of the books that were cut weren't necessarily missed in the movie. It was a downright streamlined version of the book, well written, tighter, shorter, more to the point, and I appreciate both the book and the movie for their own strengths. Honestly, I think that people who get pissed because they champion the book material over everything else are a bit pedantic. "I know better because I read the books, you peasant!"... there's good in all the different versions of LotR, or A Song of ice and fire, or Harry Potter, marvel comics, etc. It may not all be for everyone, but I can't blame anyone for liking one more than the other.

[adamq]

10 hours ago, Ftn49 said:

To each his own, I'm happy there are people on Tony's side. 

The parents thing is problematic on Cap's side but I understand why he kept it from Tony. It couldn't bring his parents back and it wasn't Bucky's fault given you can't hold him responsible when he was not in control of his own mind.

I was always on Tony's side.. Why are they allowed to be vigilantes planet wide, picking and choosing which conflicts to be a part of?

[Ftn49]

9 hours ago, adamq said:

I was always on Tony's side.. Why are they allowed to be vigilantes planet wide, picking and choosing which conflicts to be a part of?

As opposed to bureaucrats doing picking for them? Not to mention if an event happens and they have to wait for a tribunal to act. In the universe they are in that delay could be deadly. I mean the senate and congress works roughly what? 4 hours a month?

[NcFinest9erFan]

7 minutes ago, Ftn49 said:

As opposed to bureaucrats doing picking for them? Not to mention if an event happens and they have to wait for a tribunal to act. In the universe they are in that delay could be deadly. I mean the senate and congress works roughly what? 4 hours a month?

Agree. This was always my stance on it. 

[Chrissooner49er]

17 hours ago, Ftn49 said:

I liked the Hobbit but honestly Lord of the rings is just too dry for me. I did like his predecessor Robert Jordan who wrote the Wheel of time series which is being adapted (butchered) by Amazon at the moment. Some of it is a bit dated now, it started in the 90s and there are some other issues with it however its size and scope are unmatched in the fantasy realm. I've read (and listened) to that series probably 10 times over by now. The first book of that series is (rightly) criticized for being very Lord of the ringsish. It was an homage to Tolken from Jordan and after the first book quickly transitions away from it.

Tolkien is the father of modern fantasy. There was nothing like it when he wrote "The Hobbit"--which was aimed at children. He published that before WWII and LotR was published in the 50s, I believe. So, nearly every fantasy writer is at least a little LotR-ish. Many are trying to emulate the master and originator. Some have a fresh perspective while others are hacks (Paolini! Looking at you and your Eragon crud!). I think I got up to book 11 with Jordan and never finished. I liked it to begin with, but it became painfully obvious he was trying to draw things out. Matt was my favorite character. With the Amazon adaptation, I took 1 look at the reason for the ratings it was being given and knew they were going to butcher it. They want to make all fantasy like GoT. Never watched the show, but I read the 1st book. While it was good, I could not stomach some of the peripheral storylines and never read another. 

[9erFreak77]

17 hours ago, Chrissooner49er said:

I have 6 boxes of comic books. About the time my wife and I had our 1st or 2nd child, I realized comics were decreasing in overall creativity--both story and art--but increasing in cost. This was 1995 and they were just getting up to $3 or $4 each issue. So, I quit. That was tough to do since I had been collecting for over 10 years. I was an avid X-Men fan most of all, so that is the bulk of my collection--yes, every single one is in it's own protective sleeve, too. We do pull them out every great once in awhile and have a fun time reading them. So, yes: preserving the characters in transition from comic to movie is very important to me. 

The more I re-read Tolkien (I cannot count how many times I have read them; those are some of my favorite books of all time!), the more I realize Peter Jackson interpreted the books rather than told Tolkien's story. I still watch them, countless times (my favorite of these is "Fellowship", both the movie and book) and enjoy them, but cannot help but be a little disappointed at the inaccuracies. 

How did you like the earlier X-Men movies? Particularly The Last Stand……did you know Wolverine can kill The Pheonix? LOL.

[Ataal]

1 hour ago, Chrissooner49er said:

Tolkien is the father of modern fantasy. There was nothing like it when he wrote "The Hobbit"--which was aimed at children. He published that before WWII and LotR was published in the 50s, I believe. So, nearly every fantasy writer is at least a little LotR-ish. Many are trying to emulate the master and originator. Some have a fresh perspective while others are hacks (Paolini! Looking at you and your Eragon crud!). I think I got up to book 11 with Jordan and never finished. I liked it to begin with, but it became painfully obvious he was trying to draw things out. Matt was my favorite character. With the Amazon adaptation, I took 1 look at the reason for the ratings it was being given and knew they were going to butcher it. They want to make all fantasy like GoT. Never watched the show, but I read the 1st book. While it was good, I could not stomach some of the peripheral storylines and never read another. 

My second favorite fantasy writer is R. A. Salvatore.  I think I was around 12(1989ish?) when he started writing about Drizzt Do'Urden and friends.  Fantastic stories.  Would have loved to see a major movie production based on his books.  

[Chrissooner49er]

1 hour ago, 9erFreak77 said:

How did you like the earlier X-Men movies? Particularly The Last Stand……did you know Wolverine can kill The Pheonix? LOL.

Considering they were some of the 1st modern cinematic comic hero movie attempts? I liked the 1st, loved the 2nd, was a bit disappointed with the 3rd (but still like it)--especially when I heard Gambit was originally planned to be included. The guy who played Sawyer in "Lost" was asked but turned it down, from what I understand. 

Yes, that death scene...well, what can you say? They sure loved to play up the love triangle between Cyclops or Wolverine & Phoenix. It was hardly a thing in the comics. Cyke and Jean were always a thing (if Jean was alive, that is. 🙄 ). She actually offed herself in the comic (the 1st death around)...triggered a nearby weapon system when she realized her fellow X-Men may die to defend her from the Shi'ar Imperial Guard (they were trying to arrest her for her actions as Dark Phoenix--which the Professor had exorcised from her). They were fighting on the moon. Cool story.

[Chrissooner49er]

15 minutes ago, Ataal said:

My second favorite fantasy writer is R. A. Salvatore.  I think I was around 12(1989ish?) when he started writing about Drizzt Do'Urden and friends.  Fantastic stories.  Would have loved to see a major movie production based on his books.  

I have read a lot of those. I prefer the original trilogy over most of the rest, though. "The Crystal Shard" was my favorite. It would be a tricky topic to do his story on any screen, IMO. Sad, but true. 

[9erFreak77]

40 minutes ago, Chrissooner49er said:

Considering they were some of the 1st modern cinematic comic hero movie attempts? I liked the 1st, loved the 2nd, was a bit disappointed with the 3rd (but still like it)--especially when I heard Gambit was originally planned to be included. The guy who played Sawyer in "Lost" was asked but turned it down, from what I understand. 

Yes, that death scene...well, what can you say? They sure loved to play up the love triangle between Cyclops or Wolverine & Phoenix. It was hardly a thing in the comics. Cyke and Jean were always a thing (if Jean was alive, that is. 🙄 ). She actually offed herself in the comic (the 1st death around)...triggered a nearby weapon system when she realized her fellow X-Men may die to defend her from the Shi'ar Imperial Guard (they were trying to arrest her for her actions as Dark Phoenix--which the Professor had exorcised from her). They were fighting on the moon. Cool story.

The 90’s Xmen cartoon was accurate lol……i loved that cartoon even though i was to old to watch cartoons lol.