Wow, a lot of Dark World endorsements. Maybe I will have to add it to the list for now...
*** MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE *** [Staff message on OP]
3,565,273 Views |
27820 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by TCTTS
Note: Mine wasn't so much as an endorsement as a reminder to myself, hey I should probably rewatch it because I've only seen it once
TCTTS said:
Wow, a lot of Dark World endorsements. Maybe I will have to add it to the list for now...
Seriously, it's got a ton of Loki and maybe his best role in the MCU. You get a better understanding of his motivations, and he and Thor's relationship. Plus you know they are setting up Loki for a full redemption/hero turn in Infinity War, and seeing the entire arc of him and Thor will resonate more.
Loki is def gonna sacrifice himself to save Thor
That would be pretty awesome.
Kearney McRaven said:
As a prep course for the next Avenger movie, I would watch the following in this order. If you're still wanting more , then maybe Captain America - The First Avenger.
Avengers 1
GOTG 1
Thor Dark World
Avengers Age of Ultron
Captain America Civil War
GOTG 2 (I was disappointed the first time because so much time was spent on Ego, but it keeps getting better each time I watch it.)
Thor Ragnarok ( torn between this one and GOTG2 as my favorite)
I would add that it is important to watch the extra scenes after the credits.
I've seen GOTG2 twice in the past year, so I'm all good on that one. And I just don't know if I can muster the enthusiasm for AOU, but I'll make it a tentative watch.
This brings up a new Soul Stone theory I found today:TexasAggie_02 said:
interesting thought i just had. In Avengers 1, loki tries to take over Tony's mind, but the arc reactor in his chest causes the scepter to have "performance issues." Seems odd that a man-made object could actually shield one from the power of an Infinity Stone.
not to mention, at the end of IM3, tony has the arc reactor removed from his chest, so he is now no longer immune to the mind stone.
Marvel has put out this image in advertising for IW. The picture in each stone corresponds to the individual who is associated with each stone in the MCU so far. Who's in the SOUL picture? Iron Man....
Plenty more to read online of different reasons why it might be connected to him. Not sure I can wrap my mind around that yet. We'll see.
that's definitely interesting.
Tessaract image has cap front and center. But Loki has it
Aether image has Thor front and center, but the Collector has it.
Power image has Star Lord front and center, but Nova Corps has it.
The only two that are "correct" (as far as we know) are The Time and Mind Stones.
Could be that Iron Man plays a huge role in the retrieval of the soul gem, and that is why he is there. Maybe they try to get to it before Thanos?
Tessaract image has cap front and center. But Loki has it
Aether image has Thor front and center, but the Collector has it.
Power image has Star Lord front and center, but Nova Corps has it.
The only two that are "correct" (as far as we know) are The Time and Mind Stones.
Could be that Iron Man plays a huge role in the retrieval of the soul gem, and that is why he is there. Maybe they try to get to it before Thanos?
Did you watch all of the extra scenes? Especially the one with Ayeshia/Kismet/Her talking about the new birthing pod and creating Adam. I read the post downplaying the Soul Stone is in the new birthing pod and the possession of The Sovereign, but it seems like the right time to drop a clue. Plus, it makes since where they get all of their power from. Also, she should be referring to Adam Warlock. I'm not sure when he will debut, but he is central to the upcoming story. This is what happens when you were a comic book crazed kid, and all your favorite stories become mega blockbuster movies.
But the person central in each of those images is the person who first encountered each of the stones in the MCU. Or better to say the one who's film the stone was in.TexasAggie_02 said:
that's definitely interesting.
Tessaract image has cap front and center. But Loki has it
Aether image has Thor front and center, but the Collector has it.
Power image has Star Lord front and center, but Nova Corps has it.
The only two that are "correct" (as far as we know) are The Time and Mind Stones.
Could be that Iron Man plays a huge role in the retrieval of the soul gem, and that is why he is there. Maybe they try to get to it before Thanos?
I'm actually a bit disappointed it isn't closer to 3 hours. SO much to cover in this film to do it right.TexasAggie_02 said:
sameFTACO97 said:I'm actually a bit disappointed it isn't closer to 3 hours. SO much to cover in this film to do it right.TexasAggie_02 said:
Mine would be, for purpose of infinity stones...
Avengers (first introduction of Thanos)
Thor 2
Guardians 1
Ultron
Dr Strange
Cap 1 introduces the tesseract, if you want to watch that, but doesn't really mention it as a stone. Winter Soldier fallout leads to finding the scepter in Ultron, but doesn't really deal with stones at all. However, it's such an awesome movie.
Avengers (first introduction of Thanos)
Thor 2
Guardians 1
Ultron
Dr Strange
Cap 1 introduces the tesseract, if you want to watch that, but doesn't really mention it as a stone. Winter Soldier fallout leads to finding the scepter in Ultron, but doesn't really deal with stones at all. However, it's such an awesome movie.
TexasAggie_02 said:
that's definitely interesting.
Tessaract image has cap front and center. But Loki has it But it was first seen in Cap1
Aether image has Thor front and center, but the Collector has it. first seen in Thor 2
Power image has Star Lord front and center, but Nova Corps has it. Starlord found it and somewhat controlled it
The only two that are "correct" (as far as we know) are The Time and Mind Stones.
Could be that Iron Man plays a huge role in the retrieval of the soul gem, and that is why he is there. Maybe they try to get to it before Thanos?
My guesses in bold as to why they used those characters. They aren't going to put Nova prime on a promotional poster for the Orb, etc. Stark could just have been the odd man out for the odd stone out.
Edit: I see fta got to it first
Ok, random thought/question. In Civil War we see Bucky's arm have a weird interaction with T'challa's ring. For some reason I assumed we'd get a little more info on that in Black Panther, but now he doesn't have that arm. Will it even matter?
In first Avengers they teased the interaction between Cap's shield and Thor's hammer, and then just sort of showed those two putting it to use without ever giving anything else.
In first Avengers they teased the interaction between Cap's shield and Thor's hammer, and then just sort of showed those two putting it to use without ever giving anything else.
I theorize that Thanos may not even get all the stones in this one. OR he gets most of them in the first 15 minutes. But the EW magazine cover shows him with only two stones in the gauntlet, again, so perhaps Purple and Blue are what he has for most of this film.
The film has a lot to cover in regards to 20+ characters, but maybe not nearly as much in regards to Infinity Stone coverage as the last 5 pages of discussion would have you think.
The film has a lot to cover in regards to 20+ characters, but maybe not nearly as much in regards to Infinity Stone coverage as the last 5 pages of discussion would have you think.
What's odd is that Avengers 3 & 4 were originally planned as Infinity War Part I & II. Then they changed it and said that Avengers 4 has a different story. So it's unclear at this point if Avengers 4 will be a continuation of the Infinity War story and that Thanos doesn't get all the stones and destroy everything he can in IW but it continues into #4. Or if it all has to take place in IW and #4 is something separate.rhutton125 said:
I theorize that Thanos may not even get all the stones in this one. OR he gets most of them in the first 15 minutes. But the EW magazine cover shows him with only two stones in the gauntlet, again, so perhaps Purple and Blue are what he has for most of this film.
The film has a lot to cover in regards to 20+ characters, but maybe not nearly as much in regards to Infinity Stone coverage as the last 5 pages of discussion would have you think.
Purple (Nova Corps) and Blue (Asgard spaceship) stones are both in outer space.rhutton125 said:
I theorize that Thanos may not even get all the stones in this one. OR he gets most of them in the first 15 minutes. But the EW magazine cover shows him with only two stones in the gauntlet, again, so perhaps Purple and Blue are what he has for most of this film.
The film has a lot to cover in regards to 20+ characters, but maybe not nearly as much in regards to Infinity Stone coverage as the last 5 pages of discussion would have you think.
Doing my rewatch, and on Avengers 1 I noticed Tony wearing a Black Sabbath shirt. Found it hilarious since they do the Iron Man song played at the end of Iron Man. I know most of you probably caught that, but I like this kind of stuff.
FTACO97 said:What's odd is that Avengers 3 & 4 were originally planned as Infinity War Part I & II. Then they changed it and said that Avengers 4 has a different story. So it's unclear at this point if Avengers 4 will be a continuation of the Infinity War story and that Thanos doesn't get all the stones and destroy everything he can in IW but it continues into #4. Or if it all has to take place in IW and #4 is something separate.rhutton125 said:
I theorize that Thanos may not even get all the stones in this one. OR he gets most of them in the first 15 minutes. But the EW magazine cover shows him with only two stones in the gauntlet, again, so perhaps Purple and Blue are what he has for most of this film.
The film has a lot to cover in regards to 20+ characters, but maybe not nearly as much in regards to Infinity Stone coverage as the last 5 pages of discussion would have you think.
But they were still basically filmed back-to-back with the same writers/directors. I think there was something like a month between shoots, if even that. I think it was simply more of a title change than anything else. "Infinity War II" probably just isn't an accurate description of the plot, and they finally came to realize that (as the plot may or may not have changed slightly) I'm also thinking that the new title might be somewhat spoilery, hence why Marvel still hasn't announced it, even though we're just over a year away and Avengers 4 is done filming.
sort of. and will come back as Young/Kid Loki for Phase 4.Sex Panther said:TCTTS said:
Wow, a lot of Dark World endorsements. Maybe I will have to add it to the list for now...
Seriously, it's got a ton of Loki and maybe his best role in the MCU. You get a better understanding of his motivations, and he and Thor's relationship. Plus you know they are setting up Loki for a full redemption/hero turn in Infinity War, and seeing the entire arc of him and Thor will resonate more.
Loki is def gonna sacrifice himself to save Thor
I liked Thor 2. It's far from the worse MCU movie.
Incredible Hulk was the worst, Thor 2 was the second worstBruce Almighty said:
I liked Thor 2. It's far from the worse MCU movie.
I'd agree. Its will be just a continuation of IW under a different title. Parts I & II just kinda sounds silly when they could name it something much cooler.
Also it doesn't seem like that long ago that I'd sit down and watch the entire MCU prior to a new film coming out, but damn now that they're at 18 movies ain't nobody got time for that
Charlie Conway said:Incredible Hulk was the worst, Thor 2 was the second worstBruce Almighty said:
I liked Thor 2. It's far from the worse MCU movie.
IM3 is the worst
Hulk was worse as was IM2. I know I am in the minority, but I'd rank Thor 2 ahead of Cap 1, Ant Man and Dr Strange.
Didn't realize I would start so much controversy in discussing the infinity stones.... sorry about that.
Now in regards to those magazine covers:
1. Iron Man's armor. Yeah, what?
2. Love seeing War Machine back. Cool upgrade to his armor too.
3. No Ant-Man (cue the "he's there, just really tiny" jokes). I assume they wanted the actors to focus on the new Ant-Man/Wasp movie? It seems a little odd otherwise that he would sit out the largest threat to the planet ever.
4. No Hawkeye either?
5. Also, I think that SHIELD finally ran their course in Avengers 2. But I'm going to miss Nick Fury.
Now in regards to those magazine covers:
1. Iron Man's armor. Yeah, what?
2. Love seeing War Machine back. Cool upgrade to his armor too.
3. No Ant-Man (cue the "he's there, just really tiny" jokes). I assume they wanted the actors to focus on the new Ant-Man/Wasp movie? It seems a little odd otherwise that he would sit out the largest threat to the planet ever.
4. No Hawkeye either?
5. Also, I think that SHIELD finally ran their course in Avengers 2. But I'm going to miss Nick Fury.
You probably are, not even close to where I'd put it. Thor 2 is one of the few Marvel films that I'd only watch if it were on tv.Bruce Almighty said:
Hulk was worse as was IM2. I know I am in the minority, but I'd rank Thor 2 ahead of Cap 1, Ant Man and Dr Strange.
I also did like Hulk more than most.
Shut your mouth.redline248 said:Charlie Conway said:Incredible Hulk was the worst, Thor 2 was the second worstBruce Almighty said:
I liked Thor 2. It's far from the worse MCU movie.
IM3 is the worst
The Incredible Hulk is underrated, especially considering how superior it looks next to its non-MCU predecessor. The parts where Norton had a lot of influence are pretty obvious, and are pretty strong, like the entire opening act when he is in Brazil. Would be interesting to see the version Norton wanted, with more focus on Banner and including an informal shrink session with Doc Samson (my #1 minor character I want to see reprised down the road).
Had they just switched out Blonsky and his forced backstory with an American SF soldier hungry for more power, improved the character design of Abomination, and recast Betty with a stronger actress, it would have been just fine.
Had they just switched out Blonsky and his forced backstory with an American SF soldier hungry for more power, improved the character design of Abomination, and recast Betty with a stronger actress, it would have been just fine.
IM3 is incredibly underratedTCTTS said:Shut your mouth.redline248 said:Charlie Conway said:Incredible Hulk was the worst, Thor 2 was the second worstBruce Almighty said:
I liked Thor 2. It's far from the worse MCU movie.
IM3 is the worst
Bobcat06 said:IM3 is incredibly underratedTCTTS said:Shut your mouth.redline248 said:Charlie Conway said:Incredible Hulk was the worst, Thor 2 was the second worstBruce Almighty said:
I liked Thor 2. It's far from the worse MCU movie.
IM3 is the worst
I think you mean overrated.
I'm putting IM3 on right now out of general principle.
Featured Stories
See All
22:40
1h ago
926
9:38
6h ago
1.4k
Around CFB: Predicting the top 12 teams in initial CFP rankings
by Olin Buchanan
CoppellAg2009
Sark says Texas hosting "arguably the best looking team in SEC"
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
53