*** MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE *** [Staff message on OP]

3,519,222 Views | 27742 Replies | Last: 2 hrs ago by The Porkchop Express
Farmer1906
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I agree. I've done tiers before.


The Great
Avengers
Winter Soldier
GotG Vol 1
GotG Vol 2
Iron Man

The Very Good
Civil War
Spider-Man
Doctor Strange
Thor Ragnarok
Black Panther

The Good
Ant-Man
Captain America
Age of Ultron
Iron Man 2 (I seem to like this better than most)
Iron Man 3

The Okay
Thor 1
Thor 2
Hulk
Sex Panther
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ant-Man has grown on me so much. I always liked it, but it's just such a fun, light movie. It's been coming on tv a lot, and you can hop in at any time and watch a few minutes and be really entertained. The climactic battle on the toy train set is so great.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I loved Ant-Man in the theaters, but my friend ruined it for me. She's an OCD chemistry teacher, and the inconsistent physics are atrocious. Now I can never unsee them and it kills the movie
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
israeliag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
A movie about a shrinking man has unrealistic physics you say???
Brick Tamland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I like your list, I would just put Avengers 1 in the "very good" category. When it came out it was great, but now I think it's just "very good". Having them all on screen together doesn't make up for the dragging on parts like the beginning and them on the aircraft.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I said inconsistent, not unrealistic. Some suspension of disbelief is a given. But good scifi/fantasy has consistency. Spoiler tag for those who are like me and don't want something they'll never unsee.

The size thing is explained, but the mass thing is entirely inconsistent. Scott can shrink and still punch with the weight of his full body, because his mass is unchanged. However, Pym carried a freakin shrunken tank on his belt. If shrinking doesn't change mass, then that thing on his belt weighs tons. Then they size up a toy train and it suddenly weighs as much as a real train. In the movie, making something bigger always makes it more massive and heavier, but making something smaller only sometimes makes it less massive and lighter. It's really annoying and distracting when you know about it
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
LeonardSkinner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

I loved Ant-Man in the theaters, but my friend ruined it for me. She's an OCD chemistry teacher, and the inconsistent physics are atrocious. Now I can never unsee them and it kills the movie

Rule 1 on the friend, so we know how much attention we should give her opinion.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not my wife so not my call. If it helps, she was homecoming queen and she definitely has a Sara Palin vibe.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would go with this (although I haven't seen the newer ones) as none are really bad (except Hulk, but that's an actor thing not a movie thing). I would move Ant-Man into the good category though because it was fun.
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

I said inconsistent, not unrealistic. Some suspension of disbelief is a given. But good scifi/fantasy has consistency. Spoiler tag for those who are like me and don't want something they'll never unsee.

The size thing is explained, but the mass thing is entirely inconsistent. Scott can shrink and still punch with the weight of his full body, because his mass is unchanged. However, Pym carried a freakin shrunken tank on his belt. If shrinking doesn't change mass, then that thing on his belt weighs tons. Then they size up a toy train and it suddenly weighs as much as a real train. In the movie, making something bigger always makes it more massive and heavier, but making something smaller only sometimes makes it less massive and lighter. It's really annoying and distracting when you know about it
Too much fun to let minor details like that get in the way.
Bruce Almighty
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I need to watch Ant Man and Dr Strange again. I was disappointed with both after one viewing. I felt the same with Civil War, but it's really grown on me the more I watch it.
Bobcat06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

I said inconsistent, not unrealistic. Some suspension of disbelief is a given. But good scifi/fantasy has consistency. Spoiler tag for those who are like me and don't want something they'll never unsee.

The size thing is explained, but the mass thing is entirely inconsistent. Scott can shrink and still punch with the weight of his full body, because his mass is unchanged. However, Pym carried a freakin shrunken tank on his belt. If shrinking doesn't change mass, then that thing on his belt weighs tons. Then they size up a toy train and it suddenly weighs as much as a real train. In the movie, making something bigger always makes it more massive and heavier, but making something smaller only sometimes makes it less massive and lighter. It's really annoying and distracting when you know about it
force != mass. Shrinking decreases volume and mass but proportionally increase speed and acceleration so that force is constant
TexasAggie_02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
guys, ant-man is almost 3 years old, you don't need spoiler tags
AliasMan02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ant Man is one of the most rewatchable MCU films. I love Civil War, for example, but it can be a lot to get through. Ant Man is a great flick to pick up in the middle or watch bits and pieces. I've watched "just a few minutes" of it a bunch of times only to get sucked in and watch it all.

It's also very funny and I think gets funnier. I love those whole bit with Baskin Robbins. And it has great heart.

If you haven't watched it since the theater, you should try it at home on the couch.
Cromagnum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Farmer1906 said:

I agree. I've done tiers before.


The Great
Avengers
Winter Soldier
GotG Vol 1
Iron Man
Doctor Strange

The Very Good
Civil War
Spider-Man
Black Panther
GotG Vol 2

The Good
Ant-Man
Age of Ultron
Iron Man 2 (I seem to like this better than most)


The Okay
Iron Man 3
Captain America
Thor 1
Thor 2
Thor Ragnarok
Hulk



I put these pretty differently.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Force still equals mass times acceleration. If Scott's mass shrinks as he shrinks the acceleration would need to be ridiculous. Lets say he goes from 70 inches tall to 0.5 inches tall, and everything else scales accordingly. His mass would decrease by that same proportion cubed. So his mass would be about 31mg. For him to punch someone with the same force as his grown self, he fist would have to accelerate 2.7 million times faster than when he is full size. That would break the sound barrier many times over and the forces involved would burn up his tiny hands like a shuttle on reentry. You can't have both a tank on a belt and a tiny guy knocking people out with punches. One or the other doesn't make sense. For that matter, you can't have a tiny guy knocking people out one minute and riding an ant the next. I doesn't have to bother everyone like it bothers me, it just really bothers me now that I notice it.

Quote:

guys, ant-man is almost 3 years old, you don't need spoiler tags
I'm trying to save others from my fate. I wish she hadn't pointed it out to me.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Charlie Conway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

In the movie, making something bigger always makes it more massive and heavier, but making something smaller only sometimes makes it less massive and lighter. It's really annoying and distracting when you know about it
no, no it doesn't
redline248
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Your concern is duly noted, and completely unnecessary.
Farmer1906
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Black Panther is now at 562 M thru 3.5 weeks domestically. That means it only needs to do another 53 M to become the #1 box office movie in the MCU. I think that is a fairly safe bet.

Will IF top that?

Here is the current top 5.
1. The Force Awakens - 936 M
2. Avatar - 760 M
3. Titanic - 659 M
4. Jurassic World - 652 M
5. Avengers - 615 M

The next closest MCU movies Age of Ultron - 459 M, Iron Man 3 409 M, and Civil War 408 M.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What's odd is BP has beaten The Last Jedi every single weekend (except the first), but is still behind it overall. I guess TLJ had bigger weekdays due to the holidays.

In any case, it probably surpasses both it and Avengers fairly soon.

It has a very outside shot at JW, but not very likely.

TFA's record will not likely be touched within the next decade, at least. I think IW finishes in the 650-700M range.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
HOW DARE YOU UNDERESTIMATE AVATAR 2!
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Even being the resident Avatar fanboy, I doubt it replicates what the first one did.

Unless Cameron does something completely revolutionary, but how do you even do that these days?
Farmer1906
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Week 2 of TLJ was Christmas. It took in about 25 M more the BP that week.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
(I was being sarcastic, just FYI.)
Farmer1906
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:

TFA's record will not likely be touched within the next decade, at least. I think IW finishes in the 650-700M range.
As long as its good to great then I agree with this.

I wonder how much Deadpool 2 will impact it.
Bruce Almighty
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:

Even being the resident Avatar fanboy, I doubt it replicates what the first one did.

Unless Cameron does something completely revolutionary, but how do you even do that these days?


FWIW, I just got back from Disney World and Pandora in Animal Kingdom was by far the busiest thing I saw my entire time there. Even the store was busier than any of the Star Wars stores I went in to. TexAgs doesn't reflect what the rest of the world thinks.
dcaggie04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:

What's odd is BP has beaten The Last Jedi every single weekend (except the first), but is still behind it overall. I guess TLJ had bigger weekdays due to the holidays.

In any case, it probably surpasses both it and Avengers fairly soon.

It has a very outside shot at JW, but not very likely.

TFA's record will not likely be touched within the next decade, at least. I think IW finishes in the 650-700M range.
TLJ had a 4 week gross of $580M. Plus it has 9 extra weeks counting for it.

Avengers was at $532M in 4 weeks. 22 total weeks counting for it.

JW was at $572.5M after 4 weeks. 23 total weeks counting for it.

Titanic is probably too far away due to a ridiculous 41 weeks counting for it.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

TLJ had a 4 week gross of $580M. Plus it has 9 extra weeks counting for it.
I obviously mean at the same point in their release cycles.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?view=weekend&id=openingweekendshowdown.htm

$562M vs $572M. It's not much. It probably outpaces it for good this weekend.
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

(I was being sarcastic, just FYI.)
I know.
dcaggie04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:

Quote:

TLJ had a 4 week gross of $580M. Plus it has 9 extra weeks counting for it.
I obviously mean at the same point in their release cycles.
That's why I noted the 4 week gross, so it can be compared with the BP number of $562M since that is the estimated gross after 4 weeks.
fig96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bruce Almighty said:

Brian Earl Spilner said:

Even being the resident Avatar fanboy, I doubt it replicates what the first one did.

Unless Cameron does something completely revolutionary, but how do you even do that these days?


FWIW, I just got back from Disney World and Pandora in Animal Kingdom was by far the busiest thing I saw my entire time there. Even the store was busier than any of the Star Wars stores I went in to. TexAgs doesn't reflect what the rest of the world thinks.
I just missed it when we went last April, it was a few weeks away from opening. Supposed to be incredible.

That being said, I think the attraction and the popularity of the film are two different things. The movie had zero impact outside of it's initial box office and I don't think really has much of a fanbase out a hardcore minority.

The new film will get massive hype, however, so will be interesting to see.
Simplebay
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Had a go at my revised list, prove me wrong.


The World Class
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. The Avengers
3. Guardians of the Galaxy
4. Iron Man

The Very Good
5. Black Panther
6. Thor Ragnorak
7. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
8. Captain America: Civil War
9. Spider-Man: Homecoming
10. Captain America: The First Avenger

The Decently Watchable
11. Doctor Strange
12. Avengers: Age of Ultron
13. Iron Man 3
14. Ant Man

The Fk off with this almost seems like a different studio
15. Thor
16. Iron Man 2
17. The Incredible Hulk
18. Thor: The Dark World
Brian Earl Spilner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The World Class
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. The Avengers
3. Guardians of the Galaxy
4. Iron Man
Spot. On.
Whos Juan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

I said inconsistent, not unrealistic. Some suspension of disbelief is a given. But good scifi/fantasy has consistency. Spoiler tag for those who are like me and don't want something they'll never unsee.

The size thing is explained, but the mass thing is entirely inconsistent. Scott can shrink and still punch with the weight of his full body, because his mass is unchanged. However, Pym carried a freakin shrunken tank on his belt. If shrinking doesn't change mass, then that thing on his belt weighs tons. Then they size up a toy train and it suddenly weighs as much as a real train. In the movie, making something bigger always makes it more massive and heavier, but making something smaller only sometimes makes it less massive and lighter. It's really annoying and distracting when you know about it
Farmer1906
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How about trilogies?

1. Captain America
2. Iron Man







3. Thor

right?
First Page Last Page
Page 225 of 793
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.