Options

HULK SMASH PUNY BOX OFFICE RECORDS!

19495969799

Posts

  • Options
    Brovid HasselsmofBrovid Hasselsmof [Growling historic on the fury road] Registered User regular
    I caught Black Widow's name, and I heard that guy get called the hawk once. But I mean I have no idea what their respective deals were, like their powers and history and stuff. I'm guessing 'shoots arrows like a boss' and 'sexy ninja'.

  • Options
    TurambarTurambar Independent Registered User regular
    That's the gist of it

    Steam: turamb | Origin: Turamb | 3DS: 3411-1109-4537 | NNID: Turambar | Warframe(PC): Turamb
  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    How was it slow to get going when it starts with
    a big explosion/chase scene?

    Also they say black widow's name and even write it on the screen at one point when there are subtitles.

  • Options
    BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    Turambar wrote: »
    That's the gist of it

    Yup.

    Arguably the least powerful, but 2 of the most awesome members The Avengers have ever had in the comics, IMO.

    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    You pretty much got everything you need to know about them in the movie, except they never mentioned how Hawkeye learned to shoot arrows in the circus and was a criminal for a while.

  • Options
    XehalusXehalus Registered User regular
    Widow is also good at manipulating her enemies mentally

  • Options
    EdcrabEdcrab Actually a hack Registered User regular
    To be honest, the opening scene of The Avengers
    had me slightly wary, because I couldn't decide whether Loki zapping things from the back of a truck was dumb or amazing

    Having being blown away by the rest of the film, I decided on "deliberately tongue-in-cheek"

    cBY55.gifbmJsl.png
  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    You pretty much got everything you need to know about them in the movie, except they never mentioned how Hawkeye learned to shoot arrows in the circus and was a criminal for a while.
    Well it looks like they went with Ultimate Hawkeye

    who didn't do that

    I mean he could have been a carney but I doubt it

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    Well I mean one shot arrows and the other says "I was a kgb spy"

  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    I demand every version of Hawkeye be a reformed carny.

  • Options
    CorporateLogoCorporateLogo The toilet knows how I feelRegistered User regular
    He learned from Art Carney

    Do not have a cow, mortal.

    c9PXgFo.jpg
  • Options
    Brovid HasselsmofBrovid Hasselsmof [Growling historic on the fury road] Registered User regular
    I'm not saying they weren't good characters. Just that I went into the movie knowing who Hulk and Iron Man were, with kind of an idea of who Thor was, but no clue who they were. And the film didn't exactly have time for a lot of back story. But that's cool. They were cool. I like the hurt locker guy.

    And I guess by slow to start I meant it took a while to gather all the bits together and introduce everyone. I felt like it got properly interesting and fun once the team were all done meeting up and started wrecking stuff.

    Downey Junior pretty much rocked it.

  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Xehalus wrote: »
    I'm officially a Joss Whedon fan.

    He killed it.

    I've been on a Whedon kick recently.

    I can't say I really like Buffy the Vampire Slayer all that much, but pretty much everything else I've seen by him is stellar.

  • Options
    EdcrabEdcrab Actually a hack Registered User regular
    I demand every version of Hawkeye be a reformed carny.

    I hear Hawkeye used to be called the Canary in the Movieverse

    Isn't that close enough

    cBY55.gifbmJsl.png
  • Options
    DeicistDeicist Registered User regular
    Finally saw this tonight after it being in the cinemas for 2 weeks :/

    Overall a brilliant film, but some parts fell a little flat.
    The entire 'bridging' section in the middle felt a little forced, particularly Hawkeye's recovery and conversation with natasha. Not sure why it didn't work, but there was really no chemistry between them at all and that entire scene could have been cut without really losing anything. except maybe a pee break.

    Cap's uniform looked a lot better in motion than it does in screencaps, but still managed to look pretty dorky.

    Ruffalo's Hulk was excellent, not really a fan of his Banner though. Like, at all. He really overplayed the timid scientist bit to a ridiculously hammy extreme.

  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man.

    I also notice that you're way off point, since you just plain didn't address the thing I challenged you on, which is "final fight scene was bad". What was bad about it? That it had the Absorbing Man in it at all?
    It is bad because it is not a dang fight scene

    I understand that Lee's Hulk ISN'T AN ACTION MOVIE or whatever

    but having Hulk defeat Absorbing Man via yelling and having the most physical action between them be Hulk smashing some things being thrown at him

    not a good Hulk fight scene

    Look, I get that you like the movie. I am not trying to change your mind, but stating that people who disagree with you are SO WRONG is just being a dick

    people have opinions, it is crazy!


    Okay, you are being thick-headed on purpose.

    There was plenty of action in that scene. The very end of it has some dialogue and the yelling bit you are referring to.

    So you are, y'know, wrong.

    And like I said, I ain't izzactly think I was gonna change your mind, so might as well let you know the situation and get on with things. If that makes me a dick, well, (b'.')b

  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    You know what is neat about Nolan's Batman universe?

    very little

    Jesus Christ.

  • Options
    DichotomyDichotomy Registered User regular
    solar seeing that post right there delighted me

    0BnD8l3.gif
  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Joolander wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man

    ok maybe I'm dumb

    but please, enlighten me as to how the power to "absorb chemical and structural properties of what you touch and then changing into them" is a metaphor for being a terrible father

    because I am just not seeing it

    Good fathers give. Life, shelter, sustenance, opportunities.

    Dr. Banner in the film was all about possessing, or destroying that which he could not have. Hence, the Absorbing Man. Wanted to take back everything he had given, the power, down to Bruce's very life.

    This is not exactly rocket science, kid, this is basic-level 1:1 shit.

  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man.

    I also notice that you're way off point, since you just plain didn't address the thing I challenged you on, which is "final fight scene was bad". What was bad about it? That it had the Absorbing Man in it at all?

    I am a staunch defender of the idea that there is n objectivity in art

    and so I will simply say that I think that the Ang Lee version of Absorbing Man sucked balls

    And I will pat you on the head and suggest you maybe try being right about shit for a change, and all will be right with the world.

  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    Seriously

    do you not see how you are being an asshole

    you just replied to 3 different people who disagreed with you by saying HEH YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING KID JEEZ, I AM SO MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT AND RIGHT THAN YOU

    good god

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    SolarSolar Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    sarukun wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man.

    I also notice that you're way off point, since you just plain didn't address the thing I challenged you on, which is "final fight scene was bad". What was bad about it? That it had the Absorbing Man in it at all?

    I am a staunch defender of the idea that there is n objectivity in art

    and so I will simply say that I think that the Ang Lee version of Absorbing Man sucked balls

    And I will pat you on the head and suggest you maybe try being right about shit for a change, and all will be right with the world.

    Wow you really do have an inflated sense of self-importance, don't you

    Solar on
  • Options
    AntimatterAntimatter Devo Was Right Gates of SteelRegistered User regular
    Wow, saru

    Wow

  • Options
    SolarSolar Registered User regular
    Dichotomy wrote: »
    solar seeing that post right there delighted me

    I try

  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Deicist wrote: »
    Finally saw this tonight after it being in the cinemas for 2 weeks :/

    Overall a brilliant film, but some parts fell a little flat.
    The entire 'bridging' section in the middle felt a little forced, particularly Hawkeye's recovery and conversation with natasha. Not sure why it didn't work, but there was really no chemistry between them at all and that entire scene could have been cut without really losing anything. except maybe a pee break.

    Cap's uniform looked a lot better in motion than it does in screencaps, but still managed to look pretty dorky.

    Ruffalo's Hulk was excellent, not really a fan of his Banner though. Like, at all. He really overplayed the timid scientist bit to a ridiculously hammy extreme.

    Hulk smash puny opinion!

  • Options
    BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Behold, the majesty of Loki's hat:

    medium_loki_helmet.png

    Tell me, who wouldn't bow before that.

    (and yes, I know that still's from Thor, the helmet more or less the same though)

    BlackDragon480 on
    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man.

    I also notice that you're way off point, since you just plain didn't address the thing I challenged you on, which is "final fight scene was bad". What was bad about it? That it had the Absorbing Man in it at all?

    I am a staunch defender of the idea that there is n objectivity in art

    and so I will simply say that I think that the Ang Lee version of Absorbing Man sucked balls

    And I will pat you on the head and suggest you maybe try being right about shit for a change, and all will be right with the world.

    Wow you really do have an inflated sense of self-importance, don't you

    It's the internet, whaddaya gonna do.

    Seems an appropriate response to the "no accounting for taste" argument in the opposite direction, anyway.

  • Options
    JoolanderJoolander Registered User regular
    no accounting for class, either

  • Options
    sarukunsarukun RIESLING OCEANRegistered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    Seriously

    do you not see how you are being an asshole

    you just replied to 3 different people who disagreed with you by saying HEH YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING KID JEEZ, I AM SO MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT AND RIGHT THAN YOU

    good god

    I'm not sure why you would think I'm unaware of it.

    Moreover, I tried to engage you genuinely in discourse and you didn't really answer my questions

    Turnabout's fair play, and all of that.

  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    "it is the internet" isn't really a good excuse for being an asshole

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    XehalusXehalus Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Hulk vs Loki

    I didn't think anyone would top that one chain slam in the Ghost Rider 2 trailer or Iron Man's aoe laser at the end of Iron Man 2

    but daaaamn this was so great

    Xehalus on
  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    Seriously

    do you not see how you are being an asshole

    you just replied to 3 different people who disagreed with you by saying HEH YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING KID JEEZ, I AM SO MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT AND RIGHT THAN YOU

    good god

    I'm not sure why you would think I'm unaware of it.

    Moreover, I tried to engage you genuinely in discourse and you didn't really answer my questions

    Turnabout's fair play, and all of that.
    I did engage you! I explained why I felt that way and said that if you enjoy the film that is totally okay, I don't but everyone doesn't like the same shit. No big deal.

    you're the one who insists they are so superior and smarter than everyone else in the room. The answers I gave you not being ones you liked doesn't suddenly make them not answers.

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    Munkus BeaverMunkus Beaver You don't have to attend every argument you are invited to. Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    As the only person here who is unfairly immune to the edict, I can say that yes.

    Sarukun is being an asshole and probably should tone it down.

    Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
  • Options
    GatsbyGatsby Registered User regular
    sarukun wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man.

    I also notice that you're way off point, since you just plain didn't address the thing I challenged you on, which is "final fight scene was bad". What was bad about it? That it had the Absorbing Man in it at all?

    I am a staunch defender of the idea that there is n objectivity in art

    and so I will simply say that I think that the Ang Lee version of Absorbing Man sucked balls

    And I will pat you on the head and suggest you maybe try being right about shit for a change, and all will be right with the world.

    Wow you really do have an inflated sense of self-importance, don't you

    It's the internet, whaddaya gonna do.

    Yes, because this is a perfectly mature reason for anything at all.

  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    As the only person here who is unfairly immune to the edict, I can say that yes.

    Sarukun is being an asshole and probably should tone it down.

    how does it feel, to have such power.

  • Options
    Munkus BeaverMunkus Beaver You don't have to attend every argument you are invited to. Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    Langly wrote: »
    As the only person here who is unfairly immune to the edict, I can say that yes.

    Sarukun is being an asshole and probably should tone it down.

    how does it feel, to have such power.

    It feels smug.

    Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
  • Options
    GatsbyGatsby Registered User regular
    Munkus: The 21st Century Schizoid Mod.

  • Options
    JoolanderJoolander Registered User regular
    Smugkus Beaver

  • Options
    SolarSolar Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    sarukun wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    sarukun wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    I still vastly prefer Ang Lee's Hulk over the Norton one

    Are you serious

    Absolutely.

    I think the article linked above made some good points about what was wrong with Ang Lee's Hulk, but it was way more interesting than Norton's film.

    Norton's hulk was way more coherent, had way better action sequences, and had a much better leading man. Nick nolte is also horrible.

    Nolte could have worked as anyone but Absorbing Man.

    Like seriously even Abomination would have made more sense.

    Yes, okay, I agree, the Absorbing Man was a bizarre choice for the bad guy, but they made it work pretty okay.
    No they didn't

    not at all

    the big fight scene is him turning into a big cloud/storm and Hulk yelling at him and fight over

    that is not doing it pretty okay

    Absorbing Man could be a great movie villain, dude has the potential for some really cool scenes and awesome fights

    they did it about the worst way you possibly could

    You should maybe consider trying to be right about some things sometime.

    It feels pretty good, let me tell you.
    Yeah it is always awesome when your response to someone disagreeing with you is "HA YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT FUCK YOU"

    super great and not at all obnoxious

    You want to sit down and go through the movies point by point and compare scenes?

    Because "I didn't like the final fight scene" is pretty much as can't change your mind about this as it gets. I thought that scene was fine. Sorry you disagree. But if you legitimately want to sit down here and tell me objectively what was "wrong" with that scene other than "yelling is dumb for some reason!", you're more than welcome to give it a shot.
    I am saying it is a very shitty adaptation of the Absorbing Man, which it objectively is.

    Absorbing Man is a fairly simple thug who ends up with godlike powers and does exactly what you'd expect with them. His charm is that he has the personality of a generic goon working at the docks but can give Hulk or Thor a decent fight. Which is why he would be a really fun villain if he was like, the muscle for Leader or something.

    Having him be Bruce Banner's father who mutated his DNA with Starfish cells and turns into a giant cloud

    that is not Absorbing Man

    It's an "unfaithful" adaptation, certainly.

    Calling that "bad" is a matter of opinion, and pretty much ignores what the point of the Absorbing Man in the film was, and the metaphors for "terrible father" that go hand in hand with the power of the Absorbing Man.

    I also notice that you're way off point, since you just plain didn't address the thing I challenged you on, which is "final fight scene was bad". What was bad about it? That it had the Absorbing Man in it at all?

    I am a staunch defender of the idea that there is n objectivity in art

    and so I will simply say that I think that the Ang Lee version of Absorbing Man sucked balls

    And I will pat you on the head and suggest you maybe try being right about shit for a change, and all will be right with the world.

    Wow you really do have an inflated sense of self-importance, don't you

    It's the internet, whaddaya gonna do.

    Seems an appropriate response to the "no accounting for taste" argument in the opposite direction, anyway.

    Well you see what I would do

    is not be really condescending to other people about their movie opinions

    Solar on
This discussion has been closed.