Eternals | Marvel Studios | Nov 5 2021 | Magnum-Opus by Oscar winner Chloe Zhao - Marvel's first rotten movie | Dips into the 40s on RT, B CinemaScore

[WittyUsername]

2 minutes ago, DInky said:

Do you guys think an Inhumans movie would have been a better choice?

Possibly, but for whatever reason, it doesn’t seem like Kevin Feige was ever particularly interested in that property. The only reason there was supposed to be an Inhumans movie in Phase 3 was because Perlmutter was desperately trying to use them to replace the X-Men, who Marvel couldn’t use at the time. 

[DInky]

Just now, WittyUsername said:

Possibly, but for whatever reason, it doesn’t seem like Kevin Feige was ever particularly interested in that property. The only reason there was supposed to be an Inhumans movie in Phase 3 was because Perlmutter was desperately trying to use them to replace the X-Men, who Marvel couldn’t use at the time. 

 

The only reason I can come up with is that Feige didn't think a royal space family that owns slaves is very relatable. The slaves part could be taken out of the movies, of course, but it'd still be hard to make them feel grounded. I guess they could have done a Game of Thrones in space type of movie with the Kree Empire as the antagonists. I hope that they will be eventually introduced in one of the FF movies.

[grey ghost]

Title change incoming. 🍅

[Krissykins]

2 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

 

I like RT, i think it's helpful, even funny sometimes... But when it comes for MCU seems like it's a bible about what is good and what isn't which i find it weird.

Not just MCU. For some reason RT holds a lot of power over comic book films and their fans. 

[Lucas]

I can't say whether or not making an Eternals movie was a good or bad idea, I know absolutely nothing about them, but are these thoughts forming now just because it seems like the movie appears to have failed? I'm sure there must've been some way to get a functioning movie out of them, like they have for some other characters. The problem I can tell from the outset though is something like Guardians of the Galaxy is a lot easier for a newbie like me to pinpoint who they are wia their distinct looks, while the Eternals look astoundingly dull and same-y with their costumes. Is there something about this property that doesn't work for film, or did they just not get it right here?

[DInky]

Just now, Lucas said:

I can't say whether or not making an Eternals movie was a good or bad idea, I know absolutely nothing about them, but are these thoughts forming now just because it seems like the movie appears to have failed? I'm sure there must've been some way to get a functioning movie out of them, like they have for some other characters. The problem I can tell from the outset though is something like Guardians of the Galaxy is a lot easier for a newbie like me to pinpoint who they are wia their distinct looks, while the Eternals look astoundingly dull and same-y with their costumes. Is there something about this property that doesn't work for film, or did they just not get it right here?

 

It's funny that you mention them looking same-y because they have way more varied looks in the comics. I remember being disappointed when they first revealed the costumes because they were so uniform. When you adapt a Kirby creation then you might as well go all out. I can't speak to the stories in the comics though, I've read a fair amount of Marvel comics over the years and I have yet to read an Eternals comic except for an old Inhumans issue where they guest star..

[WittyUsername]

Should the big takeaway from this film be that Marvel should just stick to their established formula? 

[DInky]

3 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

Should the big takeaway from this film be that Marvel should just stick to their established formula? 

 

I for one hope it won't make them too risk-averse.

[XXR vs XXR]

12 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

Should the big takeaway from this film be that Marvel should just stick to their established formula? 

 

No, that's as silly as the overreaction to these RT ratings. 

[Porthos]

Just what is the "Marvel Formula" anyway?  Coz while I see a lot of comments about it, I don't see nearly as many definitions as to what it actually is.

 

(I realize this is inviting a 10 page thread derailment, but just about anything is better than the current obsession with RT)

[Porthos]

7 minutes ago, Porthos said:

Just what is the "Marvel Formula" anyway?  Coz while I see a lot of comments about it, I don't see nearly as many definitions as to what it actually is.

 

(I realize this is inviting a 10 page thread derailment, but just about anything is better than the current obsession with RT)

 

The reason I mention this is that we're relatively fresh off of discussions surrounding Shang-Chi where lots of people (rightly, IMO) were saying that Marvel films really aren't all alike and there are major differences between, say, Black Panther, The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy, to name three at semi-random.

 

Like, maybe there really isn't such a thing as "the Marvel Formula" (outside of "make good, entertaining, movies") and Eternals is just a blip where things didn't come together (for some folks) for whatever reasons.

[MOVIEGUY]

15 minutes ago, Porthos said:

Just what is the "Marvel Formula" anyway?  Coz while I see a lot of comments about it, I don't see nearly as many definitions as to what it actually is.

 

(I realize this is inviting a 10 page thread derailment, but just about anything is better than the current obsession with RT)

 

The MCU formula to me, is at their core these movies are fun, quippy, light-hearted romps. And they usually do that very well, better than most. Occasionally (Infinity War, Endgame), they successfully rise above that and feel like genuinely exciting action adventure movies. But that's the formula and they rarely stray from it, which is fine. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable can single out more specific stuff like cinematography, lighting, etc. as part of the MCU formula, but more than anything it's the tone of the movies.

[DInky]

By the sounds of it Eternals differs from previous films in that it's more serious in tone and it features characters who are less relatable because they're god-like beings who stand apart from humans. That's very much a Jack Kirby thing, The Eternals, the Inhumans and the New Gods are all similar in that regard. So I'm not sure this movie strays away from the Marvel formula per se but they're trying to adapt characters who don't have that "from regular Joe to hero" origin story that people enjoy.

[Porthos]

1 minute ago, MOVIEGUY said:

 

The MCU formula to me, is at their core these movies are fun, quippy, light-hearted romps. And they usually do that very well, better than most. Occasionally (Infinity War, Endgame), they successfully rise above that and feel like genuinely exciting action adventure movies. But that's the formula and they rarely stray from it, which is fine. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable can single out more specific stuff like cinematography, lighting, etc. as part of the MCU formula, but more than anything it's the tone of the movies.

 

I was wondering if someone would bring up the q-word (quips).

 

And, you know what?  Fair.  But quippy (again, a fairly ill-defined term in my opinion) romps is a pretty wide brush, IMO. 

 

Is the complaint then that Eternals is just too po-faced for its own good?  Does the quip quotient not rise high enough?  Not really sure that's it, IMO.  

 

Reading between the lines of critics who liked the film and those who didn't, it seems to me that the real dividing line is: Some folks found the characters (and their struggles) compelling and others didn't.  Sure, folks can point to (allegedly) "too many characters, not enough time to develop them/care about them", but when it comes right down to it, isn't that just buy-in?

 

I'm not saying that Eternals is being judged unfairly or anything like that.  Just that perhaps the diagnosis (strays too far from the so-called Marvel Formula) really doesn't seem to fit the complaints of "Just didn't care".

 

Let me try to bring up a compare/contrast with a film that is dear to my heart, Rogue One (which also had the unenviable task of introducing loads of characters in a short amount of time).  While many people point to the killer third act, a common complaint is that the the characters in the first half of the film are cookie cutter and/or uninteresting.  I personally find this bizarre, as they hooked me from the moment they showed up.  

 

But buy-in is a hard to define thing.  What works and is compelling for one person (say me) isn't for others.  That part I don't find bizarre.  

 

(this isn't an invitation to discuss R1, either.  Just bringing up a movie where there is something of a disagreement about one of its central pieces)

 

So to bring this back to Eternals, maybe that's just the problem here.  For whatever reasons, too many reviewers just aren't buying what is being sold.  But for folks who do buy into the characters, it seems to work.

 

That's the dividing line I find more interesting rather than straying from a so-called Marvel Formula.

[RRA]

18 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

The reason I mention this is that we're relatively fresh off of discussions surrounding Shang-Chi where lots of people (rightly, IMO) were saying that Marvel films really aren't all alike and there are major differences between, say, Black Panther, The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy, to name three at semi-random.

 

Like, maybe there really isn't such a thing as "the Marvel Formula" (outside of "make good, entertaining, movies") and Eternals is just a blip where things didn't come together (for some folks) for whatever reasons.

A classic clap at the 007 films is how they're all the same (sound familiar?) but then you put together a double feature of say The Spy Who Loved Me and Skyfall....I mean OK, there's a dude named James Bond and there are gadgets and sexy time and....uh....that's it? Completely different tones, plots, etc. 

 

(Funny enough there are locals here who think apparently Craig's Bond is what every 007 film that ever exists is like or something ridiculous. I would pay to watch them react to Moonraker tbh lol)

 

You all remember the days when DCEU was supposedly the "humorless" brand, how allegedly WB ordered "no jokes" in their stuff? Of course that order wasn't true and DCEU now has had the terrific Shazam!* and TSS and so forth. But even then, there was humor even all the way back in MOS. Some memes bear a salt of truth, and some memes are just BS when you actually think about them and not just mindlessly share them as franchise soldiers. 

 

*=Which some fans loathe its existence, unfortunately. The most kid-friendly superhero film ever made, which for a spectrum originally created to amuse children...that's a great compliment. 

[Napoleon]

There must good essays out there dissecting the Marvel formula but everyone who complains about it has something that annoys them and for me particularly is how every character have the same personality, and that’s the reason why the Ant-Man movies are my favorite MCU movies, Evangeline Lily’s character must be the only main character in this entire cinematic universe that is serious and doesn’t crack jokes. Other people have a problem with how every movie has the same color palette. After more than 20 movies people start to get tired of specific similarities and wish there were diversity in tone, style, story structure, etc.

[MOVIEGUY]

4 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

I was wondering if someone would bring up the q-word (quips).

 

And, you know what?  Fair.  But quippy (again, a fairly ill-defined term in my opinion) romps is a pretty wide brush, IMO. 

 

Is the complaint then that Eternals is just too po-faced for its own good?  Does the quip quotient not rise high enough?  Not really sure that's it, IMO.  

 

Reading between the lines of critics who liked the film and those who didn't, it seems to me that the real dividing line is: Some folks found the characters (and their struggles) compelling and others didn't.  Sure, folks can point to (allegedly) "too many characters, not enough time to develop them/care about them", but when it comes right down to it, isn't that just buy-in?

 

I'm not saying that Eternals is being judged unfairly or anything like that.  Just that perhaps the diagnosis (strays too far from the so-called Marvel Formula) really doesn't seem to fit the complaints of "Just didn't care".

 

Let me try to bring up a compare/contrast with a film that is dear to my heart, Rogue One (which also had the unenviable task of introducing loads of characters in a short amount of time).  While many people point to the killer third act, a common complaint is that the the characters in the first half of the film are cookie cutter and/or uninteresting.  I personally find this bizarre, as they hooked me from the moment they showed up.  

 

But buy-in is a hard to define thing.  What works and is compelling for one person (say me) isn't for others.  That part I don't find bizarre.  

 

(this isn't an invitation to discuss R1, either.  Just bringing up a movie where there is something of a disagreement about one of its central pieces)

 

So to bring this back to Eternals, maybe that's just the problem here.  For whatever reasons, too many reviewers just aren't buying what is being sold.  But for folks who do buy into the characters, it seems to work.

 

That's the dividing line I find more interesting rather than straying from a so-called Marvel Formula.

 

I mean I haven't seen Eternals yet I can't speak on any of that lol. But uhhh I stand by what I said

[Legion Again]

1 hour ago, WittyUsername said:

Should the big takeaway from this film be that Marvel should just stick to their established formula? 

Why would we need movie 26 to take this away? Seems pretty clear from the first 25.

[WittyUsername]

There’s definitely a certain vibe that the MCU typically gives off that makes it recognizable to people, and widely accessible for a general audience. This movie sounds like it does away with a lot of that, in favor of trying to be more “artsy.” 

[VENOM]

2 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

Poor Kumail, he seems really upset.

 

 

Seeing MCU fans lose there minds over rotten reviews is one thing but the actors is something else