scraylo187 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Well, that looks much larger in scope than I was expecting.Man, that subtitle might surpass "Age of Ultron" for inscrutability to non-comic readers. "What's a Winter Soldier?" I eagerly await people scatching their heads, wondering why it doesn't appear to be winter time in the movie. Where's the snow? *watches Star Trek: Into Darkness trailer* Why does not more scenes at nighttime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVA Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Man, I was having dinner at my mom's house last night, and she had Entertainment Tonight on. When they showed the teaser for this trailer, one of the anchors, some lady, referenced the next Avengers movie, and hearing the words "Age of Ultron" come out of her mouth was sublimely preposterous. It rolled off her tongue about as easily as the name of an Icelandic volcano. When they went to break, she probably asked if somebody had Burgundy'd her. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 She probably watches Keeping up with the Kardashians instead of Agents of SHIELD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 The Winter Soldier trailer looks great. It might be the movie I'm most excited for next year now. I'm struggling with shield 5 episodes in. Nothings been really bad so far but its just not the show i wanted it to be. I wanted secret agents doing secret agent shit with and against super heroes/villains not a bunch of kids solving mysteries. I can enjoy it for what it is but i think it could have been so much more. Why cant the Shield TV series be like that but on a smaller scale? To me this is the biggest problem with the Shield tv series. Its not really being run as a proper secret agent/intelligence agency it really should be. I really think the mistake they made was hiring Whedon to work on it as this type of stuff isn't really his strong suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Whedon's only involved as a producer. He's not even running the show. His brother/sis-in-law are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 He was in charge of the pilot and has obvious influence on the show, especially with his brother and sister-in-law running it. I think it was a mistake to use him and his associates in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Without him, it likely doesn't get made in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVA Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 To this point, I would say the show has failed to provide a compelling reason why it should've been made in the first place. (Beyond corporate synergy, of course.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Without him, it likely doesn't get made in the first place. I'm curious how you came to this bit of reasoning. Marvel in general has been trying to create tv shows with of their characters, and Agents of Shield was one of the easiest they could do. It would have happened regardless of whether or not Whedon was the developing it. To this point, I would say the show has failed to provide a compelling reason why it should've been made in the first place. (Beyond corporate synergy, of course.) Because Marvel is doing well with films and they hoped to translate this into success in television as well. Agents of Shield was the easiest thing to make since it doesn't need big stars or heavy budget for effects. There really isn't much of a question or problem of why it was made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVA Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 So corporate synergy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVA Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Yes, corporate synergy in the interest of making money. Disney: "Yo, Marvel, we makin a lotta money in the movies, you wanna kick some of that ABC's way?" Literally every show on TV exists because someone thinks there's money in it. That, in and of itself, does not constitute a compelling reason. That is the baseline reason. But every show worth a damn has an answer to the question "What else?" To date, I don't think SHIELD has the else figured out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 What constitutes a compelling reason to you? In general it exists to give fans more of the Marvel universe from the movies, only in a smaller setting. To be honest I think the question you are actually trying to ask isn't the one your posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 I think Agents of SHIELD is there to bring these people into the fold of the Marvel Universe. To use a wrestling phrase, it's there to bring in the casual fans and make them seek out other stuff, get them hooked on the brand, etc. I don't think the show is there to set-up future movies or anything. It's there to expand on existing material, to introduce new things (nothing big most likely) and to gain new fans for the Marvel movies. My mom talks about this show (not that she likes it - but she knows it exists). Her best friend loves it. Neither of them even know what the fuck comics are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Without him, it likely doesn't get made in the first place. I'm curious how you came to this bit of reasoning. Marvel in general has been trying to create tv shows with of their characters, and Agents of Shield was one of the easiest they could do. It would have happened regardless of whether or not Whedon was the developing it. Because this show doesn't get made without the success of The Avengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Without him, it likely doesn't get made in the first place. I'm curious how you came to this bit of reasoning. Marvel in general has been trying to create tv shows with of their characters, and Agents of Shield was one of the easiest they could do. It would have happened regardless of whether or not Whedon was the developing it. Because this show doesn't get made without the success of The Avengers. Maybe, but that wasn't even remotely what I was talking about when I said they shouldn't have hired Whedon for Agents of Shield, but I think you already knew that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Natural Posted October 25, 2013 Author Share Posted October 25, 2013 Happy Thor: The Dark World marks the third Tom Hiddleston performance as Loki. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuroresuFan Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 He can be in every Marvel film as far as I'm concerned. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scraylo187 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 It's so bizarre that DC/WB tends to do their shows well (animated DCU, Smallville, and people seem to like Arrow) and can't get a proper movie franchise off the ground, while Marvel is crushing movies and can't figure out TV. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fresh Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 He can be in every Marvel film as far as I'm concerned.You just know we're getting a Loki solo film somewhere down the road... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipGofern Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 It's so bizarre that DC/WB tends to do their shows well (animated DCU, Smallville, and people seem to like Arrow) and can't get a proper movie franchise off the ground, while Marvel is crushing movies and can't figure out TV. That's my rule of thumb. And I like SHIELD but even I wouldn't say it's anywhere near as awesome as Arrow. People going gaga over Jessica Drew Skye should see the hot hacker chick, Felicity, they have on Arrow. I can understand missing on the handsome male lead but when Greg Berlanti does Quirky Nerdy Dreamgirl better than Joss f'n Whedon, there's something wrong in the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 It's so bizarre that DC/WB tends to do their shows well (animated DCU, Smallville, and people seem to like Arrow) and can't get a proper movie franchise off the ground, while Marvel is crushing movies and can't figure out TV. They seem to be figuring out TV just fine really. The Marvel Universe block is doing well for Disney XD it seems. And despite the complaints of Agents of SHIELD it did just get a full season pick-up. And that's just their first TV show of their new era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianS81177 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 It's so bizarre that DC/WB tends to do their shows well (animated DCU, Smallville, and people seem to like Arrow) and can't get a proper movie franchise off the ground, while Marvel is crushing movies and can't figure out TV. That's my rule of thumb. And I like SHIELD but even I wouldn't say it's anywhere near as awesome as Arrow. People going gaga over Jessica Drew Skye should see the hot hacker chick, Felicity, they have on Arrow. I can understand missing on the handsome male lead but when Greg Berlanti does Quirky Nerdy Dreamgirl better than Joss f'n Whedon, there's something wrong in the universe. Spoilered for size: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raziel Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 As much as I like the Marvel stuff and know that Marvel does a better job with TV/Film than DC does, but Arrow > SHIELD. By a LONG shot. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buy Me a Burrito Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 I'm shocked that there isn't an Arrow thread. The first season was decent, but I've loved the second season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts