rmontro
-
Posts
5.6k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by rmontro
-
-
9 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:
Eh, I don't have a problem with Sheldon helping with something he's the best at. Connie was still there taking direction from him. It doesn't make it any better if she does it all by herself, and probably in an inferior manner.
Yeah, I didn't see anything written in the rules that she had to organize the room by herself. If Sheldon wanted to volunteer his time to the church, so much the better.
9 hours ago, kay1864 said:I don’t foresee the Georgie and Mandy show doing too well.
You might be right, but Georgie is likable enough. You make a good point that Mandy's mom doesn't really add any comedy to the situations, that might be a problem in the new show. They showed clips of it during the commercials, did they start filming it already? It appeared so. The show is called Georgie and Mandy's First Marriage. That suggests they might have married each other more than once, which is something I had wondered about before.
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, amarante said:
Poaching a nanny is a heinous violation of the Girl Code - or is it the Mommy Code?
We haven't really seen Morgan be a real witch for awhile now. Maybe they had forgotten that was her personality, and decided to get her back to character for the final episodes. And she was also dumping all the chump jobs on Dom. Was that her just being mean again, or was she trying to teach him some sort of lesson?
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Annber03 said:
Aw, I liked that ending with Jorcan talking to Asher's photo. Interesting to see her reaction to the guy claiming to be Jesus this episode, to see her own religious beliefs being challenged as they were.
Someone was complaining a few weeks ago about how Asher had warmed back up to his Judaism again, and now in this episode Jordan loses his her faith (although she apparently got it back again). People on this show don't seem to have very stable beliefs.
Seems a little strange that the guy who thought he was Jesus was okay to give his consent to the kidney donation, but suddenly when they found out they could cure him, he wasn't anymore. Either he was or he wasn't.
There are three episodes left. I wonder why they killed Asher off like they did, so close to the finish line? Makes me wonder if the actor had another job lined up or something. I hope they keep Jerome around for the limited time left. Would they kill off Glassman and make him unavailable for a possible reunion show in ten years? I see a final scene for him walking off into the sun with his daughter.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, MagnusHex said:
2x6: The Doomsday Machine
This has always been my favorite episode, for whatever reason. Or used to be. I've mentioned this before, but I don't like the way they've changed the look of the Doomsday machine in the new episodes with the updated special effects. Originally it was a cool, glacial looking blue, and they changed it to more of a green, and made the hull smoother looking. I don't understand what was wrong with the original look or color. And it was so iconic from my childhood, I did not appreciate the change. One of the few (only?) cases where I like the original special effect to the updated one. I thought the original machine looked great.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:
Then again it's probably for the best that this was all they really used from the Ultimates
They pulled a lot from the Ultimate Universe when making the Fan4stic movie, and all of that was a bad idea. I hated that they made the FF a teenage genius thinktank, the FF should be a family, and that works better with a bit of an age spread.
I kind of liked what they did with the Ultimates though, which was their version of the Avengers. And of course we got Miles Morales from the Ultimate Universe also.
-
18 hours ago, Tenshinhan said:
I get why fans of the original versions of characters might be turned off by the changes, but I think you may be overestimating the overall impact and significance of that particular group of fans. It's not the comic book fans who have made these films as successful as they are, it's the general moviegoing audience.
Well hey, all the more reason to tell the fans to go take a flying leap, right? That is the message that Disney seems to be sending out. But since Disney has moved toward caring about the fans less, the success of their movies has decreased also, and in a big way. So it may be the comic book fans are more valuable than you or they think.
Now it looks like they are looking to the Fox franchises (Deadpool and Wolverine) to set the MCU on the right path. Something that was once unthinkable. Ryan Reynolds is definitely looking to please the fan. Isn't that a refreshing attitude?
If you don't want to do these franchises justice, why buy them? It just becomes a big money grab.
-
2
-
-
11 hours ago, Simon Boccanegra said:
Larry was only retiring from Curb Your Enthusiasm, not retiring period.
That's good news. I liked his Clear History movie. It almost seemed like a long form episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm, the character was very similar. Maybe he can do something like that.
-
5 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:
MCU didn't do so well with their female characters (an understatement) in part IMO because the best Marvel female characters are in the X-Men comics and then in Fantastic Four. There is no Marvel equivalent to Wonder Woman. Marvel works IMO better with teams. I think they can make a new success now that they have all of them in the same playground.
They did pretty well with Natasha/Black Widow, she always came across as real (or as real as can be in a superhero movie). She was highly skilled, but you never got the impression she didn't earn it, or just magically have it like a Mary Sue, she was trained intensively. Of course that was before Marvel started failing.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Trini said:
Yeah, it doesn't really make sense for everyone in the restaurant to follow along; but I think that was 'breaking the fourth wall' and/or audience participation moment for the movie audience.
That possibility did cross my mind, that the scene wasn't mean to show reality necessarily, but a surrealistic artful depiction of what was going on.
-
I just saw this again, and there's one particular scene I wonder about:
The scene where Fred and Lloyd are in the cafe and Fred asks him to do the moment of silence to think about all the people who "loved them into being". All the people in the restaurant follow along with them. How do they know what they are doing? Have they been listening to the whole conversation since Mr. Rodgers is a celebrity? Or (probably more likely) are they so used to Fred eating there that they know what he's doing, because they've seen him do it so often, and they go along with it?
-
2 hours ago, Chyromaniac said:
I'm not talking about any old man or woman - I'm talking about presenting a character that is essentially the same in every way to the original, the only difference being that it's a woman instead of a man. Same personality, same storyline - would that character have the same resonance? If not then I think we know what the issue is.
That sounds a little judgemental. When I was growing up, we were told we weren't supposed to "see color", because that was racist. Now we are told we are supposed to see color or people won't be seen. In other words, we are told that race is part of the experience of the person. So if that is the case, how could it be the same person if you change their race? If you think about it, that doesn't make sense.
I haven't seen the new Wonder Man yet, but the race change there doesn't bother me. But if it is one of my very favorite characters, no I don't want the race changed, or anything else changed about them. Besides which, it's lazy. Make new compelling characters that are more diverse. That makes more sense anyway. Most of these characters from the Lee/Kirby days were from a time when the US was not at all as diverse as it is now, not even close. Let's have some creativity today, Hollywood seems to rely only on sequels, reboots, remakes, and adaptations these days. Where are today's creators?
-
24 minutes ago, Chyromaniac said:
Okay, so what if the Silver Surfer in the MCU is from Zenn-La, makes a deal with Galactus to spare the planet, and goes on to be his herald until reaching earth and confronting the F4? Everything about the character's motives, emotions, personality and ethics are the same, and the plotline and visuals are presented with all the gravitas of the original comics. The only difference is that instead of a shiny naked guy on a surfboard, it's a shiny naked lady. Why is that a big deal? If it's the same story with the same messages, it should have the same meaning right?
It's not a big deal to me. But if someone was a huge Silver Surfer/Norrin Radd fan, I would understand it if they were a little disappointed, because they wanted to see their favorite debut in the MCU, and now is either going to have to wait, or never get it. And there are people upset about it. But although I like the Surfer, I'm not upset about this, mainly because I think we'll eventually be getting Norrin Radd Surfer in the 616 universe. Rumors are the FF universe is going to be destroyed, possibly by an incursion. Does that kill off Lady Surfer?
Wasn't there going to be a Silver Surfer TV series on Disney Plus? Was that one of the projects that got cancelled when Disney went into the dumpster?
-
21 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:
Do you really think that comic book fans are a united "we" who all want the same thing?
No, but I think there is a sweet spot in there. And more particularly, there are fans of each team or character. If you're a fan of Superman, for example, you probably want him to be from the planet Krypton, and not Viltrum. You might want him to be adopted by a couple named the Kents. You might want to see him seek a career in journalism. You might want to see him with a good upbringing, and not killing people left and right like he's the Punisher.
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Tenshinhan said:
Reed can still be the leader of the team even if they make Sue the lead character and focus of the film. Having the story revolve around Sue doesn't necessarily diminish Reed's role and vision. It all depends on the writing and how they choose to tell the story.
Agreed. One of the problems with the MCU's attempts to push more female heroines is they haven't done a good job of writing real female, feminine characters. If they can do that with Sue, while keeping Reed as the true, but distracted and sometimes misguided genius, they'll do well.
10 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:What we now know is that until a few years ago, there was an intentional bias against having women and people of color as main characters. Having them now is putting things to normal, not having an opposite bias.
Having more diversity is fine. Intentionally changing beloved characters in order to fill out those quotas is not. And I want to tell you, there are few things in pop culture as beloved to me as the Fantastic Four. I've been a fan since I was in the single digits.
And I completely disagree that you cannot serve comic book fans. It isn't that complicated. They have done it, for the most part, up through Endgame. We don't ask for anything that unreasonable, for the most part. Most of us are aware there are differences in the film and comic format, and don't expect page by page recreations. We just want a little respect, and for them to capture the essence of the books that make them entertaining.
-
2 hours ago, Tenshinhan said:
I don't think that socially responsible filmmaking is a bad thing. Those DEI standards are in place for a purpose. Also, you can be socially responsible while also serving the story and pleasing the fans, all at the same time. Take out Norrin Radd and replace him with Shalla-Bal and you can do just that.
Bearing in mind that I don't particularly care that they're using Shalla-Bel in this case since it's a different universe, and we may see Norrin Radd in the regular MCU:
Being "socially responsible" is fine, but there are plenty of ways to do that without having to change iconic characters. People don't want their very favorite characters gender swapped or race swapped, they want to see their favorites up on the screen, as if they had walked off the comic book pages. That's why RDJ worked so well as Tony Stark, he looked and acted like the comic book character. Why can't they show some creativity and create new characters that are "socially responsible" instead of hijacking old ones?
Sue has acted as field leader for the Fantastic Four at times during the comic's run, but Reed is the leader of the Fantastic Four, and always will be. He is the entire reason they exist, and they go on their adventures because Reed is such a gifted genius that they have a unique opportunity to aid humanity by helping him bring his vision to life.
-
27 minutes ago, Tenshinhan said:
What exactly is Disney's "agenda" as you see it?
What you've said and they've said, DEI. Feige has said they want 51% of the heroes to be female, and reportedly when he saw the first three cast members of the Fantastic Four, his response was "Too white". Followed by their hiring Pedro Pascal. Now I think Pascal will likely do a passable job, but you have to admit, he doesn't exactly scream "Reed Richards".
It may very well be as you say, that they chose the female Surfer for story reasons, but given their stated intentions, and past actions, I think it's much more likely she is there to satisfy the DEI factor. What Disney should realize is comic book fans have always been mostly male, and buy into that. I think I saw a stat that even with The Marvels (a movie aimed more at females), the audience was 2/3 male. As I said before, "Shalla Bel Surfer" doesn't ruin the movie for me, but I would expect to get Norrin Radd in the 616 Universe.
There are also rumors that Sue will be considered the lead and focus of the FF movie. I can see how they might effectively tell the movie from her viewpoint, but if you know Marvel comics history, the Reed Richards character should really be the next Tony Stark, but better. Some have speculated that they will turn this Reed Richards into The Maker, but if they do that, what is the point of getting us attached to this Fantastic Four team? Unless they don't plan on having any sequels. Which, I guess they won't, if it bombs. But you would still expect the FF to be popping up in MCU movies fairly routinely for the near future at leats.
-
5 hours ago, Raja said:
The question is how much a factor the nerds excitement in finally having their stories "told right" was a driver in the billions the Avengers made? Without their collective seal of approval are MCU productions just another movie. Another in a long line that did it wrong before Jon Favreau and Joss Whedon brought the MCU's most important films in correct enough for them.
I've been saying this all along, but a lot of people disagree. IMO, you have to please the core comic book fans, you have to please the fans of the source material, because then you create a positive foundation from which to sell the product to a larger audience. Displease the core fans, and you create negativity and bad word of mouth around your movie, that simply isn't necessary.
And maybe, just maybe, it's a good thing to respect the source material, because maybe, just maybe, there was something good there that attracted people to it in the first place.
This is main difference between the earlier MCU movies (up through say, Endgame), and the ones we've received since. And it's clear a lot of this is because Disney is more interested in pushing their agenda than in pleasing the fans.
-
1
-
-
It's a different universe's Silver Surfer, so I suppose it doesn't matter much, although clearly some comic fans don't feel served by this. Problem is, this is a different universe's Fantastic Four also, so why should we care about them?
Rumor is this Fantastic Four will be made a permanent part of the MCU reality, along with the X-Men, by some cosmic event. Okay. Now what about the female Silver Surfer? Does she get moved to the MCU also, or do we get Norrin Radd? I'm guessing, and I prefer, the latter. Because I don't like changes to iconic characters simply to please DEI standards, as opposed to storyline and serving the fans of the source material.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, LennieBriscoe said:
"[A] continuity error"?! SNL isn't some long-running drama where characters and plot are usually linear!
You're right of course, it was just my way of saying that it appeared she had done that to retire that character. Although I would also say that my impression was that all those skits had taken place consecutively up to that point.
-
On 4/11/2024 at 3:15 PM, Stuckathome said:
But then there was an episode where Jeff tells Larry he was screwing the dental hygienist and she had to get an abortion. He paid and she had been squeezing him for more and more cash, so Larry tries to find out if she actually ever was pregnant and had the procedure. Maybe I am naive, but....this is a thing?
From my observation, there are a lot of people who think and behave that way. I certainly don't agree with it, but it's their life. I'd say Jeff is a classic case of wanting his cake and eating it too.
The whole relationship with Suzie, Jeff, and Larry is so odd to begin with. Larry and Suzie sometimes get along like best friends, and seem genuinely fond of each other. And at other times they are like mortal enemies.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, MrWhyt said:
one of the best things IMO about this sketch is, aside from the shared laugh, was that they weren't Beavis and Butthead, they just looked like them. Having actual B and B would have pushed things too far.
Subtlety isn't the first thing I would have thought about with this sketch lol, but I guess you're right!
-
22 hours ago, EtheltoTillie said:
I laughed so hard at the Beavis sketch I woke up my husband who was in another room behind a closed door. It was just so silly. I never laugh for real at SNL.
But did you laugh as hard as Heidi Gardner? I've never seen her lose it like that. But there was too much breaking throughout the show, they just never let up on it. Kudos to whoever wrote that Beavis and Butthead sketch, I think it was one of the most original things I've seen on SNL, and it was genuinely funny.
I've always loved the alien sketch. I was hoping Kate McKinnon would do one when she hosted awhile back, but holding it for Gosling makes sense. But her character supposedly permanently left earth with the aliens on her farewell show, so we have a continuity error.
-
2
-
-
I think a MeeMaw spinoff, or a Mom and Missy could be good.
4 hours ago, chitowngirl said:SpoilerA friend of mine was only married for a week, so it could have been a short marriage. Georgie and Mandy could have gotten a divorce, Georgie have a short relationship with this second wife, and then have him get back with Mandy. They could even throw it into the middle of the spinoff somewhere if they wanted to, although I'm not saying that would be a good idea.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, januaryman said:
Sheldon came off as a buffoon in this episode. They don't know how to write him anymore.
I think it's more like they don't care anymore. The other characters are more interesting. Kind of strange when you consider what a focus of TBBT Sheldon was, but I guess it's a different kind of show.
Mandy seems to be getting a lot of hate here. I like her, though I admit she doesn't do much. Do we know from TBBT if Georgie ended up divorced? You can answer in spoilers if you like.
-
4
-
S07.E10: Community Service And The Key To A Happy Marriage
in Young Sheldon
I think the reason it's called Georgie and Mandy's First Marriage is to address the info from Big Bang Theory that Georgie had been divorced. The title hints that even if they separate in the future, they may end up back together, so this allows the fan to buy into their relationship without as much hesitation.