Movie Talk (New Films, Old Films... doesn't matter) (44 Viewers)

Dostoevsky

Tzu
Administrator
May 27, 2007
89,032
It used to be kind of separated but now it's a legit part of the DC Universe. Sandman has interacted with people like Batman or Superman.
I think it's vice versa.

Batman and Superman used to mentioned at the start of the Sandman. Back at the time there wasn't Vertigo at all, it was a part of DC Universe. Then they created Vertigo pretty much cause of Sandman and Swamp thing. The main reason is that they didn't want to have Nill and Moore on a chain, they gave them the whole freedom and with that both comics became a lot better.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

JuveJay

Senior Signor
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007
75,043
Thought I'd go and see The Revenant before it closed in the cinemas, worth it. Great setting (big fan of this era/frontier), obviously a great story if slightly altered, great cast as well. The accents wobbled and confused a bit, particular Gleeson. Maybe it's just me but I notice a lot of British/Irish actors playing American roles in the past few years. I wasn't astounded by the movie but it was good.
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,333
Thought I'd go and see The Revenant before it closed in the cinemas, worth it. Great setting (big fan of this era/frontier), obviously a great story if slightly altered, great cast as well. The accents wobbled and confused a bit, particular Gleeson. Maybe it's just me but I notice a lot of British/Irish actors playing American roles in the past few years. I wasn't astounded by the movie but it was good.
Everybody in The Walking Dead is either British or Australian.
 

radekas

( ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)
Aug 26, 2009
20,200
I think it's vice versa.

Batman and Superman used to mentioned at the start of the Sandman. Back at the time there wasn't Vertigo at all, it was a part of DC Universe. Then they created Vertigo pretty much cause of Sandman and Swamp thing. The main reason is that they didn't want to have Nill and Moore on a chain, they gave them the whole freedom and with that both comics became a lot better.
It's both ways. It started in the main DC Universe, then in 1993 it was separated and then in 2010 all the titles were once again included back into the main universe.
 

Post Ironic

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
He asked that question for very important point.
@Post Ironic I get why some would take it as you did With this being only exposure to Deadpool THE character. But however small or big, for those who know the cartoon, videos or more importantly the comic, this IS Deadpool (read comics due to my brother, hence was looking forward to the zany mofo). Movie is 95 procent adaption of the crazy balls out wtf clown that is Deadpool regardless of format he is depicted in (the 5 procent remaining is for toning him down a bit from super r rated at times dark comic, it's not all humor). It's not many comic adoptions can say that.

So it's the least thing one should have with the movie itself (tho it's disjointed and mediocre at times, didn't like how director did the time jumps). Then it basically becomes wether you like the character itself to find him ridiculously funny or obnoxious.

And yeah Reynolds was amazingly well fit for the role. He was born for the role. Basically his career at his best has been this type of funny since Van Wilder. Waste of witty type of actor to do top serious roles or bland rom coms for career reasons.
I understand why people enjoy the film, even people who aren't fans of the comic... I don't have a problem admitting it's entertaining and fun at times for me, and that others would find the entirety of it this way...

Just for me, personally speaking, I can't handle close to 2 hours of that sort of humour. It felt like I was being barraged by a staccato of crude and adolescent humour. I just felt irritated by it for the last half of the movie. I haven't read the comic myself, I never read much in the way of comics growing up (@iceman), so I don't have the prior appreciation for the character in that sense. I just felt the whole thing was a little too much, and a little too smug... The director could have added a little more depth to the humour, to the meta stuff, to the satire aspect and made it a better film imo.
 

Ramin

vBookie Champion
Nov 18, 2003
4,728
Hail, Caesar! Truly awful in every sense! Bulls!t story, waste of time and money. Avoid at all costs. Coen brothers should seriously consider retiring after this nonsense.
 
OP
Elvin

Elvin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2005
36,923
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #23,434
    Never understood wtf was so special about Coen brothers anyway. They make pretentious movies and everyone sucks their dicks for it.
     

    Völler

    Always spot on
    May 6, 2012
    23,091
    O Brother, Where Art Thou, No Country for Old Men (thought it was pure shit, yes), Burn After Reading. Can't recall any other.
    Hmm, kind of surprised that you mention No Country For Old Men there. Usually it's their humor that's divisive. Still, I'd be pretty surprised if you didn't like True Grit, Inside Llewyn Davis or even something like Miller's Crossing. They're much quieter and don't have their usual quirkiness.

    Wait, what about Fargo? You didn't like that either?
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 34)