I've been a fan of the site ever since the first anniversary movie and have followed just about every reviewer on the site. Throughout the years I have watched just about every video the TGWTG crew have put up there are videos I've enjoyed and there are videos I don't enjoy and recently I find myself not that much of a fan of the site.
Granted there are still reviewers of the site that I do enjoy but I find myself rather distant from it and I'm going to give reasons as to why and also talk about some of the reviewers on the site.
Lately their jokes can range between either funny or juvenile and by juvenile I mean on Family Guy levels, the best example I can give concerning that are Phoelous and Nostalgia Critic, recently.
Phoelous
I've followed his reviews and the one review that I happen to find decent was his A Sirbian Film review. Not because of the humor but because it's one of his few reviews that actually portrays some decent emotion out of it. What I find irritating about his reviews is that he can come off as a douchebag. In his regular reviews outside of A Sirbian Film he comes off as the kind of guy you feel like you just want to punch in the face or tell em to STFU. Especially with the way he makes those faces whenever he says something condescending
Nostalgia Critic
I wouldn't go as far as to call him my all time favorite reviewer, Linkara is first and Nostalgia Chick is second, however I do consider him one of my favorite reviewers at the time. But the more I watch his later videos the more I start to see how stale he has became. Also I tend to get irritated whenever he'd try to force feed his Demo Reel crew into his recent reviews. That and the majority of the reviews now aren't even reviews of old movies. It just takes the nostalgia out of the Nostalgia Critic, if all he's going to do is recent stuff then shouldn't he be called The Critic instead? Also his high pitched screaming can get annoying if done constantly.
I do happen to like his Avatar reviews as it's as close to an honest review I've seen and he isn't doing the typical angry reviewer stick.
I find myself reaching a point where I don't take the guys reviews seriously anymore tbh. Yeah I know they're not supposed to be taken seriously given their style but they still try to come off as legit reviewers and would often credit actual reviewers like Siskel and Ebert as their inspiration. Having seen their material they don't come off like those guys, on their worst day, they come off as the posters one sees in the comic forums. And you know the kind I'm talking about.
For instance when The Dark Knight Rises came out just about the majority of the people on the site seem to hate it. I put it off then I started to notice something in the Man of Steel review and I noticed something thats rather similar to TDKR. When Doug hates something everyone on that site follows. You have a few exceptions but it seems that when the boss hates something they're inclined to hate it too. So lets say if Doug hates Avengers 2 or the Superman/Batman movie then do they have to blindly agree with him? It reminds me of when Alan Moore did a rant against Watchmen and just about every comic fanboy complained about how much the movie sucked, not because they've seen it to give that kind of a fair judgment but just because to kiss Alan Moore's butt. It's that kind of sheep mentality I don't really care for.
Another reviewer I don't care for is Blockbuster Buster. The guy comes off as a fanboy than a legit reviewer. Also the guy's often been accused of not doing his research when reviewing something. Someone had pointed out a few inaccuracies from his Revenge of The Fallen review. One thing I roll my eyes on is his view on how he finds that Dreamworks makes bad movies, the two Kung Fu Panda movies, Rise of The Guardians, and Megamind is among the many movies that proves his theory wrong. I do however like him better when he's reviewing fan films, that really should be his job right there as it's not often you have someone that reviews fan films these days.
There are some reviewers I do happen to like though
Nostalgia Chick, especially when Nella is involved. She's actually informative when she does her reviews.
Cinema Snob: I like his reviews on old exploitation flicks and just about any scene with his cats in em. As far as his non-Cinema Snob stuff goes I like his regular movie reviews but only when he's doing him solo or when it's with Jillian, who should have her own show. Outside of his other crew like Sarah and Jake I don't really are much for the other Snob Crew. Especially Dave.
Dave to me sounds like the equivalent of a bratty child that one sees at a supermarket or any store when reviewing a movie. This is him at his worst.
http://blip.tv/the-cinema-snob/midnight-screenings-carrie-6668872
It didn't make me not want to watch Carrie but it did make me want to press the mute button so I don't really hold his opinion in any high value.
Spoony: I know some people would think typical angry reviewer but to me when looking at Spoony's reviews he comes off more honest than your usual angry reviewer. Also he rarely gets angry in his reviews, he mostly does when it's something thats actually worth it.
Linkara: I AM A MAAN!!! Also I like his arc stuff and when he rants on a comic you know it deserves the rant it gets. That and while he also did say something negative about MOS I at least can buy that what he's saying was honest, not because The Boss, hated it.
Suede: He's one of the few people that comes off as a angry reviewer
Welshy: The guy can be funny at times and my personal favorite was his Braindead and Doctor Who reviews.
So yeah these are my thoughts. If you have any thoughts relating to this drop a comment or if you have a reviewer that you like or don't like then also drop a comment.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Friday, October 18, 2013
Remakes
Just three words....reel it in.
Has horror movies in mainstream hollywood declined so badly that they need to depend on remakes of a classic horror movie or a novel to get it out of the hole that its in? Just you know this isn't an attack on the Carrie remake that has already came out but just wanted to point something out. It really didn't need a remake.
I respect the effort that the two stars of the movie put out and the movie did look like it was trying, which is more than I can say for most remakes, however it still falls under the cash grab remake. A horror movie that mainstream hollywood decides to remake just for the soul purpose of putting butts in seats.
Carrie has been remade so many times that I actually felt that they were beating a dead horse by remaking it again.
There were some satisfying moments, the roaring rampage of revenge. Still doesn't ignore the fact that a remake wasn't needed but I wouldn't go as far as to call it a horrible movie since there was some effort put in but not enough to put this movie in the same category with other gems like John Carpenters The Thing or Dawn of The Dead because of the fact that it was scene for scene. It didn't really do anything innovative. You know, some would find this ridiculous but I don't care. Have Carrie's mom be a psychic and the two have a psychic showdown. Least that would have been a curveball.
I happen to get a hidden message to this. With the string of anti-bullying stuff going on one could confuse the Carrie remake as a anti-bullying propaganda film. Although it makes me a little concern with the message it's giving. Ok replace psychic powers in the movie with someone going on a shooting rampage. Yeah not a message I'd recommend with what has been going on as of late.
Would I recommend this movie to anyone? Only if you have nothing to watch but honestly watch Chronicle instead since thats the closest to a good Carrie remake I've seen.
Still mainstream hollywood, it wouldn't kill you to do something original. Especially since the foreign films are kicking your butts when it comes to horror.
Has horror movies in mainstream hollywood declined so badly that they need to depend on remakes of a classic horror movie or a novel to get it out of the hole that its in? Just you know this isn't an attack on the Carrie remake that has already came out but just wanted to point something out. It really didn't need a remake.
I respect the effort that the two stars of the movie put out and the movie did look like it was trying, which is more than I can say for most remakes, however it still falls under the cash grab remake. A horror movie that mainstream hollywood decides to remake just for the soul purpose of putting butts in seats.
Carrie has been remade so many times that I actually felt that they were beating a dead horse by remaking it again.
There were some satisfying moments, the roaring rampage of revenge. Still doesn't ignore the fact that a remake wasn't needed but I wouldn't go as far as to call it a horrible movie since there was some effort put in but not enough to put this movie in the same category with other gems like John Carpenters The Thing or Dawn of The Dead because of the fact that it was scene for scene. It didn't really do anything innovative. You know, some would find this ridiculous but I don't care. Have Carrie's mom be a psychic and the two have a psychic showdown. Least that would have been a curveball.
I happen to get a hidden message to this. With the string of anti-bullying stuff going on one could confuse the Carrie remake as a anti-bullying propaganda film. Although it makes me a little concern with the message it's giving. Ok replace psychic powers in the movie with someone going on a shooting rampage. Yeah not a message I'd recommend with what has been going on as of late.
Would I recommend this movie to anyone? Only if you have nothing to watch but honestly watch Chronicle instead since thats the closest to a good Carrie remake I've seen.
Still mainstream hollywood, it wouldn't kill you to do something original. Especially since the foreign films are kicking your butts when it comes to horror.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Good vs Good
First off this isn't me hating the concept of good guys vs good guys because quite frankly, when done right, it can be a entertaining story. However I just want to talk about this topic because there are certain situations within this topic that I find irritating. So today I'm going to jot down some examples relating on the subject as to how a good vs good story can be really good and sometimes it can be wallbangingly horrible.
Wolverine vs Cyclops
Yes any comic fan are familiar with the story of how these two are at eachother's throats. To be perfectly honest, I find it overrated. The whole Wolverine, Scott, Jean love triangle has been told so many times that it has lost whatever appeal it had since the triangle started. Also it can get irritating when it starts to affect how either side leads the team and even put their own teammates in danger because Wolverine and Cyclops couldn't just stow their crap.
One of the things I liked about X-Men Evolution is that it didn't use the love triangle issue and it didn't have Logan and Scott at eachothers throats. Hell Logan even supported Jean/Scott. That alone in itself was refreshing.
Whats even sadder is that when Jean is dead and out of the picture instead of having Cyclops and Wolverine settle their differences they're still at eachothers throats and you know what that soon resulted in? Avengers vs X-Men.
It's like no matter what they do they always get in a fight over something that eventually ends up putting the whole team in jeopardy.
What I also don't really care for is that whenever Cyclops and Wolverine fight you hardly see Jean step in and put a stop to it. In honesty it just makes her look bad on her part. That and the sneaking behind Scott's back to make out with Logan doesn't do her any favors.
Also, if I'm wrong then pardons because it's been awhile since reading an X-Men comic, nobody has called either side out on their crap and the damage it's doing to the team. If I were one of the X-Men I'd get annoyed whenever Scott and Logan bicker over Jean and even more irritated when Jean just watch.
I'm glad that Marvel is the only company of the big two that has the decency to not do a reboot but if it comes a time that they do then pleeeease don't rehash an old tired story involving the love triangle. Why not try something innovative?
Civil War/Avengers vs X-Men
Ugh where to begin. You have one arc that pretty much was Marvel's equivalent of Identity Crisis but instead of a physical rape it metaphorically raped the characteristics of the Marvel Characters and almost destroyed what made them likable then on the other hand you have an arc that is basically Civil War II with both characters not learning squat from their previous experience.
The way I look at it Civil War was something that could have been settle if things were just talked out instead of one big "Lets all settle our differences by fighting eachother."
The sad thing about this is that despite who is right and who is wrong you have both leaders Steve/Tony and Scott/Logan/Steve again acting pretty childish in the whole conflict. And the storyline on each arc was pretty half assed to begin with. Which says something when Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 did a better version of Civil War than the comic version did, so did a fic called Not A Typical Civil War.
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/6470827/1/Not_a_Typical_Civil_War
Note: To fans of Maria Hill you might not like this one but keep in mind this was before Maria got developed into a well rounded character and I'd still recommend it to see another example of Civil War done right.
I'd also recommend this.
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8359430/1/Firebirds
What AvsX should have been.
What makes it worse is that it wasn't a villain pulling the strings. I would have accepted Civil War and AvsX if it had been revealed that a supervillain was manipulating the whole situation. But it didn't turn out that way. Instead we got something that could have been resolved with both representatives talking it out but ended up being the clusterfuck of all clusterfucks.
Amazons Attack
Linkara says it better than I could
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/amazons-attack-1-and-2.html
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/amazons-attack-3-and-4.html
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/amazons-attack-5-and-6.html
What is it with DC's intent on treating the Amazons like a douche treating a homeless guy begging for change?
There have been some good moments from Good vs Good
Superman vs Flash
No actual fighting or someone getting hurt over it just two guys involved in a friendly competition. With Myxy manipulating things.
Grudge Match
1. Mind control was involved
2. Villain manipulating the scenes
3. They kicked villains butt after the mind control is done
4. SUPERPOWERED GIRL FIGHT!!!! SUPERPOWERED GIRL FIGHT!!!!
The Cadmus Arc in Justice League Unlimited
1. Villain manipulating the scenes
2. Heroes actually learning something and working to improve after said arc
3. Speed Force
It's also Civil War but done by a competent storyteller.
The Avengers
1. Villain manipulating the scenes in the first act
2. Heroes banding together after they learned they were manipulated.
3. Puny God
So what I'm saying is Good vs Good can be ok but at least have one villain manipulating the scenes and have the heroes in question learn and mature from that experience. Also you can do it in a friendly competition manner. Take this video for instance
Wolverine vs Cyclops
Yes any comic fan are familiar with the story of how these two are at eachother's throats. To be perfectly honest, I find it overrated. The whole Wolverine, Scott, Jean love triangle has been told so many times that it has lost whatever appeal it had since the triangle started. Also it can get irritating when it starts to affect how either side leads the team and even put their own teammates in danger because Wolverine and Cyclops couldn't just stow their crap.
One of the things I liked about X-Men Evolution is that it didn't use the love triangle issue and it didn't have Logan and Scott at eachothers throats. Hell Logan even supported Jean/Scott. That alone in itself was refreshing.
Whats even sadder is that when Jean is dead and out of the picture instead of having Cyclops and Wolverine settle their differences they're still at eachothers throats and you know what that soon resulted in? Avengers vs X-Men.
It's like no matter what they do they always get in a fight over something that eventually ends up putting the whole team in jeopardy.
What I also don't really care for is that whenever Cyclops and Wolverine fight you hardly see Jean step in and put a stop to it. In honesty it just makes her look bad on her part. That and the sneaking behind Scott's back to make out with Logan doesn't do her any favors.
Also, if I'm wrong then pardons because it's been awhile since reading an X-Men comic, nobody has called either side out on their crap and the damage it's doing to the team. If I were one of the X-Men I'd get annoyed whenever Scott and Logan bicker over Jean and even more irritated when Jean just watch.
I'm glad that Marvel is the only company of the big two that has the decency to not do a reboot but if it comes a time that they do then pleeeease don't rehash an old tired story involving the love triangle. Why not try something innovative?
Civil War/Avengers vs X-Men
Ugh where to begin. You have one arc that pretty much was Marvel's equivalent of Identity Crisis but instead of a physical rape it metaphorically raped the characteristics of the Marvel Characters and almost destroyed what made them likable then on the other hand you have an arc that is basically Civil War II with both characters not learning squat from their previous experience.
The way I look at it Civil War was something that could have been settle if things were just talked out instead of one big "Lets all settle our differences by fighting eachother."
The sad thing about this is that despite who is right and who is wrong you have both leaders Steve/Tony and Scott/Logan/Steve again acting pretty childish in the whole conflict. And the storyline on each arc was pretty half assed to begin with. Which says something when Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 did a better version of Civil War than the comic version did, so did a fic called Not A Typical Civil War.
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/6470827/1/Not_a_Typical_Civil_War
Note: To fans of Maria Hill you might not like this one but keep in mind this was before Maria got developed into a well rounded character and I'd still recommend it to see another example of Civil War done right.
I'd also recommend this.
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8359430/1/Firebirds
What AvsX should have been.
What makes it worse is that it wasn't a villain pulling the strings. I would have accepted Civil War and AvsX if it had been revealed that a supervillain was manipulating the whole situation. But it didn't turn out that way. Instead we got something that could have been resolved with both representatives talking it out but ended up being the clusterfuck of all clusterfucks.
Amazons Attack
Linkara says it better than I could
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/amazons-attack-1-and-2.html
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/amazons-attack-3-and-4.html
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2009/03/amazons-attack-5-and-6.html
What is it with DC's intent on treating the Amazons like a douche treating a homeless guy begging for change?
There have been some good moments from Good vs Good
Superman vs Flash
No actual fighting or someone getting hurt over it just two guys involved in a friendly competition. With Myxy manipulating things.
Grudge Match
1. Mind control was involved
2. Villain manipulating the scenes
3. They kicked villains butt after the mind control is done
4. SUPERPOWERED GIRL FIGHT!!!! SUPERPOWERED GIRL FIGHT!!!!
The Cadmus Arc in Justice League Unlimited
1. Villain manipulating the scenes
2. Heroes actually learning something and working to improve after said arc
3. Speed Force
It's also Civil War but done by a competent storyteller.
The Avengers
1. Villain manipulating the scenes in the first act
2. Heroes banding together after they learned they were manipulated.
3. Puny God
So what I'm saying is Good vs Good can be ok but at least have one villain manipulating the scenes and have the heroes in question learn and mature from that experience. Also you can do it in a friendly competition manner. Take this video for instance
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Scott Pilgrim/Knives/Ramona: A Deconstructive Love Triangle
Scott Pilgrim vs The World
While I still don't consider the movie as a masterpiece like some people made it out to be I tend to notice some hidden storytelling elements in the movie. For instance the love triangle between Scott/Ramona/Knives.
Scott was dating a girl named Knives but at some point Scott was starting to feel dissatisfied with the relationship then wants to have a clean break from it. He then meets a girl named Ramona and this is where the deconstructive side of the love triangle comes in.
Scott Pilgrim isn't exactly the kind of person that any young woman should be involved with. When it comes to relationship issues the dude can be pretty wishy washy. But then again... his two respective love interest are just as messed up. You have Knives who'd go complete Yandere the minute someone breaks up with her and you have Ramona who'd use then toss away her boyfriends/girlfriend at the drop of a hat and has relationship issues that are as messed up as Scott's.
In your usual love triangle in this scenario theres the Archie archtype, Betty archtype, and Veronica archtype. Scott Pilgrim is the subversion of the Archie archtype in that when you look at him there really isn't anything about him thats likable. He has a excuse due to his past girlfriend dumping him and because of that it makes it hard for him to have a meaningful relationship. It still doesn't excuse the fact that he's willing to dump Knives for someone better. Ramona is the subversion of the Betty archtype due to the fact that she isn't some sweet homely girl that any normal person would be lucky to be involved with and she is singlehandedly responsible for the Seven Evil Exes tormenting Scott. Knives is the subversion of the Veronica archtype due to that she doesn't flaunt her family background to others, she comes from a family of ninjas, but when someone does her wrong she'd go Glenn Close on someone.
The message that I got from the love story is that when it all boils down to it that neither individuals are good for eachother since remaining together just hurt them even more. Knives did the right thing by ending things but Ramona and Scott ended up together. Happy ending???? Maybe to some but the way I see it whose to say Scott wouldn't get bored of Ramona or worse....Ramona dumps Scott then she continues the Evil Exes Cycle with Scott being the first of the Exes. Not a happy ending as one would think.
So in a way Scott Pilgrim vs The World actually showcase a more damaging side of the love triangle cliche. Maybe even the harem cliche when taking Ramona into consideration.
Does overexposure of your favorite character ruin your enjoyment of the character
I remember awhile back I was reading some of Movie Bob's video articles and I came across this one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/6865-Enough-With-The-Batman-Already
Not that I agree with him but I even have reached that point long before the article came about. Think about this. What DC character has had more animated movies than any of the DC Characters? Batman. The only DC character that rivals him is Superman. When it comes to animated movies Batman has had more opportunities than anyother DC superhero/heroine. It has reached a point where people on message boards have voiced their irritation on how overexposed he is in the animation movie department.
Before the reboot there have been lots of comics featuring him. The guy has been on the cover more times than Wolverine, which I'll get to later. People even talk about how the character is getting top billing while Superman is the least popular of the two. Lets put it this way. Batman/Superman & Wolverine/Cyclops have some things in common.
The fans like Batman/Wolverine due to the fact that they both have dark and troubled past and that they're badasses and that they're chick magnets. Also they seem to play the mentor/ father figure role to teen hero characters. Meanwhile you have other people who don't care for Cyclops/Superman because they find the characters goody goody or dull or isn't dark enough like Wolverine/Batman. I remember a humorous nudge nudge joke Timm made during the Worlds Finest episode from Superman TAS where they toyed with a triangle involving Bruce, Superman, Lois. Of course that didn't stick but I got the joke. Still I bet there is some comic fan out there that would rather have Lois go with Bruce on grounds that he's more interesting than "boring" Clark Kent.
Another similarity is that it sometimes seem that whenever Batman and Superman paired with eachother it's Superman that plays second fiddle. Much like when Cyclops and Wolverine are paired with eachother it's Cyclops that plays second fiddle. However Bruce Timm actually managed to write Superman and Batman respectively while the ones who did X-Men Evolution managed to treat Wolverine and Cyclops respectively. I also liked how Cyclops and Wolverine was written in 90's X-Men. Wolverine gets to showcase his skills yet Cyclops showcase how badass he is also.
I don't think the overexposure of a couple of characters automatically makes them a bad character. While I'd sometimes avoid anything involving Batman and Wolverine like the plague I still like them since they're one of the main things that got me into comics. Just....give them a break already. I know they're cash cows but there are other interesting characters they can use. It doesn't always have to be about Batman and Wolverine. And for the love of God don't make every superheros personalities mimic theirs. Otherwise you'd have a pretty dull universe.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/6865-Enough-With-The-Batman-Already
Not that I agree with him but I even have reached that point long before the article came about. Think about this. What DC character has had more animated movies than any of the DC Characters? Batman. The only DC character that rivals him is Superman. When it comes to animated movies Batman has had more opportunities than anyother DC superhero/heroine. It has reached a point where people on message boards have voiced their irritation on how overexposed he is in the animation movie department.
Before the reboot there have been lots of comics featuring him. The guy has been on the cover more times than Wolverine, which I'll get to later. People even talk about how the character is getting top billing while Superman is the least popular of the two. Lets put it this way. Batman/Superman & Wolverine/Cyclops have some things in common.
The fans like Batman/Wolverine due to the fact that they both have dark and troubled past and that they're badasses and that they're chick magnets. Also they seem to play the mentor/ father figure role to teen hero characters. Meanwhile you have other people who don't care for Cyclops/Superman because they find the characters goody goody or dull or isn't dark enough like Wolverine/Batman. I remember a humorous nudge nudge joke Timm made during the Worlds Finest episode from Superman TAS where they toyed with a triangle involving Bruce, Superman, Lois. Of course that didn't stick but I got the joke. Still I bet there is some comic fan out there that would rather have Lois go with Bruce on grounds that he's more interesting than "boring" Clark Kent.
Another similarity is that it sometimes seem that whenever Batman and Superman paired with eachother it's Superman that plays second fiddle. Much like when Cyclops and Wolverine are paired with eachother it's Cyclops that plays second fiddle. However Bruce Timm actually managed to write Superman and Batman respectively while the ones who did X-Men Evolution managed to treat Wolverine and Cyclops respectively. I also liked how Cyclops and Wolverine was written in 90's X-Men. Wolverine gets to showcase his skills yet Cyclops showcase how badass he is also.
I don't think the overexposure of a couple of characters automatically makes them a bad character. While I'd sometimes avoid anything involving Batman and Wolverine like the plague I still like them since they're one of the main things that got me into comics. Just....give them a break already. I know they're cash cows but there are other interesting characters they can use. It doesn't always have to be about Batman and Wolverine. And for the love of God don't make every superheros personalities mimic theirs. Otherwise you'd have a pretty dull universe.
Saturday, October 5, 2013
Trailer Review: Thor-Dark World
When I first saw the trailer I wasn't that impressed with it but I managed to give it a chance anyway and hope that future trailers can improve the movie. The year of superhero films have been rather mediocre for me with the disappointment that was IM3 and Kick Ass 2 and the mediocrity of MOS. The only fun superhero movie for me happened to be a Wolverine movie called The Wolverine.
I caught this trailer when I was watching Riddick and I thought the trailer not only provided an improvement over the first trailer but it also provide me a little ray of hope for Thor: Dark World. I don't know if anyone got this vibe from the trailer but I got a Lord of The Rings vibe from this. Especially when it concerns the battle scenes. From the looks of things the stakes are much higher when compared to the first movie. Which is good. I like that in each sequel the stakes get larger in comparison to the first and that it isn't falling for the same trap most sequels do by being similar just with a few minor differences to fool the viewers.
There is alot of speculation concerning this movie it seems. There is rumors that someone will die in the movie and judging from Thor's reaction in the trailer it's someone thats close to him. Some say it's Jane while others say it's Frigga. Here is my two cents on it..
I'm a little concerned for this because I hear that Sif's role might get extended in the sequel, normally I would be happy but it just turns out that she's reduced to a designated love interest to Thor. Sif deserves better than that!!! It also seem that Frigga is getting more involvement this time around and Jane could possibly take a level in badass. Now looking at these one can say women in refrigerators but I don't see that. Just because a female character gets killed doesn't always mean women in refrigerators. If the story and build is handled well then we could have something thats pretty moving.
I also have another possible theory. What if it's Loki? It's the classic villain redemption scenario. Loki does one final good deed by protecting one of the main characters and he sacrificed his life in the process. Some evidence to back it is that the actor playing Loki might not come back so he has an out.
There is another way to look at these theories. I know for a fact that it wont be either Jane or Frigga given the importance of the characters but I wouldn't put it past the movie to make the audience think it's them but someone else dies instead while protecting them. Also since we are talking about whats technically a disney movie you know that in disney movies dead doesn't always mean dead. So here is how I see these two possible theories happening.
Sif: She dies either protecting Jane or Frigga or both. Which provides Thor the motivation he needs to take down the big bad once and for all. There is a tear jerking and heartwarming final scene between Thor and Sif before she passes on. An interesting possibility I can see is that this could be a good way to introduce Hela. Sif dies but Hela claims her so that Sif can act as her agent of death. You just have one of the major plot points for the next movie. Thor tries to save Sif from Hela's control.
Loki: Loki does one act of goodness and you might get a moment between him and Thor. It would soon be revealed that Loki didn't really die but just went into hiding.
Hope Dark World is not only an improvement over Thor but also a fun superhero movie experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)