Ya, he has the Mind Stone. One would think that his first fight in Infinity War would have gone along the lines of:
"We're here to kill you and steal your Infinity Stone!"
"No, you're not"
"You're right. We're not. We'll be leaving now"
-
Features
Which movie did you watch today and how would you rate it?
- Thread starter C_Mucius_Scaevola
- Start date
Ya, he has the Mind Stone. One would think that his first fight in Infinity War would have gone along the lines of:
"We're here to kill you and steal your Infinity Stone!"
"No, you're not"
"You're right. We're not. We'll be leaving now"
prideandfall
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,118
- Location
- a drawer of inappropriate starches
- Basic Beliefs
- highly anti-religious agnostic
in his first fight in infinity war he's approximately 2 years old (or possibly less)
Vision's personality is a mix of Jarvis, whatever vague sentience is in the mind stone, and Ultron - but he's also a synthetic lifeform with no innate comprehension of how biological life functions or how brains work.
i don't think it's unreasonable that a being that is only a couple of years old that has quite obviously dedicated his time and energy into fostering his relationship to a woman and hiding out has not been training and learning to develop his combat skills and find out what all he can do with the powers of the mind stone.
The Colourful Jester
Member
Oceans 8 - 6.5/10 Good, but felt a little samey compared to the first movie. Also, not so much 8.
Hereditary - 6/10 Some good scares towards the end. But I walked out the cinema thinking "Yes, and... ?" Just felt a little pointless.
Seven Brides for Seven Brothers - 6/10 My views from today hit hard against this movie. It felt outrageously sexist. Gained some charm here and there, but it's no Calamity Jane.
Hereditary - 6/10 Some good scares towards the end. But I walked out the cinema thinking "Yes, and... ?" Just felt a little pointless.
Seven Brides for Seven Brothers - 6/10 My views from today hit hard against this movie. It felt outrageously sexist. Gained some charm here and there, but it's no Calamity Jane.
Underseer
Contributor
What did you think about it?
Underseer
Contributor
I'll buy that, although I admit that I have a soft spot for Vision in part because I think the character Commander Data was somewhat based on him. It doesn't hurt that his naivet[ent]eacute[/ent] is adorable. Still, a guy who can change his mass and/or become intangible should have been more of a problem for Thanos' minions.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 46,751
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
First movie... as in Oceans 11 Sinatra or Oceans 11 Clooney?
The Colourful Jester
Member
Clooney. The main character in O8 is his sister.
Underseer
Contributor
Yeah, I remember. It should be harder to take him down though.
I remember listening to the Russo brothers discussing the Nick Fury chase scene from Winter Soldier, and it all boiled down to one sentence: Nick Fury should be very hard to kill. That's exactly what those scenes felt like. Yes, Fury was in danger and you were worried for Fury, but at no time did it feel like the bad guys were having an easy time trying to take him down despite the fact that he was badly outnumbered.
Vision on the other hand got one injury right away and from then on didn't feel like much of a threat to any of the bad guys.
I get the Russos were juggling a lot of different balls simultaneously and maybe Vision had to go down fast to keep the plot from getting overly complicated with that many characters, but the part of me that likes Vision felt a little robbed. Then again, the Hulk also went down awfully fast, so maybe I should shut up.
Underseer
Contributor
Incredibles 2
9/10
Every bit as good as the original, but the CG is more detailed, the characters develop a bit further, and they focus on different characters (Elastigirl, Frozone, baby Jack-Jack). There is still the same heart, the family dynamics is what keeps you interested, and the action scenes are good.
If there is a downside, the villain was too predictable and felt more like a villain from a mainstream comic book movie.
PS[ent]mdash[/ent]This is still the best on-screen incarnation of the Fantastic Four.
9/10
Every bit as good as the original, but the CG is more detailed, the characters develop a bit further, and they focus on different characters (Elastigirl, Frozone, baby Jack-Jack). There is still the same heart, the family dynamics is what keeps you interested, and the action scenes are good.
If there is a downside, the villain was too predictable and felt more like a villain from a mainstream comic book movie.
PS[ent]mdash[/ent]This is still the best on-screen incarnation of the Fantastic Four.
The Colourful Jester
Member
Isn't Vis made of vibranium? He should be indestructible.
Underseer
Contributor
He can become intangible or supermassive and super dense at will. He should be pretty close to indestructible.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 46,751
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Thanos had the stone that changes physical perception though, so that could explain why Vision couldn’t manage.
Ford
Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 7,751
- Location
- Freedomland
- Basic Beliefs
- Just don't knock on my door on a Saturday Morning
As I said earlier, their powers seem to vary depending on what the story needs at the moment. Hulk can pummel Loki. Thor can wallop Hulk. Thor and Loki are equals, except when they're not. Tony can fall from a mile up in his crude prototype and not be hurt. War Machine falls from a similar distance and is nearly killed. Vibranium is indestructible except when it isn't. Seems like the only constant is that nobody can beat Thanos, but I suspect that will be changing.
Underseer
Contributor
Wait. Vibranium is a bad example for the point you are trying to make.
It's not indestructible and it was never claimed to be indestructible. Cap's shield is damage-resistant because it converts a portion of the incoming kinetic energy into sound.
DrZoidberg
Contributor
Playing for Time 8/10
I recently finnished the book, KL: A History of the Nazi Concentration Camps
by Nikolaus Wachsmann. I can recommend it.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22237143-kl
It's a newish book, and the time since the event allows us to have a discussion about it less influenced by strong emotions (either way). It's basically a listing of facts without making any kind of case for anything. But books doesn't have moving pictures, so I thought I'd watch a film on the topic to help with my immersion.
So I saw the not-so-new film Playing for Time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playing_for_Time_(film)
Which brings me to my number one pet peeve with historical dramas. If you are making a historical drama... at least get the clothes right. This isn't as bad as Vikings (oh, the horror!), but still fucks a lot of the details up. Once you know how they're supposed to be dressed, it just becomes annoying. Doubly annoying since the main character was involved in the production... Which makes the fact that they got the main characters real life name wrong... bizarre!
If you're into angry acting.. this is the film for you. They seem unable to have an ordinary conversation. I suspect it was a stylistic choice. It's a feel-bad flic. They fail to portray friendships or any kind of fun in the camp. It's an endless odyssey of horror.
There's very little character development. The main character spends five years in Auschwitz and apparently sunk to her deepest despair even before arriving. She didn't even perk up when liberated by the British. It might very well be true, because the main character was involved in the production. But it doesn't make a particularly emotionally involving film.
But otherwise it's good. I like how they mentioned loads of stuff without explaining it, which you can only understand if you know the detailed history. Another pet peeve is series and movies over-explaining. They avoided falling into this trap. Which adds to the immersion.
But the things they got wrong in costuming made me wonder if anything was historically accurate. Which took me out of being emotionally engaged. It could have been stronger. I kept wondering if the stuff really happened or happened in that way.
There's an interesting piece of trivia associated with this production. Venessa Redgrave plays the main character, Fania Fenelon. The real Fania Fenelon was staunchly opposed to Redgrave playing the part on grounds that Redgrave was politically active in the support for Palestinian rights. The production company over-ruled Fenelon and gave the part for Redgrave. Fenelon was afterwards really butthurt and angry about this. And whined about it in public. On the question whether Redgrave did a good job portraying her Fenelon said it was a stellar performance. Very accurate. Her issue with Redgrave was purely based on Redgrave's political opinions. The small mindedness of certain people boggles the mind. Especially after having suffered through something as extreme as the Holocaust. I guess it just goes to show that Jews, before and after the Holocaust are also humans with all the same foibles as the rest of us.
I recently finnished the book, KL: A History of the Nazi Concentration Camps
by Nikolaus Wachsmann. I can recommend it.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22237143-kl
It's a newish book, and the time since the event allows us to have a discussion about it less influenced by strong emotions (either way). It's basically a listing of facts without making any kind of case for anything. But books doesn't have moving pictures, so I thought I'd watch a film on the topic to help with my immersion.
So I saw the not-so-new film Playing for Time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playing_for_Time_(film)
Which brings me to my number one pet peeve with historical dramas. If you are making a historical drama... at least get the clothes right. This isn't as bad as Vikings (oh, the horror!), but still fucks a lot of the details up. Once you know how they're supposed to be dressed, it just becomes annoying. Doubly annoying since the main character was involved in the production... Which makes the fact that they got the main characters real life name wrong... bizarre!
If you're into angry acting.. this is the film for you. They seem unable to have an ordinary conversation. I suspect it was a stylistic choice. It's a feel-bad flic. They fail to portray friendships or any kind of fun in the camp. It's an endless odyssey of horror.
There's very little character development. The main character spends five years in Auschwitz and apparently sunk to her deepest despair even before arriving. She didn't even perk up when liberated by the British. It might very well be true, because the main character was involved in the production. But it doesn't make a particularly emotionally involving film.
But otherwise it's good. I like how they mentioned loads of stuff without explaining it, which you can only understand if you know the detailed history. Another pet peeve is series and movies over-explaining. They avoided falling into this trap. Which adds to the immersion.
But the things they got wrong in costuming made me wonder if anything was historically accurate. Which took me out of being emotionally engaged. It could have been stronger. I kept wondering if the stuff really happened or happened in that way.
There's an interesting piece of trivia associated with this production. Venessa Redgrave plays the main character, Fania Fenelon. The real Fania Fenelon was staunchly opposed to Redgrave playing the part on grounds that Redgrave was politically active in the support for Palestinian rights. The production company over-ruled Fenelon and gave the part for Redgrave. Fenelon was afterwards really butthurt and angry about this. And whined about it in public. On the question whether Redgrave did a good job portraying her Fenelon said it was a stellar performance. Very accurate. Her issue with Redgrave was purely based on Redgrave's political opinions. The small mindedness of certain people boggles the mind. Especially after having suffered through something as extreme as the Holocaust. I guess it just goes to show that Jews, before and after the Holocaust are also humans with all the same foibles as the rest of us.
Incredibles - 9/10
Great movie about a family of superheroes forced to live a normal life because superheroing became illegal due to all the collateral damage which was caused by their fights. Then the father joins a secret superhero mission and the rest of the family has to suit up and save him. Brilliantly done and easily the best Fantastic Four movie ever made.
Incredibles 2 - 7/10
A sequel made 14 years later which takes place 30 seconds after the end of the first film. Still really good and all the Elastigirl stuff was excellent, but the parts where Mr Incredible had to play the Mr Mom role were a bit too cliched, aside from the baby parts.
Great movie about a family of superheroes forced to live a normal life because superheroing became illegal due to all the collateral damage which was caused by their fights. Then the father joins a secret superhero mission and the rest of the family has to suit up and save him. Brilliantly done and easily the best Fantastic Four movie ever made.
Incredibles 2 - 7/10
A sequel made 14 years later which takes place 30 seconds after the end of the first film. Still really good and all the Elastigirl stuff was excellent, but the parts where Mr Incredible had to play the Mr Mom role were a bit too cliched, aside from the baby parts.
Underseer
Contributor
For some reason, it bugged me that the character design for Evelyn Deavor was highly reminiscent of Roxie from Megamind. She literally looked like Roxie got out of the wrong side of bed and didn't fix her hair.