Thank you for the post.
Thank you for the post.
In before all the “Hollywood is Dreck” and “I’ve not been to see a movie since Casablanca” posts.
Someone missed the point.
I’ll go see it. I guess I am a mind numbed fan-bio.
Anyway, I thought the civil war meme came from the comic books. So it’s not exactly a new theme.
Eh. I’m seeing it tonight with my family and we’re looking forward to it!
#TeamCap
The author is way overthinking this.
From a Christian review site:
RECOMMENDED FOR: Marvel fans, people who enjoy a fight but want an alternative to election coverage, dates (eye candy for everyone!), families (several good teachable moments).
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR: Squeamish types, viewers who don’t appreciate sci-fi, sensitive souls who want to avoid violence, and people with no sense of humor.
Rather amusing that the author thinks the character of “Black Panther” is “blacksploitation” for today’s audience. His origin was in the 1960s. . .
Since NRO is wrong 100% of the time this movie must be AWESOME!
It appears the author either watched a different movie, or watched it through agenda colored glasses. This review has little resemblance to the movie it mentions.
Well. I think the author is pretty cynical myself. I’m gonna go see it and probably will enjoy it.
My daughter went last night, said it was ‘so good’.
She didn’t see batman/superman, wasn’t interested...’maybe’ when it comes out on redbox...
Looks like Armond doesn’t have the faintest idea where the plot for this movie came from.
Too much to cover everything, but here are a couple of points:
It’s way toned down in the movie, but the comic book version of Civil War really was a war, and involved a far larger cast (much of the reason behind the reduced scope is the tangle of copyright restrictions that prevent Marvel from including everyone they’d like). In the original, both Thor and the Hulk were involved, which really ramped up the “war” side of “civil war”.
Armond has absolutely zero knowledge about Black Panther, and further has no understanding that BP is not a token, out-of-left-field inclusion with no relation to the story arc.
Probably the crowning example of how detached from reality this review is, is Armond’s praising of the mediocre “Batman vs Superman” movie as being deep and soulful.
I have loved every single one of the Marvel movies save some of the Spider-Man episodes, and the new FF.
I thought Age of Ultron was an absolute masterpiece, and in my universe, “Guardians of the Galaxy” would have won an academy award. So I look forward to “Civil War.”
Especially so, now that the GOPe perpetually irrelevant NR has weighed in against it.
" the offensively named Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance"...? Good grief. This is what happens when humorless faux intellectuals are allowed anywhere near genre entertainments.
I don’t care about this stuff, so I thought I’d come post and let you know.
Sounds like a Captain America fanboy doesn’t like Ironman as much. They need to remember that Loki woulda already killed him if it wasn’t for Ironman.
when a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman), many fanboys, and critics, react with anger, resentment — and ignorance.
This is all you need to read in this movie "review."
I can't believe National Review actually pays this clown.
Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman are both embarrassing messes.
“Tony Stark, the George Soros/Steve Jobs–type”
Umm, no, Tony Stark is based on Howard Hughes. He’s a brilliant individualist, distrusts the government, is a womanizer, with mental and substance abuse issues to boot... not like those prog pantywaists.