I know a lot of people love digital versions of entertainment (books, music, movies, streaming TV), but I don't see the appeal. I like owning (and lending) my media. But then again, I am a Luddite screaming "get off my lawn" more often than not
I just don't see the appeal of "special" features. Usually it's debatable wether they're worth my time. A lot of the information I already know or just don't care about. Many times the featurettes end up on YouTube or other online sources anyways. The last blu ray I bought was Avengers and I've watched it once. It's now on Netflix streaming, in HD, and that's how me and my son watch it.
I just don't see the appeal of "special" features. Usually it's debatable wether they're worth my time. A lot of the information I already know or just don't care about. Many times the featurettes end up on YouTube or other online sources anyways. The last blu ray I bought was Avengers and I've watched it once. It's now on Netflix streaming, in HD, and that's how me and my son watch it.
I'm the complete opposite; I love all the behind the scenes stuff. It goes along with why frequent Wikipedia. I like to see the Genesis of the story, casting, scenes, etc. I get more entertainment out of absorbing the whole thing & not just the movie.
I'm the complete opposite; I love all the behind the scenes stuff. It goes along with why frequent Wikipedia. I like to see the Genesis of the story, casting, scenes, etc. I get more entertainment out of absorbing the whole thing & not just the movie.
M
Right there with you my friend.
One of the many things I completely nerd out about is film-making.
Deleted scenes in particular fascinate me. As much as I enjoy them, I don't believe I've ever seen one that wasn't deleted for good reasons.
I generally love most special features. The only feature I usually avoid is commentary tracks. I tried it with the Buffy tv series dvds and only the Joss Wheadon ones had any insight. With the other ones, it usually devolved into "that was great" or he/she is great/funny/wonderful"
I generally love most special features. The only feature I usually avoid is commentary tracks. I tried it with the Buffy tv series dvds and only the Joss Wheadon ones had any insight. With the other ones, it usually devolved into "that was great" or he/she is great/funny/wonderful"
Unless recommended, I normally don't watch with commentaries that don't include the actors.
I know a lot of people love digital versions of entertainment (books, music, movies, streaming TV), but I don't see the appeal. I like owning (and lending) my media. But then again, I am a Luddite screaming "get off my lawn" more often than not
Completely opposite here. I don't buy any physical media anymore. I hate the clutter and would much rather have access to a digital library of material, like Netflix or Marvel Unlimited, than own anything since 99.99999% of its existence in my home will be spent on a shelf collecting dust instead of being used anyway. Most of the people I would lend to use the same services as me anyway, so lending is never a problem. I just suggest something, they watch it with no extra cost to themselves and I never have to worry about never getting it back.
It also lowers the cost of entry when it comes to trying new things. I've read so many Marvel books and watched so many shows that I otherwise wouldn't have if I had to buy and own it.
I generally love most special features. The only feature I usually avoid is commentary tracks. I tried it with the Buffy tv series dvds and only the Joss Wheadon ones had any insight. With the other ones, it usually devolved into "that was great" or he/she is great/funny/wonderful"
Try watching the original Conan the Barbarian with Arnold Schwarzenegger's and director John Milius's commentary @CaptShazam. It is awesome, but only slightly better than commentary on for Total Recall. But don't take my word for it.
I'm the complete opposite; I love all the behind the scenes stuff. It goes along with why frequent Wikipedia. I like to see the Genesis of the story, casting, scenes, etc. I get more entertainment out of absorbing the whole thing & not just the movie.
M
Right there with you my friend.
One of the many things I completely nerd out about is film-making.
Deleted scenes in particular fascinate me. As much as I enjoy them, I don't believe I've ever seen one that wasn't deleted for good reasons.
There's been a couple I've seen over the years that I thought should've been in the final cut because it explained something.
Deleted scenes 1 & 3 on this DVD would've added a little more to the story in basically 2-3 minutes of add on time.
When Nick Fury is being attacked in the streets, he gets the moment he needs to escape when a yellow Penske truck slams into his attackers. Later, when Agent Sitwell is thrown into traffic, guess what hits him? Not just a Penske truck, but the Russos reveal, the very same Penske truck. "The man who drives that truck," Joe deadpans, joking that the driver is a candidate for a future Marvel One-Shot, "Is very highly trained. He thinks on his own terms. He's got a plan and a very specific skill set."
The Punisher isn't mentioned by name, but there aren't that many Marvel characters who'd fit that description and would be so ready and willing to take a life! Again, it sounds like he's messing about as far as the One-Shot etc goes, but it's pretty cool to think that ol' Frank Castle might have had a hand in both rescuing Fury and taking out Sitwell! I'm sure many of you will be going back to watch your Blu-rays and DVDs of the movie to double check this..I know I am.
When Nick Fury is being attacked in the streets, he gets the moment he needs to escape when a yellow Penske truck slams into his attackers. Later, when Agent Sitwell is thrown into traffic, guess what hits him? Not just a Penske truck, but the Russos reveal, the very same Penske truck. "The man who drives that truck," Joe deadpans, joking that the driver is a candidate for a future Marvel One-Shot, "Is very highly trained. He thinks on his own terms. He's got a plan and a very specific skill set."
When Nick Fury is being attacked in the streets, he gets the moment he needs to escape when a yellow Penske truck slams into his attackers. Later, when Agent Sitwell is thrown into traffic, guess what hits him? Not just a Penske truck, but the Russos reveal, the very same Penske truck.
It is this attention to detail by Marvel's film makers that make these movies so awesome. True fans making films.
Man... Imagine if they'd done a marvel one shot on winter soldier involving the punisher and his side story weaving into this car chase?! The closest they've come to anything this cool so far has been the return if Sam Rockwell in the im3 short.
I know a lot of people love digital versions of entertainment (books, music, movies, streaming TV), but I don't see the appeal. I like owning (and lending) my media. But then again, I am a Luddite screaming "get off my lawn" more often than not
Completely opposite here. I don't buy any physical media anymore. I hate the clutter and would much rather have access to a digital library of material, like Netflix or Marvel Unlimited, than own anything since 99.99999% of its existence in my home will be spent on a shelf collecting dust instead of being used anyway. Most of the people I would lend to use the same services as me anyway, so lending is never a problem. I just suggest something, they watch it with no extra cost to themselves and I never have to worry about never getting it back.
It also lowers the cost of entry when it comes to trying new things. I've read so many Marvel books and watched so many shows that I otherwise wouldn't have if I had to buy and own it.
I've heard that a lot, so I seem to be in the minority. Of course, I also never rented movies when that was a thing. I figured I'd either see it in the theater or own it or both.
I'm OK with the idea of the Punisher being a background plot point that builds through the movies, but I'd be far happier if it turned out to be Scourge.
I'm OK with the idea of the Punisher being a background plot point that builds through the movies, but I'd be far happier if it turned out to be Scourge.
I'm OK with the idea of the Punisher being a background plot point that builds through the movies, but I'd be far happier if it turned out to be Scourge.
I've always loved Scourge. I remember that, when I was reading through the OHOTMU as a kid, and reading about all the characters he killed, and then tracking down those issues of Cap, especially the infamous "Bar With No Name" issue, and it all seemed pretty cool and dark, and stuck with me.
However, I don't know how well Scourge works unless your world is so crowded with super-villains that there can be those C-level scrub ones for a Scourge to prey on. In fact, as an older reader, I enjoyed the meta-layer that Gruenwald, as a writer and editor/handbook maker, was basically using Scourge as housekeeping. But I think your shared universe needs to be a little overstuffed with villains, including slightly laughable ones, to make Scourge necessary, and to make him make sense, you know what I mean? I feel like the shared cinematic (and, likely, soon to be the case with the TV universe) actually has so few super-villains in it at this point that every single one is something of a big deal.
It reminds me of some other characters and ideas that are post-modern enough that, to me, they only work when your shared universe is built up enough. Like Damage Control. Or a She-Hulk who is a lawyer that focuses on cases involving superhumans. Or Booster Gold. Booster Gold needs to have a history of superheroes to match himself up against (and attempt to cash in on) to make sense, I think.
For me, the Scourge idea is one of those. Both in the narrative (and as an editorial tool) he/they are a response to a world that is getting overpopulated with costumed villains.
I'm OK with the idea of the Punisher being a background plot point that builds through the movies, but I'd be far happier if it turned out to be Scourge.
I've always loved Scourge. I remember that, when I was reading through the OHOTMU as a kid, and reading about all the characters he killed, and then tracking down those issues of Cap, especially the infamous "Bar With No Name" issue, and it all seemed pretty cool and dark, and stuck with me.
However, I don't know how well Scourge works unless your world is so crowded with super-villains that there can be those C-level scrub ones for a Scourge to prey on. In fact, as an older reader, I enjoyed the meta-layer that Gruenwald, as a writer and editor/handbook maker, was basically using Scourge as housekeeping. But I think your shared universe needs to be a little overstuffed with villains, including slightly laughable ones, to make Scourge necessary, and to make him make sense, you know what I mean? I feel like the shared cinematic (and, likely, soon to be the case with the TV universe) actually has so few super-villains in it at this point that every single one is something of a big deal.
It reminds me of some other characters and ideas that are post-modern enough that, to me, they only work when your shared universe is built up enough. Like Damage Control. Or a She-Hulk who is a lawyer that focuses on cases involving superhumans. Or Booster Gold. Booster Gold needs to have a history of superheroes to match himself up against (and attempt to cash in on) to make sense, I think.
For me, the Scourge idea is one of those. Both in the narrative (and as an editorial tool) he/they are a response to a world that is getting overpopulated with costumed villains.
Agreed with all of that assessment. It actually was something that I thought about as I was posting but felt like the opportunity to let Scourge appear for the first time in a Captain America title.
I've always loved Scourge. I remember that, when I was reading through the OHOTMU as a kid, and reading about all the characters he killed, and then tracking down those issues of Cap, especially the infamous "Bar With No Name" issue, and it all seemed pretty cool and dark, and stuck with me.
Same here. I LOVED the Scourge of the underworld storyline. Using his position as Editor, Gruenwald ever so slowly built up minor Scourge appearances across various titles for months and months, until it all came to a head in Cap's title. It was so mysterious and ominous. It really played well with the idea of the all the books sharing the same world, without being a full blown cross-over event. If you read more than a couple of Marvel books, it was great to connect that shadowy figure that you had seen appear in another title.
Forgot how good the movie was. The fight scenes were on point and really showed us the extent of how bada$$ movie cap is. They did a good job of keeping him a bit naive but not too naive to the point where he comes off as stupid. Overall one of my favorite comic movies and I like the relationship between widow and cap, they are good as friends, hope they do not try and make them a couple later on in the movie verse.
Lastly you know you got choked up at the bucky cap scene near the end.....
Comments
M
One of the many things I completely nerd out about is film-making.
Deleted scenes in particular fascinate me. As much as I enjoy them, I don't believe I've ever seen one that wasn't deleted for good reasons.
M
It also lowers the cost of entry when it comes to trying new things. I've read so many Marvel books and watched so many shows that I otherwise wouldn't have if I had to buy and own it.
Deleted scenes 1 & 3 on this DVD would've added a little more to the story in basically 2-3 minutes of add on time.
M
I got it at target. I don't own a 3d blu ray player (just a ps3), but hey, same price. Plus ya never know....
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/notyetamovie/news/?a=107579
He'd make a great running threat through the various Netflix series.
(BTW: I really want to first meet Luke Cage as Matt Murdock fails to keep him out of prison.)
Why can't there be room for both?
However, I don't know how well Scourge works unless your world is so crowded with super-villains that there can be those C-level scrub ones for a Scourge to prey on. In fact, as an older reader, I enjoyed the meta-layer that Gruenwald, as a writer and editor/handbook maker, was basically using Scourge as housekeeping. But I think your shared universe needs to be a little overstuffed with villains, including slightly laughable ones, to make Scourge necessary, and to make him make sense, you know what I mean? I feel like the shared cinematic (and, likely, soon to be the case with the TV universe) actually has so few super-villains in it at this point that every single one is something of a big deal.
It reminds me of some other characters and ideas that are post-modern enough that, to me, they only work when your shared universe is built up enough. Like Damage Control. Or a She-Hulk who is a lawyer that focuses on cases involving superhumans. Or Booster Gold. Booster Gold needs to have a history of superheroes to match himself up against (and attempt to cash in on) to make sense, I think.
For me, the Scourge idea is one of those. Both in the narrative (and as an editorial tool) he/they are a response to a world that is getting overpopulated with costumed villains.
Lastly you know you got choked up at the bucky cap scene near the end.....