Gatsby77

On the one hand, you're not wrong. I think The Dark Knight and Watchmen are both top 5 all-time superhero movies - and each is better than at least 20 of the MCU films. On the other hand, both came out more than 10 years ago. That's the rub - and the source of my frustration with DC films as a whole. The *only* really really good DC films since Watchmen have been The Dark Knight Rises and Wonder Woman. Whereas in that same time period (2010-present) we've had a lot of really good superhero films from that other company. Namely: The Avengers Iron Man 3 Winter Soldier Guardians of the Galaxy Black Panther Avengers: Infinity War I fundamentally don't understand why we haven't yet seen a solid Green Lantern re-boot, a Justice League film that didn't suck (yes - that includes the Snyder cut), and two Flash films during that time period. Even assuming they started in 2013 (with Man of Steel) vs. Marvel in 2008, Warner Brothers could *easily* have produced a solid half dozen additional great films over last 10 years. Instead, we've got nearly a lost decade of 2013-2021, with literally more projects announced and abandoned than have actually seen filming. That sucks. But yes - Dark Knight and Watchmen alone trounce nearly the entire output of the MCU.

I didn't really like Thunderball when I first saw it 30+ years ago - at least not compared to From Russia with Love or Goldfinger. And then (see the last page) I actually liked Never Say Never Again better (the stunt motorcycle sequence, better opening sequence, better female villain portrayal). But yes - it irks me that most people think Goldfinger's better than From Russia with Love. I don't get it.

Sure. But you can't ignore the aggregate power of 26 action films over nearly 60 years. My favorites (and thus, votes for "good films"): Skyfall From Russia With Love Goldfinger Casino Royale Goldeneye On Her Majesty's Secret Service Each of these were solid sky thrillers with compelling villains and minimal buffoonery of the Roger Moore era that (rightfully) inspired Austin Powers. I also really liked both Timothy Dalton entries, but I'm not sure either qualifies as a "good film" in and of itself.

Try Squid Game (Netflix). It's worthy.

The whole Thunderball saga is one of my favorite things about the whole Bond mythology. Wikipedia summarizes it well, noting that Fleming's novel was based on an original screenplay by Jack Whittingham, which itself was based on a story by Kevin McClory, Whittingham and Fleming. It's the only original Bond story not really written by Fleming. The initial problem? It was *good.* 1) Thunderball created SPECTRE, arch-nemesis Blofeld, SMERSH, and other elements that became indelible parts of the Bond mythos - both in Fleming's later books (esp. On Her Majesty's Secret Service) and throughout the Connery / Moore era Bond films; and 2) Thunderball was *by far* the most financially successful of the original Bond films, and (inflation-adjusted) was the most watched Bond film theatrically well into the Daniel Craig era. And yet - McClory and Whittingham owned the story - and the characters. So the litigation went on for literally 20 years and was ultimately resolved in the early '80s. In retaliation - knowing they'd lost the rights to SPECTRE, Blofeld, etc. and that McClory & co. would try to launch an independent remake of Thunderball, the Broccolis killed Blofeld off in the pre-credits sequence of For Yours Eyes Only. Only - he was never named, because EON didn't have the rights to use him even then. It was just clear to audiences - from the wheelchair, etc. - that *of course* it was Blofeld. He "died" in 1981 - all to undercut his reappearance by a rival studio. Which happened in the Thunderball remake, Never Say Never Again, in 1983. Because this wasn't a Broccoli / EON production, it's not considered an official Bond film. But the producers' genius? They brought back Sean Connery to star. It ultimately got trounced at the box office by Roger Moore's Octopussy that year, but Never Say Never Again is the better film, even with Connery's laughable toupee. Fast forward another 20 years and EON *still* didn't have the rights to SPECTRE or Blofeld, hence "Quantum."

This movie made almost as much as Justice League did its first weekend.

I watched the first episode yesterday and I'm excited to finish it this week. Best Netflix original 1st episode I've seen since The Queen's Gambit. While the Hunger Games comparison is apt, I was reminded more of Battle Royale (arguably the basis for the Hunger Games books and films).

Yes - there's a reason the short-sellers were short-selling. Also, I still believe AMC is a takeover target for Amazon - and the hedge funds knew that - may even have been acting on Amazon's behalf by proxy. On the one hand, part of the MGM acquisition agreement was that they'd continue to show future Bond films theatrically. On the other, because Amazon now owns Bond, No Time to Die doesn't need to make a profit theatrically (esp. with the break-even now at at least $700 million). Either way, Amazon will likely establish a nationwide theater presence sometime in the next three years. And an acquisition of existing theater chain is the easiest way to do that.

Disagree. From the beginning my hope was that MarvelVision would have the balls to loosely adapt "House of M" with only two objectives: Show 1) (Again - after her nearly single-handedly defeated Thanos) that Wanda's one of the most powerful beings in the MCU; and 2) That's she's bat-mess f---kn crazy. Mission accomplished.

She wasn't. That's the point! She (not Agatha) was the villain all along. The entire thing was about Wanda, her fractured psyche (born of losing Vision) and her psychosis. Loved it!

Except...I'd hold up both Black Panther and WandaVision as examples that pushed the envelope in the right way. Black Panther because Killmonger had a point - as did M'baku. There was impressive moral ambiguity in that film, particularly with the revelation of his father's sin. And WandaVision was about as far from the typical "comic book template" as you could get - and I think the best Marvel Netflix show since Jessica Jones. Ditto Captain Marvel - even if Carol's arc largely mirrored that of Dumbo's - realizing he didn't actually need the feather to fly and all, because the true power was within (gasp!) the whole time.

Perfect example of a movie that seemingly intentionally limited its audience to "just the fans." I *loved* The Watchmen film but damn is it a hard watch - and really bleak - for your average moviegoer who is unfamiliar with the source material and just wants to be entertained. Remember - this came out in 2009. We'd just had Iron Man and The Dark Knight the year before, but the comic book movie boom was just getting started in earnest and still revolved largely around the "single hero vs. single villain" template. I think it would perform much better today - with critics and commercially - than it did 12 years ago.

I'm skeptical of an audience rating when the film's been out for less than 24 hours. I'm also fairly confident that the bulk of folks who want to see this in the theater will see it this weekend or this week. And (of course) Bond will absolutely own it next weekend.

In the last 24 hours Rotten Tomatoes has slipped from 74% positive to 59% positive. Shocked...shocked I am!

+1. I remember literally only two scenes from Spectre. It was about as instantly forgettable as Quantum of Solace, which was a huge letdown. Because I think Skyfall is absolutely a top 3 all-time Bond film; maybe top-2.

Per the article citing Cary Fukunaga, Thunderball and Goldfinger. In Thunderball, Fukunaga notes that Bond bascially forces himself on a woman...twice. And it's more subtle in Goldfinger, but in the book it's explicit that Galore is a lesbian. In the film, it's strongly implied that a literal "roll in the hay" with Bond (in a barn) "cures" her of that lesbianism.

Is this actually how the James Bond Jr. cartoon went 30 years ago? I never watched it. Or the Marvel comic adaptation of the same? FYI - per Wikipedia, he was actually referred to as Agent 003 1/2

Maybe. There were solid rumors of a Jinx spin-off series after No Time To Die - and I would have enjoyed seeing that. But (and I've read no rumors about this - this is just my gut):

See...I'm conflicted about Lazenby - in no small part because On Her Majesty's Secret Service is 1) Arguably the best of Fleming's original books; and 2) The plot of the film - and its supporting cast - (i.e., Telly Savalas and Diana Rigg) are superb. It also stands out because the two surrounding Connery films (You Only Live Twice and Diamonds are Forever)...umm...weren't good. So Lazenby gets a bad rap (perhaps deservedly so) but almost accidentally also stars in one of the best Bond films. If Connery had starred in OHMSS rather than Lazenby folks would easily hold it in higher esteem than Goldfinger.

Maybe that explains the...I guess the word is "cartoonishness" of some of Adams' recent work? The last cover I remember really liking of his was his All Star Superman variant, what - 15 years ago? The Green Lantern # 8 variant and Batman Odyssey work just looked far too...cartooney - not at *all* like vintage Adams. Even his 80s-90s Continuity work still looked more like him stylistically.

~10 years ago I scored a 6.5-7.0 copy of ASM 129 for ~$100. It was from a Craig's List listing - maybe 25 mid-grade Bronze books. So how did I get lucky? The guy listed the book as ASM 219 - he had multiple folks calling up specifically asking about ASM 129 and Hulk 180-181 and he told them no, thinking it was a 219. We met up at a cafe, chatted over coffee for ~1/2 an hour and I bought the lot for $400 cash. Also included 8.0-ish books like Green Lantern 85, ASM 121, and a few Adams Batman and some Steranko Caps. I was honest about the value of the books and we both left happy.

That there's a distinct difference between a theatrical film and a TV show. And I'm old enough to remember actually watching the Supergirl film in the theater. It...wasn't good. She deserves a well-written, big budget, big screen adventure. Full stop. Plus - we've already got a great Supergirl show (via the CW) - that, by the way, led to Superman & Lois. It's still not comparable to one solid theatrical version. See also the difference between the (great!) Flash TV show and the (ahem!) long-gestating Flash film. There are fundamental differences of scale and of audience -- like people who loved The Avengers but never watched Agents of Shield; or folks who never watched the Arrowverse but would love to see Green Arrow or Deathstroke, etc. done right on the big screen. (Once upon a time I was unbelievably stoked for David Goyer's Supermax Green Arrow film. Would still love to see it.) What's next? We'll hear that, due to disappointment with Wonder Woman 1984, that rather than move forward with a third film, Gal Gadot will be relegated to an HBO Max TV show?

This is a really good point. BKV is only 45 years old. In his prime (say, 2005) - when he was writing Y: The Last Man, Ex Machina, Runaways and Ultimate X-Men, he was only 29, and writing largely for the college crowd (17-25 year-old comic book collectors who 15 years earlier would have proudly been immersed in such "adult" comics as Sandman, Hellblazer and Animal Man). A 21 year-old is going to view Yorick very differently than a 45 year-old.

It's worth noting that in the books 008 was a woman, although she was only referenced - I don't believe she ever actually appeared. And her ethnicity was never mentioned.

What happened to all the Henry Cavill gossip? I haven't kept up lately but thought he was still on the short list just a month ago.