MCU's THE ETERNALS (11/6/20) 8 8

[TupennyConan]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:11 PM, Frederic9494 said:

I liked Druig even though he didn't end up as a villain like in the comics. Chemistry with Makkari was great. 

Out of the cast, Barry Keoghan gave one of the best performance in this movie.

Druig & Makkari worked even though there was little in the narrative to support their relationship. I attribute this to quality acting.

As for the two leads, the movie gave them plenty of screen time yet their relationship had no chemistry. Gemma Chan didn't help the film.

[Axelrod]

Well, I saw it, and my reaction was - decidedly "meh." 

It was not terrible, but it was definitely not great.  And in thinking more about it, I have come to the conclusion that many, if not most, of the issues had to do with the "Marvelization" of a story that really didn't fit the mold of a traditional Marvel film.  In this respect my thoughts might actually align with several critical responses I've seen.   Warning, lengthy analysis ahead.  

Spoilers!

Spoiler

So, here is what (I believe) this movie wanted to be about:  A group of super-powered beings (Eternals), sent to Earth ~7000 years ago by the God-like Celestials, and who believed their mission was to protect the planet and its population, learn that their true mission is only to safeguard the people until the population reaches a certain size, creating sufficient "life energy" to birth the nascent Celestial seeded inside the planet.  The resulting birth will destroy the planet and its entire population.  This realization causes a fracture within the group of previously united Eternals, with some rejecting this purpose and wishing to save the planet, and some staying loyal to the Celestials, reasoning that the greater good of creating a new Celestial outweighs the destruction of the world.  They fight, and those wishing to save the world prevail, but at cost.  

Now, that story is there, in this movie.  But it is pushed to the side for most of the film.  Instead, we get a story about Eternals battling Deviants for the majority of the time.  You will notice that the story outlined above doesn't really have a need for Deviants in it at all.  Perhaps you could say that the Deviants were one of the threats the Eternals were supposed to protect the planet from - even the primary threat - but that would be almost incidental to the main story I'm suggesting.  In this movie, the Deviants are basically just a red herring.  They seem like they are supposed to be the primary threat, but in the end, they are virtually irrelevant.  But the "Marvel" movie needs them, because otherwise, who are the Eternals going to fight for the majority of the film?  Where are the action sequences?  The "Marvel" movie needs that.  Their audience expects it.  So, this movie provides, but it's simply not what the movie really was about.  And the stuff the movie was about then gets short shrifted.   

To give just one example: after 7000 years of being together, fighting side by side, caring for each other, it takes Ikaris approximately 2 minutes to decide to kill Ajak when she says she wants to save the planet. This is supposed to be a big dramatic reveal in this movie (previously we are meant to have believed the Deviants had killed Ajak), but it falls incredibly flat, and simply isn't believable for the character to have acted this way after all this time.  That betrayal needed some room to breathe.  Some kind of build up.  You wanted to see Ikaris struggle with his faith.  You don't get that (or you only get minor lip-service to that) because the movie doesn't have time for that, and/or is afraid we would be bored by that, and we need to get to the next fight with the Deviants STAT.   (Incidentally, you also don't see Ajak struggle with her faith.  She who was the only one who (apparently) knew the original plan from the beginning, and was going along with it the whole time, but after 7000 years, waited until literally 6 days before the Celestial's birth to decide she wanted to try and stop it).  

Similarly, Sprite deciding to side with Ikaris - not because she necessarily believes in the Celestial plan, but because she loves him - is given the barest of character motivations in this film.  It's stated, but not really shown.  Because to do that correctly would require more movie real estate time than this film has to give.  And no fighting at all.  

There are multiple multiple other examples of this "Marvelization."  The way Kit Harrington's Dane Whitman/Future Black Knight character was shoe-horned into this film was incredibly clumsy.  I mean, the character was fine.  A human man, in a relationship with an Eternal, which could be contrasted with the 7000 year relationship the Eternal had with her first love.  But having him then abruptly just happen to turn out to be another (forthcoming) Marvel super hero, was just dumb.  If they wanted to introduce the Black Knight character in this movie, they really should have done it differently.  But that's Marvel again. 

I could nit-pick at other points all day.   I really disliked the "revelation" that the Eternals, instead of being a separate race of beings from their own world, were actually Celestial constructs, given false memories of a homeworld that never existed, and whose memories get wiped after every mission.  Are we to believe that Ajak (the one who was aware of the truth) who went along with previous missions without issue, and was complicit in the destruction of untold worlds in the past, just happened to put her foot down when it came to Earth.  Because we're just so special, I guess?  There was a very brief reference to Thanos and "the people of this world" defeating him, which I guess was supposed to be the reason she feels differently about humans, but it's (again) just not developed in any way.  The whole excuse for why they didn't intervene when Thanos was destroying 1/2 of all life in the universe was just weak, but I guess they couldn't come up with a better one?  (I could come up with a better one.  In fact I did, in about two minutes thinking about it).   Also, if they are "constructs" then did it strike anyone else as weird that the Celestials would bother to construct an Eternal who was hearing impaired?  Or one who was perpetually a child?  Or even bother to have them cover a whole range of different ethnicities and genders?  Doesn't really make any sense there either.  I don't think the Eternals were supposed to be "constructs" in the comics, just a race of beings who were originally created by the Celestials, so I'm not even sure what the point of this change was.

It was disappointing because, having now seen the film, I feel like I can see the movie it could have been, wanted to be, but that the studio was too afraid to actually commit to, and the whole thing suffers as a result.  

Edited November 7, 2021 by Axelrod

[▫️]

On 11/7/2021 at 6:38 PM, WEBHEAD said:

I agree with many of your points this movie needed an intro movie showing more of their origon it was too long and the first hour took too much time trying to introduce them why are they so important and the basic premise which I must have missed in reading the books this "Super Eternal was responsible for the creation?"  therefore every X-thousand years you destroy that world just so another bunch of planets can get seeded?  I give it a 4 on premise 8 for the second half. IMHO

Bro what is up with your signature line, I can’t even screen cap all of it!

[WEBHEAD]

I can only pray that they allow Galactus have a real corporale body not the Cloud they did in the movie that pissed me off.....

[TupennyConan]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:30 PM, Axelrod said:

Well, I saw it, and my reaction was - decidedly "meh." 

It was not terrible, but it was definitely not great.  And in thinking more about it, I have come to the conclusion that many, if not most, of the issues had to do with the "Marvelization" of a story that really didn't fit the mold of a traditional Marvel film.  In this respect my thoughts might actually align with several critical responses I've seen.   Warning, lengthy analysis ahead.  

Spoilers!

  Reveal hidden contents

So, here is what (I believe) this movie wanted to be about:  A group of super-powered beings (Eternals), sent to Earth ~7000 years ago by the God-like Celestials, and who believed their mission was to protect the planet and its population, learn that their true mission is only to safeguard the people until the population reaches a certain size, creating sufficient "life energy" to birth the nascent Celestial seeded inside the planet.  The resulting birth will destroy the planet and its entire population.  This realization causes a fracture within the group of previously united Eternals, with some rejecting this purpose and wishing to save the planet, and some staying loyal to the Celestials, reasoning that the greater good of creating a new Celestial outweighs the destruction of the world.  They fight, and those wishing to save the world prevail, but at cost.  

Now, that story is there, in this movie.  But it is pushed to the side for most of the film.  Instead, we get a story about Eternals battling Deviants for the majority of the time.  You will notice that the story outlined above doesn't really have a need for Deviants in it at all.  Perhaps you could say that the Deviants were one of the threats the Eternals were supposed to protect the planet from - even the primary threat - but that would be almost incidental to the main story I'm suggesting.  In this movie, the Deviants are basically just a red herring.  They seem like they are supposed to by the primary threat, but in the end, they are virtually irrelevant.  But the "Marvel" movie needs them, because otherwise, who are the Eternals going to fight for the majority of the film?  Where are the action sequences?  The "Marvel" movie needs that.  Their audience expects it.  So, this movie provides, but it's simply not what the movie really was about.  And the stuff the movie was about then gets short shrifted.   

To give just one example: after 7000 years of being together, fighting side by side, caring for each other, it takes Ikaris approximately 2 minutes to decide to kill Ajak when she says she wants to save the planet. This is supposed to be a big dramatic reveal in this movie (previously we are meant to have believed the Deviants had killed Ajak), but it falls incredibly flat, and simply isn't believable for the character to have acted this way after all this time.  That betrayal needed some room to breath.  Some kind of build up.  You wanted to see Ikaris struggle with his faith.  You don't get that (or you only get minor lip-service to that) because the movie doesn't have time for that, and/or is afraid we would be bored by that, and we need to get to the next fight with the Deviants STAT.   (Incidentally, you also don't see Ajak struggle with her faith.  She who was the only one who (apparently) knew the original plan from the beginning, and was going along with it the whole time, but after 7000 years, waited until literally 6 days before the Celestial's birth to decide she wanted to try and stop it).  

Similarly, Sprite deciding to side with Ikaris - not because she necessarily believes in the Celestial plan, but because she loves him - is given the barest of character motivations in this film.  It's stated, but not really shown.  Because to do that correctly would require more movie real estate time than this film has to give.  And no fighting at all.  

There are multiple multiple other examples of this "Marvelization."  The way Kit Harrington's Dane Whitman/Future Black Knight character was shoe-horned into this film was incredibly clumsy.  I mean, the character was fine.  A human man, in a relationship with an Eternal, which could be contrasted with the 7000 year relationship the Eternal had with her first love.  But having him then abruptly just happen to turn out to be another (forthcoming) Marvel super hero, was just dumb.  If they wanted to introduce the Black Knight character in this movie, they really should have done it differently.  But that's Marvel again. 

I could nit-pick at other points all day.   I really disliked the "revelation" that the Eternals, instead of being a separate race of beings from their own world, were actually Celestial constructs, given false memories of a homeworld that never existed, and whose memories get wiped after every mission.  Are we to believe that Ajak (the one who was aware of the truth) who went along with previous missions without issue, and was complicit in the destruction of untold worlds in the past, just happened to put her foot down when it came to Earth.  Because we're just so special, I guess?  There was a very brief reference to Thanos and "the people of this world" defeating him, which I guess was supposed to be the reason she feels differently about humans, but it's (again) just not developed in any way.  The whole excuse for why they didn't intervene when Thanos was destroying 1/2 of all life in the universe was just weak, but I guess they couldn't come up with a better one?  (I could come up with a better one.  In fact I did, in about two minutes thinking about it).   Also, if they are "constructs" then did it strike anyone else as weird that the Celestials would bother to construct an Eternal who was hearing impaired?  Or one who was perpetually a child?  Or even bother to have them cover a whole range of different ethnicities and genders?  Doesn't really make any sense there either.  I don't think the Eternals were supposed to be "constructs" in the comics, just a race of beings who were originally created by the Celestials, so I'm not even sure what the point of this change was.

It was disappointing because, having now seen the film, I feel like I can see the movie it could have been, wanted to be, but that the studio was too afraid to actually commit to, and the whole thing suffers as a result.  

Your post is brilliant. The first two sentences of paragraph 2 wherein you point out the Deviants' gratuitous role is terrific; gratuitous only if you think Marvel's comics don't need constant beat 'em ups; which they do. Same with the MCU & all action flicks. Imagine how hated ACT I & II would be without them.  

Edited November 7, 2021 by TupennyConan

[mr_highgrade]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:30 PM, Axelrod said:

Well, I saw it, and my reaction was - decidedly "meh." 

It was not terrible, but it was definitely not great.  And in thinking more about it, I have come to the conclusion that many, if not most, of the issues had to do with the "Marvelization" of a story that really didn't fit the mold of a traditional Marvel film.  In this respect my thoughts might actually align with several critical responses I've seen.   Warning, lengthy analysis ahead.  

Spoilers!

  Hide contents

So, here is what (I believe) this movie wanted to be about:  A group of super-powered beings (Eternals), sent to Earth ~7000 years ago by the God-like Celestials, and who believed their mission was to protect the planet and its population, learn that their true mission is only to safeguard the people until the population reaches a certain size, creating sufficient "life energy" to birth the nascent Celestial seeded inside the planet.  The resulting birth will destroy the planet and its entire population.  This realization causes a fracture within the group of previously united Eternals, with some rejecting this purpose and wishing to save the planet, and some staying loyal to the Celestials, reasoning that the greater good of creating a new Celestial outweighs the destruction of the world.  They fight, and those wishing to save the world prevail, but at cost.  

Now, that story is there, in this movie.  But it is pushed to the side for most of the film.  Instead, we get a story about Eternals battling Deviants for the majority of the time.  You will notice that the story outlined above doesn't really have a need for Deviants in it at all.  Perhaps you could say that the Deviants were one of the threats the Eternals were supposed to protect the planet from - even the primary threat - but that would be almost incidental to the main story I'm suggesting.  In this movie, the Deviants are basically just a red herring.  They seem like they are supposed to be the primary threat, but in the end, they are virtually irrelevant.  But the "Marvel" movie needs them, because otherwise, who are the Eternals going to fight for the majority of the film?  Where are the action sequences?  The "Marvel" movie needs that.  Their audience expects it.  So, this movie provides, but it's simply not what the movie really was about.  And the stuff the movie was about then gets short shrifted.   

To give just one example: after 7000 years of being together, fighting side by side, caring for each other, it takes Ikaris approximately 2 minutes to decide to kill Ajak when she says she wants to save the planet. This is supposed to be a big dramatic reveal in this movie (previously we are meant to have believed the Deviants had killed Ajak), but it falls incredibly flat, and simply isn't believable for the character to have acted this way after all this time.  That betrayal needed some room to breath.  Some kind of build up.  You wanted to see Ikaris struggle with his faith.  You don't get that (or you only get minor lip-service to that) because the movie doesn't have time for that, and/or is afraid we would be bored by that, and we need to get to the next fight with the Deviants STAT.   (Incidentally, you also don't see Ajak struggle with her faith.  She who was the only one who (apparently) knew the original plan from the beginning, and was going along with it the whole time, but after 7000 years, waited until literally 6 days before the Celestial's birth to decide she wanted to try and stop it).  

Similarly, Sprite deciding to side with Ikaris - not because she necessarily believes in the Celestial plan, but because she loves him - is given the barest of character motivations in this film.  It's stated, but not really shown.  Because to do that correctly would require more movie real estate time than this film has to give.  And no fighting at all.  

There are multiple multiple other examples of this "Marvelization."  The way Kit Harrington's Dane Whitman/Future Black Knight character was shoe-horned into this film was incredibly clumsy.  I mean, the character was fine.  A human man, in a relationship with an Eternal, which could be contrasted with the 7000 year relationship the Eternal had with her first love.  But having him then abruptly just happen to turn out to be another (forthcoming) Marvel super hero, was just dumb.  If they wanted to introduce the Black Knight character in this movie, they really should have done it differently.  But that's Marvel again. 

I could nit-pick at other points all day.   I really disliked the "revelation" that the Eternals, instead of being a separate race of beings from their own world, were actually Celestial constructs, given false memories of a homeworld that never existed, and whose memories get wiped after every mission.  Are we to believe that Ajak (the one who was aware of the truth) who went along with previous missions without issue, and was complicit in the destruction of untold worlds in the past, just happened to put her foot down when it came to Earth.  Because we're just so special, I guess?  There was a very brief reference to Thanos and "the people of this world" defeating him, which I guess was supposed to be the reason she feels differently about humans, but it's (again) just not developed in any way.  The whole excuse for why they didn't intervene when Thanos was destroying 1/2 of all life in the universe was just weak, but I guess they couldn't come up with a better one?  (I could come up with a better one.  In fact I did, in about two minutes thinking about it).   Also, if they are "constructs" then did it strike anyone else as weird that the Celestials would bother to construct an Eternal who was hearing impaired?  Or one who was perpetually a child?  Or even bother to have them cover a whole range of different ethnicities and genders?  Doesn't really make any sense there either.  I don't think the Eternals were supposed to be "constructs" in the comics, just a race of beings who were originally created by the Celestials, so I'm not even sure what the point of this change was.

It was disappointing because, having now seen the film, I feel like I can see the movie it could have been, wanted to be, but that the studio was too afraid to actually commit to, and the whole thing suffers as a result.  

Everything that you wrote was spot on. 

[MattTheDuck]

I'm in general agreement FWIW with the "meh" thoughts on this movie.  It absolutely lacked any emotional heft at all, which has been one of the hallmarks of the better Marvel movies.  If you can suspend your disbelief, you cared when Tony died, cared that Cap had a chance to fulfill his lament: "I had a date."  "Eternals" did nothing to make anyone care about any of the characters.  Just completely the wrong tone.  Chose the wrong writers, went ahead and produced an expensive movie from a -script that should never have made it past a first draft.  The desperation to shoehorn every current human societal meme into a movie about celestial robots speaks for itself.

When good, Marvel productions have benefitted from two things:  very, very good writing and actors and directors who have managed to bring comic book characters to life.  The choices made for this movie were almost universally bad ones.

[drotto]

On 11/7/2021 at 11:49 AM, paperheart said:

$71MM US, $91MM Int'l; the int'l # is pretty good

Forbes is now predicting Eternals will finish under $200 million for total domestic box office.  They give a very wide range and seem rather non committal on what type of legs this film is going to have. They give three brackets, but the summery is a very low end of $161 million and a high end around $198 million (that is estimated based on the just under $200, I did not see a firm number in the article).  Seems to me they are hedging to around $175 to $180, but here is the article you can reach your own conclusions. Interestingly, they say the industry is currently applying a -15% adjustment to box office to try and account for COVID impact. So they are saying pre-COVID all these number would be 15% higher.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2021/11/07/eternals-box-office-disappointment-70m-angelina-jolie-chemma-chan-salma-hayek-chloe-zhoe-disney/?sh=33d8c28d7e8a

Edited November 7, 2021 by drotto

[WeR138]

On 11/7/2021 at 11:11 AM, Frederic9494 said:

I liked Druig even though he didn't end up as a villain like in the comics. Chemistry with Makkari was great. 

Out of the cast, Barry Keoghan gave one of the best performance in this movie.

To each his own. I thought he did a great job in The Killing Of A Sacred Deer.

In this one, not so much.

[Chaos_in_Canada]

#1 Movie In The World! 

 

 

[▫️]

On 11/7/2021 at 9:41 PM, Chaos_in_Canada said:

#1 Movie In The World! 

 

 

Marvel just called their own movie the #1 movie in the world. Sounds legit. 

 

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:30 PM, Axelrod said:

Well, I saw it, and my reaction was - decidedly "meh." 

It was not terrible, but it was definitely not great.  And in thinking more about it, I have come to the conclusion that many, if not most, of the issues had to do with the "Marvelization" of a story that really didn't fit the mold of a traditional Marvel film.  In this respect my thoughts might actually align with several critical responses I've seen.   Warning, lengthy analysis ahead.  

Spoilers!

  Reveal hidden contents

So, here is what (I believe) this movie wanted to be about:  A group of super-powered beings (Eternals), sent to Earth ~7000 years ago by the God-like Celestials, and who believed their mission was to protect the planet and its population, learn that their true mission is only to safeguard the people until the population reaches a certain size, creating sufficient "life energy" to birth the nascent Celestial seeded inside the planet.  The resulting birth will destroy the planet and its entire population.  This realization causes a fracture within the group of previously united Eternals, with some rejecting this purpose and wishing to save the planet, and some staying loyal to the Celestials, reasoning that the greater good of creating a new Celestial outweighs the destruction of the world.  They fight, and those wishing to save the world prevail, but at cost.  

Now, that story is there, in this movie.  But it is pushed to the side for most of the film.  Instead, we get a story about Eternals battling Deviants for the majority of the time.  You will notice that the story outlined above doesn't really have a need for Deviants in it at all.  Perhaps you could say that the Deviants were one of the threats the Eternals were supposed to protect the planet from - even the primary threat - but that would be almost incidental to the main story I'm suggesting.  In this movie, the Deviants are basically just a red herring.  They seem like they are supposed to be the primary threat, but in the end, they are virtually irrelevant.  But the "Marvel" movie needs them, because otherwise, who are the Eternals going to fight for the majority of the film?  Where are the action sequences?  The "Marvel" movie needs that.  Their audience expects it.  So, this movie provides, but it's simply not what the movie really was about.  And the stuff the movie was about then gets short shrifted.   

To give just one example: after 7000 years of being together, fighting side by side, caring for each other, it takes Ikaris approximately 2 minutes to decide to kill Ajak when she says she wants to save the planet. This is supposed to be a big dramatic reveal in this movie (previously we are meant to have believed the Deviants had killed Ajak), but it falls incredibly flat, and simply isn't believable for the character to have acted this way after all this time.  That betrayal needed some room to breath.  Some kind of build up.  You wanted to see Ikaris struggle with his faith.  You don't get that (or you only get minor lip-service to that) because the movie doesn't have time for that, and/or is afraid we would be bored by that, and we need to get to the next fight with the Deviants STAT.   (Incidentally, you also don't see Ajak struggle with her faith.  She who was the only one who (apparently) knew the original plan from the beginning, and was going along with it the whole time, but after 7000 years, waited until literally 6 days before the Celestial's birth to decide she wanted to try and stop it).  

Similarly, Sprite deciding to side with Ikaris - not because she necessarily believes in the Celestial plan, but because she loves him - is given the barest of character motivations in this film.  It's stated, but not really shown.  Because to do that correctly would require more movie real estate time than this film has to give.  And no fighting at all.  

There are multiple multiple other examples of this "Marvelization."  The way Kit Harrington's Dane Whitman/Future Black Knight character was shoe-horned into this film was incredibly clumsy.  I mean, the character was fine.  A human man, in a relationship with an Eternal, which could be contrasted with the 7000 year relationship the Eternal had with her first love.  But having him then abruptly just happen to turn out to be another (forthcoming) Marvel super hero, was just dumb.  If they wanted to introduce the Black Knight character in this movie, they really should have done it differently.  But that's Marvel again. 

I could nit-pick at other points all day.   I really disliked the "revelation" that the Eternals, instead of being a separate race of beings from their own world, were actually Celestial constructs, given false memories of a homeworld that never existed, and whose memories get wiped after every mission.  Are we to believe that Ajak (the one who was aware of the truth) who went along with previous missions without issue, and was complicit in the destruction of untold worlds in the past, just happened to put her foot down when it came to Earth.  Because we're just so special, I guess?  There was a very brief reference to Thanos and "the people of this world" defeating him, which I guess was supposed to be the reason she feels differently about humans, but it's (again) just not developed in any way.  The whole excuse for why they didn't intervene when Thanos was destroying 1/2 of all life in the universe was just weak, but I guess they couldn't come up with a better one?  (I could come up with a better one.  In fact I did, in about two minutes thinking about it).   Also, if they are "constructs" then did it strike anyone else as weird that the Celestials would bother to construct an Eternal who was hearing impaired?  Or one who was perpetually a child?  Or even bother to have them cover a whole range of different ethnicities and genders?  Doesn't really make any sense there either.  I don't think the Eternals were supposed to be "constructs" in the comics, just a race of beings who were originally created by the Celestials, so I'm not even sure what the point of this change was.

It was disappointing because, having now seen the film, I feel like I can see the movie it could have been, wanted to be, but that the studio was too afraid to actually commit to, and the whole thing suffers as a result.  

I disagree with your analysis of the Deviants in the film. Spoiler filled rebuttal below:

Spoiler

Before I dig into the movie, the red herring-ness you ascribe to the Deviants is actually in line with the original Jack Kirby stories. In the original series, the Deviants are initially described to be the main adversary of the Eternals until we learn that the Fourth Host (where Celestials judge whether Earth shall live or die based on humanity's evolution) is the true threat to the Eternals and Earth.

As for the MCU Deviants, I don't feel they were red herrings the way you describe. In a way they were "red herrings" for the Eternals themselves as our heroes were unaware of the true nature of their presence on Earth. For the movie's story, we learn fairly early in the movie, by the half-way point I believe, that the emergence of a new Celestial is the reason for the return of the Deviants. So in that respect, the Deviants as any kind of red herring to the story goes away.

The Deviants are also important to the story for the following reasons:

1. The emergence of the Deviants is directly related to the emergence of the new Celestial. And it is the emergence of these Deviants that causes the Eternals to reunite. Without their emerging threat, there is no team for us to see on the big screen who collectively discover through Sersi the true threat of the emergence.

2. Because the Eternals believe the Deviants are the true threat, Ikaris is able to completely blame them for what happens to Ajak, even though the Deviants were physically responsible for what happens. So while they are adversaries in the film, Ikaris is able to use them as foils. He wouldn't have been able to come up with another excuse if the Deviants had not emerged.

3. Thena's madness, along with the resurrection of the Deviants, is also a sign of the emergence of the Celestial. Her final battle with Kro gives her a way to cure herself of her madness. 

4. In the present day, there are only three battles with Deviants: the beginning in London, the middle battle in the South American jungle, and on the volcano island in the finale. It's only during that first battle in London that we don't know yet that the emergence of a Celestial is the true threat to Earth. By the second battle, we already know that the Celestials are the larger threat. But we do discover in that battle that the Deviants can absorb Eternals energy to evolve making them an even bigger threat in addition to the larger one of the Celestials.

 

[TupennyConan]

Spoiler

On the subject of the gratuitous Deviants, there only to satisfy the need for a beat 'em up [& therefore essential, not gratuitous], Arishem should've created the Eternals to aid the emergence & never kept his robots in the dark. If they needed beat 'em ups, then give them the Deviants, but also give them the coding to gather together as a team upon the birth of the next baby Celestial, standing ready & willing at the crib. The Eternals should've been shepherds, growing the flock of humans, & warriors of the rookery, fighting off all foxes bent on the henhouse.  

 

Edited November 7, 2021 by TupennyConan

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:30 PM, Axelrod said:

Well, I saw it, and my reaction was - decidedly "meh." 

It was not terrible, but it was definitely not great.  And in thinking more about it, I have come to the conclusion that many, if not most, of the issues had to do with the "Marvelization" of a story that really didn't fit the mold of a traditional Marvel film.  In this respect my thoughts might actually align with several critical responses I've seen.   Warning, lengthy analysis ahead.  

Spoilers!

  Reveal hidden contents

So, here is what (I believe) this movie wanted to be about:  A group of super-powered beings (Eternals), sent to Earth ~7000 years ago by the God-like Celestials, and who believed their mission was to protect the planet and its population, learn that their true mission is only to safeguard the people until the population reaches a certain size, creating sufficient "life energy" to birth the nascent Celestial seeded inside the planet.  The resulting birth will destroy the planet and its entire population.  This realization causes a fracture within the group of previously united Eternals, with some rejecting this purpose and wishing to save the planet, and some staying loyal to the Celestials, reasoning that the greater good of creating a new Celestial outweighs the destruction of the world.  They fight, and those wishing to save the world prevail, but at cost.  

Now, that story is there, in this movie.  But it is pushed to the side for most of the film.  Instead, we get a story about Eternals battling Deviants for the majority of the time.  You will notice that the story outlined above doesn't really have a need for Deviants in it at all.  Perhaps you could say that the Deviants were one of the threats the Eternals were supposed to protect the planet from - even the primary threat - but that would be almost incidental to the main story I'm suggesting.  In this movie, the Deviants are basically just a red herring.  They seem like they are supposed to be the primary threat, but in the end, they are virtually irrelevant.  But the "Marvel" movie needs them, because otherwise, who are the Eternals going to fight for the majority of the film?  Where are the action sequences?  The "Marvel" movie needs that.  Their audience expects it.  So, this movie provides, but it's simply not what the movie really was about.  And the stuff the movie was about then gets short shrifted.   

To give just one example: after 7000 years of being together, fighting side by side, caring for each other, it takes Ikaris approximately 2 minutes to decide to kill Ajak when she says she wants to save the planet. This is supposed to be a big dramatic reveal in this movie (previously we are meant to have believed the Deviants had killed Ajak), but it falls incredibly flat, and simply isn't believable for the character to have acted this way after all this time.  That betrayal needed some room to breathe.  Some kind of build up.  You wanted to see Ikaris struggle with his faith.  You don't get that (or you only get minor lip-service to that) because the movie doesn't have time for that, and/or is afraid we would be bored by that, and we need to get to the next fight with the Deviants STAT.   (Incidentally, you also don't see Ajak struggle with her faith.  She who was the only one who (apparently) knew the original plan from the beginning, and was going along with it the whole time, but after 7000 years, waited until literally 6 days before the Celestial's birth to decide she wanted to try and stop it).  

Similarly, Sprite deciding to side with Ikaris - not because she necessarily believes in the Celestial plan, but because she loves him - is given the barest of character motivations in this film.  It's stated, but not really shown.  Because to do that correctly would require more movie real estate time than this film has to give.  And no fighting at all.  

There are multiple multiple other examples of this "Marvelization."  The way Kit Harrington's Dane Whitman/Future Black Knight character was shoe-horned into this film was incredibly clumsy.  I mean, the character was fine.  A human man, in a relationship with an Eternal, which could be contrasted with the 7000 year relationship the Eternal had with her first love.  But having him then abruptly just happen to turn out to be another (forthcoming) Marvel super hero, was just dumb.  If they wanted to introduce the Black Knight character in this movie, they really should have done it differently.  But that's Marvel again. 

I could nit-pick at other points all day.   I really disliked the "revelation" that the Eternals, instead of being a separate race of beings from their own world, were actually Celestial constructs, given false memories of a homeworld that never existed, and whose memories get wiped after every mission.  Are we to believe that Ajak (the one who was aware of the truth) who went along with previous missions without issue, and was complicit in the destruction of untold worlds in the past, just happened to put her foot down when it came to Earth.  Because we're just so special, I guess?  There was a very brief reference to Thanos and "the people of this world" defeating him, which I guess was supposed to be the reason she feels differently about humans, but it's (again) just not developed in any way.  The whole excuse for why they didn't intervene when Thanos was destroying 1/2 of all life in the universe was just weak, but I guess they couldn't come up with a better one?  (I could come up with a better one.  In fact I did, in about two minutes thinking about it).   Also, if they are "constructs" then did it strike anyone else as weird that the Celestials would bother to construct an Eternal who was hearing impaired?  Or one who was perpetually a child?  Or even bother to have them cover a whole range of different ethnicities and genders?  Doesn't really make any sense there either.  I don't think the Eternals were supposed to be "constructs" in the comics, just a race of beings who were originally created by the Celestials, so I'm not even sure what the point of this change was.

It was disappointing because, having now seen the film, I feel like I can see the movie it could have been, wanted to be, but that the studio was too afraid to actually commit to, and the whole thing suffers as a result.  

I also disagree with your complaint that the primary threat in the story is pushed aside. Spoiler filled rebuttal below (beware MAJOR SPOILERS):

Spoiler

That's because the true threat to the Eternals (and maybe Earth) is the fracture of their family because of the divide over their allegiance to their creators.

The emergence of the Celestial as a threat guides every move of every Eternal (in the present day story) from the beginning to the end of the movie. It's why Ikaris misleads the other Eternals. It's why Ajak passed leadership of the Eternals to Sersi. It's why Sersi leads the search for the other scattered Eternals. It's why Phastos creates the Uni-Mind.

Yes, the numerous flashbacks do disrupt this part of the story, but as I wrote in an earlier post, what the flashbacks serve is to show why each Eternal reacts in different ways to the truth of their presence on Earth, which is important to the story and also important to defining who these characters are.

And in that "Marvelization" sense, it is the characters themselves that is the most important thing in the MCU, not the plot.

 

[@therealsilvermane]

@TupennyConan You should Spoiler proof your above post (click the eye icon) or at least put a spoiler warning over it.

[TupennyConan]

On 11/7/2021 at 2:30 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

@TupennyConan You should Spoiler proof your above post (click the eye icon) or at least put a spoiler warning over it.

Done. Thanks. 

[TupennyConan]

I haven't stopped thinking about this movie for nearly 48 hours. This means it's a good movie. I want to see it again, sooner rather than later. 

[paperheart]

On 11/7/2021 at 10:34 AM, drotto said:

Forbes is now predicting Eternals will finish under $200 million for total domestic box office.  They give a very wide range and seem rather non committal on what type of legs this film is going to have. They give three brackets, but the summery is a very low end of $161 million and a high end around $198 million (that is estimated based on the just under $200, I did not see a firm number in the article).  Seems to me they are hedging to around $175 to $180, but here is the article you can reach your own conclusions. Interestingly, they say the industry is currently applying a -15% adjustment to box office to try and account for COVID impact. So they are saying pre-COVID all these number would be 15% higher.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2021/11/07/eternals-box-office-disappointment-70m-angelina-jolie-chemma-chan-salma-hayek-chloe-zhoe-disney/?sh=33d8c28d7e8a

critical whiff, check. financial whiff, check.

[Gatsby77]

Let’s see:

- Sub-50% RT critics score

- Horrific “B” CinemaScore among general moviegoers who have seen it

- Box office drop off nearly 50% Friday-Sunday

- Some on these boards discussing whether it’s better than Thor 2.

That’s a lot of data points pointing to total failure - both critical and box office.

 

 

Edited November 7, 2021 by Gatsby77

[Bosco685]

On 11/7/2021 at 11:49 AM, paperheart said:

$71MM US, $91MM Int'l; the int'l # is pretty good

Yup. Landed below the forecasted domestic box office.