Entertainment

MCU Eternals (Angelina Jolie Richard Madden Kumail Nanjiani Salma Hayek cosmic adaptation)

  • Last Updated:
  • Jan 24th, 2022 4:00 pm
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 23, 2009
22529 posts
8938 upvotes
Toronto
BernardRyder wrote: If this hadn't been a Marvel movie and was reworked a bit, maybe it could have been a tolerable franchise on its own.
As a part of the MCU, it felt off brand. It didn't convince me it belonged in the current MCU and felt like an offshoot. But I think trying to include Cosmic storylines will be a problem for Marvel overall, unless they draw a line at what they decide to include. The Eternals, IMO, won't fit in well with what is already established. But we'll see.

What I was most surprised with the movie is how it included an HBO quality scene with a former GoT star. I didn't know enough going in, so I was pretty surprised by that scene, didn't think it would be that "obvious" Smiling Face With Open Mouth And Cold Sweat
Personally I like off brand. Shang-Chi is off brand for example. Guardians of the Galaxy was also off brand when it came out, but its success has now established its style as “on brand”.

The problem isn’t that Eternals is off brand. The problem is that the movie just isn’t good.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Oct 23, 2008
19239 posts
17864 upvotes
GTA, ON
I personally didn't find the movie that bad. It works well enough as a stand-alone....but....

I agree that it doesn't fit in with the rest of the MCU. The MCU is already jam packed with superheroes and these Eternals just makes things messy. Maybe if the movie and storyline was better portrayed and explained but it wasn't. They never really explained how they were on Earth for 7000 years and yet their presence only went down into the chronicles as myth, especially as they led up closer to the late 1500s. If they had at least shown one of the Eternals erasing people's memories then I would have been satisfied why people generally don't know who they are.

I'm NOT even excited at all with the pre- & post- credit scenes. Thanos' brother? Why? Regardless if the character exists in the comics, why now? That arc is over, so no point even dropping the name connection now. And though I am pleased to see a sneak peak at Blade, I want that in a separate Marvel universe too. I also do not want to see the eventual introduction of X-Men into this current MCU (even if years away), keep them as a separate franchise. You can't start introducing vampires, monsters or mutants into the world and pretend they were always around for the last 20+ MCU years but never ever mentioned or considered a threat for SHIELD or whomever.

IMO, only bring on the Fantastic Four to the MCU and leave it at that. Their introduction would be easy to explain going forward.
Tis banana is IRIE 😎

10% off is cold, 50% off is warm, 75% off is hot, but FREE IS RFD!
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 16, 2009
7363 posts
8573 upvotes
GTA
EugW wrote: Personally I like off brand. Shang-Chi is off brand for example. Guardians of the Galaxy was also off brand when it came out, but its success has now established its style as “on brand”.

The problem isn’t that Eternals is off brand. The problem is that the movie just isn’t good.
It's off brand in the sense that as a movie goer and someone that's seen all the previous MCU movies before this, I don't see how it will fit in with what is already going on.
Shang-Chi wasn't off brand to me because I can see how he fit in to what has already been established. GotG probably did feel a bit off-brand, but when watching I could see how as a group they could fit in to the MCU.
Just as Chimaican is saying above, this movie and it's characters don't give me a feeling they fit in to what exists, at least not in an organic sense. Right now, they feel shoehorned in to what has been established.
And don't get me wrong, I didn't think it was an awesome movie. A lot of the complaints here I can agree with. That's why I said with some work, and as its own movie franchise outside the MCU, it could have been tolerable. If it was Netflix or Amazon Prime exclusive not related to the MCU, I bet it could get a lot of eyeballs and some fans.
c'mon get happy!
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 23, 2009
22529 posts
8938 upvotes
Toronto
BernardRyder wrote: If it was Netflix or Amazon Prime exclusive not related to the MCU, I bet it could get a lot of eyeballs and some fans.
As is, if it was Netflix or Amazon Prime not related to the MCU, it would still suck.
That's why I said with some work, and as its own movie franchise outside the MCU, it could have been tolerable.
Basically you're saying that if it were a better movie... it would be more tolerable. Face With Stuck-out Tongue And Tightly-closed Eyes
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 16, 2009
7363 posts
8573 upvotes
GTA
EugW wrote: As is, if it was Netflix or Amazon Prime not related to the MCU, it would still suck.


Basically you're saying that if it were a better movie... it would be more tolerable. Face With Stuck-out Tongue And Tightly-closed Eyes
Hey, I never disagreed with either of those statements anywhere! Smiling Face With Open Mouth And Smiling Eyes

If it was a better movie AND not related to the MCU, it definitely would have been a good movie!
c'mon get happy!
Member
Oct 11, 2007
388 posts
354 upvotes
I am glad I waited for it to appear on Disney+ to watch for "free".....
Deal Addict
Aug 14, 2015
1757 posts
1270 upvotes
Burnaby
chimaican wrote: I personally didn't find the movie that bad. It works well enough as a stand-alone....but....

I agree that it doesn't fit in with the rest of the MCU. The MCU is already jam packed with superheroes and these Eternals just makes things messy. Maybe if the movie and storyline was better portrayed and explained but it wasn't. They never really explained how they were on Earth for 7000 years and yet their presence only went down into the chronicles as myth, especially as they led up closer to the late 1500s. If they had at least shown one of the Eternals erasing people's memories then I would have been satisfied why people generally don't know who they are.

I'm NOT even excited at all with the pre- & post- credit scenes. Thanos' brother? Why? Regardless if the character exists in the comics, why now? That arc is over, so no point even dropping the name connection now. And though I am pleased to see a sneak peak at Blade, I want that in a separate Marvel universe too. I also do not want to see the eventual introduction of X-Men into this current MCU (even if years away), keep them as a separate franchise. You can't start introducing vampires, monsters or mutants into the world and pretend they were always around for the last 20+ MCU years but never ever mentioned or considered a threat for SHIELD or whomever.
Did some small research afterward. Eros/StarFox (Thano's Bro) is apparently part of the eternals comic series.
I wonder if this movie stayed true to the original comic - as in - if we read the comic, will we know the story of the next movie.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 20, 2009
10166 posts
8293 upvotes
Toronto
spiritsBB wrote: Did some small research afterward. Eros/StarFox (Thano's Bro) is apparently part of the eternals comic series.
I wonder if this movie stayed true to the original comic - as in - if we read the comic, will we know the story of the next movie.
He was an Avenger during my childhood.
I am curious how they will use him. His original powers from the comics - the ability to stimulate the pleasure centre of other people's brains, has not aged well and seems fairly invasive and creepy.

I wonder if MCU would ever consider doing a movie about Thanos' backstory, which has been more thoroughly explored throught the comics over the last decade?
"When someone is burning a book, they are showing utter contempt for all of the thinking that produced its ideas, all of the labor that went into its words and sentences, and all of the trouble that befell the author . . .” ― Lemony Snicket
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
19712 posts
13576 upvotes
Ottawa
I liked the movie a lot more than I thought I would given some of the comments I read in this thread before. The plot was mostly ridiculous to me, but I guess I've given up how to make sense of a universe with Infinity Stones controlling all aspects of the Time and Space, with things like Time Authority existing and then the idea universe building super entities isn't too far fetched, but I digress. Overall, it didn't really feel like a normal formulaic MCU movie which was welcome. But there were problems like the pacing and dialogue, so it waffled between cringey and/or boring often with a sprinkle of a few funny bits and nice looking battle sequences.

Maybe I'm too bored with superhero movies in general, but this one definitely is decidedly average.

minor comment: I did like the visuals a lot, and I liked that the superspeed character was able to gang up on a stronger character and just pummeling the stronger character so fast and hard that they can't respond.
Deal Addict
Aug 14, 2015
1757 posts
1270 upvotes
Burnaby
Dreamrider wrote: watched it last night.
Gilgamesh ruined the experience for me.
Having watched so many of his Korean movies, bad ass gangster, cop, it was so weird and cringe seeing him in tights and speak English....
They just look around the room and pick the most convenient people and go,
"Hey you here, you play Gilgamesh. You there, uh.. never mind you too good looking. Ah you over there, you play Shang-Chi"
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 23, 2009
22529 posts
8938 upvotes
Toronto
I thought Gilgamesh was fine. The characters I didn't like were Kumail Nanjiani's character (although I liked his assistant), and I didn't like the kid much either.

The CG of the Deviants up close didn't really impress either.
Deal Addict
Oct 17, 2002
1342 posts
390 upvotes
Oakville
EugW wrote: I thought Gilgamesh was fine. The characters I didn't like were Kumail Nanjiani's character (although I liked his assistant), and I didn't like the kid much either.

The CG of the Deviants up close didn't really impress either.
That's another thing I didnt like about the movie. So they didnt need Kumail's character for that unimind thingie? And at the end, they didnt even need those bracelets (or whatever?) to activate the uni mind?
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 23, 2009
22529 posts
8938 upvotes
Toronto
KennyX wrote: That's another thing I didnt like about the movie. So they didnt need Kumail's character for that unimind thingie? And at the end, they didnt even need those bracelets (or whatever?) to activate the uni mind?
They needed the bracelets. Much of the end of the movie was devoted to leveraging those bracelets. Did you fall asleep during the movie? Face With Stuck-out Tongue And Tightly-closed Eyes I wouldn’t blame you if you did.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
19712 posts
13576 upvotes
Ottawa
given this movie didn't exactly knock the socks off in terms of box office and has lackluster reception, I wonder if it might be possible that the sequel won't happen at all.

The characters in the movie are pretty flat so it's hard to get excited about any of them, and in the end, I'm not itching to see them in action again. I don't see a strong fanbase who would petition for a sequel to be made if nothing is announced.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 13, 2014
1361 posts
1791 upvotes
Westmount, QC
They don't need to make a sequel. They can incorporate the characters in other movies as needed.

They can have a Black Knight movie, they can put Black Knight in the Blade movie, they can put some Eternals in the Captain Marvel or GotG movies...
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
19712 posts
13576 upvotes
Ottawa
Right, but what I am saying is maybe they DID have a sequel in mind, but now it might be scrapped due to all the various issues. Of course, they can roll the characters into other movies and call it a day and still not leave too many threads hanging, but I really have a feeling they had bigger plans originally.

Anyway, we'll see what happens, no biggy either way. Personally if another superhero movie doesn't get made, and they concentrate on something else instead, that would be fine by me.
Please update your profile to include your city https://forums.redflagdeals.com/ucp.php?i=ucp_profile&mode=profile_info
Deal Fanatic
Feb 21, 2013
5897 posts
2950 upvotes
Toronto
chimaican wrote: I agree that it doesn't fit in with the rest of the MCU. The MCU is already jam packed with superheroes and these Eternals just makes things messy.

I'm NOT even excited at all with the pre- & post- credit scenes. Thanos' brother? Why? Regardless if the character exists in the comics, why now? That arc is over, so no point even dropping the name connection now. And though I am pleased to see a sneak peak at Blade, I want that in a separate Marvel universe too. I also do not want to see the eventual introduction of X-Men into this current MCU (even if years away), keep them as a separate franchise. You can't start introducing vampires, monsters or mutants into the world and pretend they were always around for the last 20+ MCU years but never ever mentioned or considered a threat for SHIELD or whomever.
Adding Starfox in basically just cements the plan to make the MCU more cosmic-focused moving forward. They also had a cameo of sorts of Adam Warlock in GotG 2, so this I guess is where the MCU direction is headed.

As I and a few others mentioned, going cosmic just seems to be a weird decision. My biggest issue is the power creep that will essentially just devalue a lot of the more Earth-based storylines, but also it's just a lot of characters to keep track of now.

Moving forward, I really hope they keep the universes separate. They already have the mutants separated, plus they've established the idea of different realities within the MCU, so it shouldn't be that difficult to retcon them into: The Avengers MCU (Avengers, Netflix, Spiderman), the Cosmic MCU (Eternals, GotG, Captain Marvel, etc), the mutants (X-Men, Deadpool) and the paranormal MCU (Blade, Venom, Morbius, Ghost Rider etc).

You can probably have a few crossover characters like Dr. Strange, Loki, Kang the Conqueror and maybe Scarlet Witch, who may then lead crossover events through the use of their powers (kind of like Secret Wars or Endgame scale battles), but otherwise I hope they are able to keep them separated.
Gear: Fujifilm X-Pro2 | Canon A-1
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
19712 posts
13576 upvotes
Ottawa
yeah it was kind of cool with all the tie-ins and crossovers all leading up to a grand event, but for the future movies, it's best if they kept some degree of separation. I mean, if you miss a movie or two of another plotline, it still makes sense. Otherwise, they should be just called Marvel Movie Part 10, 11, 12 and you should just watch them in order.

As I said, I liked that this felt like a different type of Marvel Movies, just like I liked the feeling of some of the Netflix TV shows. I hope they continue to have different tone in their movies, otherwise it just feels like generic MCU movie.
Please update your profile to include your city https://forums.redflagdeals.com/ucp.php?i=ucp_profile&mode=profile_info
Deal Addict
Oct 17, 2002
1342 posts
390 upvotes
Oakville
EugW wrote: They needed the bracelets. Much of the end of the movie was devoted to leveraging those bracelets. Did you fall asleep during the movie? Face With Stuck-out Tongue And Tightly-closed Eyes I wouldn’t blame you if you did.
lol... yeah I actually did doze off a few times (I missed a good 5mins or so) just before the group got to that camp (felt like a cult?) where the mind control eternal was in charge of.

But yeah, I guess I'll take your word for the ending, I wasnt paying too much attention by the end. I just thought it was weird that Gemma Chan started to float into the air for no reason and put 2 and 2 together when all the other eternals (well not all of them, just the ones in the area) started to float their energy to her (though didnt notice the bracelets).

Oh well. Part of me wants to watch this again to see all the parts I missed - maybe in a few months after the bad taste is gone.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)