Tuesday, May 29, 2012

State of the Onion Address

There's really no clever tie-in; I just wanted to use the phrase, "State of the Onion Address."

Today's post is a scattershot, unnecessarily bulleted list of what's on my mind today. Not enough substance to constitute a proper post (like Sunday's post; that was a keeper), yet still worth a mention:

- Looking back on my recent post about upcoming movies, I realize that I had omitted Men in Black 3, which, from what I've seen in previews, looks to be an improvement over the second movie. That's all I really ask for in a sequel--that it's not the worst installment in the series, and that there's a compelling reason to continue the story.

- Also looking back at that same post, I understand now that Columbia Pictures, who did Spider Man 1-3, is behind The Amazing Spider-Man, and that the movie will not be part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe with Thor, Captain America, Iron Man, Hulk, and The Avengers. I liked Spider Man 1-3. I was on board with a remake that would have deliberate continuity with other films. But now I hear that's not the case, and now I have no interest in seeing the film.

I didn't bother with X-Men: First Class because it looked like another origin story barely ten years after the last one, and because I really wasn't digging the costumes or the actors, and because X-Men: The Last Stand couldn't commit to being the end of the franchise or just a radically universe-changing sequel, leaving the storyline in a weird place that left room only for prequels, the first of which (X-Men Origins: Wolverine) just made things weirder. Spider-Man 3 injected a bit of weirdness to its franchise, too, and I just don't care anymore about franchises that give up at the first sign of trouble and find any excuse to dance around established continuity. Especially in a case like this, where The Amazing Spider-Man is effectively stealing some of the Marvel's biggest characters away from the MCU without the justification of, "well, we already had a series going and we want to continue it." Marvel Studios seems to know how to make money by telling a good story, but I'm getting the sense that Columbia Pictures is telling this story just to make money--and though the difference is subtle, it's significant enough that I really don't care to support them for it.

- Continuing on the subject of Marvel and movies, I finally got out to see The Avengers this weekend, after managing to locate a copy of Thor a few days prior to get caught up on the characters and events that might be involved. It lives up to the hype, though the sheer amount of hype I've heard made it difficult not to be overly critical any time there was anything less than perfect. For example, any time *spoiler* Joss Whedon IMPALED ANOTHER CHARACTER I LIKED */spoiler*. We also walked into the theater five minutes before the previews were supposed to start, only to find that the movie itself had already been running for five minutes. Coupled with bumbling around in absolute darkness to find seats--because, apparently, The Avengers' budget didn't include lighting until seven or eight minutes into the film--it took longer than it should have for me to warm up to the movie.

I foresee a Hulk / Iron Man 1-2 / Thor / Captain America / Avengers marathon in my future (which should be a total breeze after Harry Potter), so I think I'll hold off on further analysis and review until then.

- As foreshadowed in a recent Sunday Spotlight, I have succumbed to the lure of Sony and traitorously welcomed a PlayStation 2 into my Nintendo-only home last night. My original plan was, at some point later this year or early next year, to pick up a PlayStation Portable and the three or four games that had caught my interest. However, boring story short, my wife and I picked up an old-style PS2 from a friend this weekend. The (as-yet-to-be-determined) price was unbeatable, and my friend takes much better care of his gaming equipment than virtually anyone else I'd potentially buy from. Ostensibly, this PS2 was to replace the one my wife had lent out and never got back a while ago, but realistically, it was because Mega Man Legends 1 and 2 were part of the deal, and because we had picked up Mega Man X7 for cheap when we still thought it might be possible to reclaim my wife's PS2.

It was both exciting and terrifying to update my standing wish list with all the PS1 and PS2 games I'm now able to play: Mega Man X8. Final Fantasy X. Guilty Gear X. Gradius V, etc. Sorry, got carried away with the X's for a second there. I'm terrible at fighting games. But I'm pretty good at RPGs, and that's what worries me. PlayStation is the console for RPGs, and RPGs take forever to play. I'll never get through my Backloggery now!


A Philosophical Nerd said...

That was the issue I had with giving up on PlayStation was that I loved RPGs and PlayStation was the system for RPGs. After my PlayStation 2 was stolen along with most of my games, rather than go with the PS3 (the one that is backwards-compatible was just too expensive, and the cheaper one wasn't backwards compatible, which is a deal-breaker for me), so I went to Xbox 360 which is more well-known for its First Person Shooters, a genre I don't much care for.

Now, you mentioned there may be a marathon of the movies: Hulk / Iron Man 1-2 / Thor / Captain America / Avengers. Are these all the movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe connected to the Avengers movie? If so, I think I may have to follow your lead and have a similar marathon once Avengers comes out on DVD.

Flashman85 said...

[Nod of acknowledgment toward the first paragraph.]

There's a Marvel Cinematic Universe hyperlink in the post to the guest article my brother-in-law wrote about the MCU, which might help clear up the question. But yep, those are all connected to the Avengers movie!