The Mego Museum needs your help!
The Mego Museum needs your help!

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Agents of Shield - Mid season premiere tonight

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Operation:Mego
    replied
    The Winter Soldier has definitely affected AoS:

    Leave a comment:


  • trekman101
    replied
    I have watched the show from the start and knew it had potential.......can't wait till next week.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnystorm
    replied
    Great episode! I loved that X-ray view of Deathlok, looked just like the comic, I'm guessing they're going to head toward that look too judging from the little metal bits showing through his forehead.
    Guess the event happening at the Hub involves the Winter Soldier.

    Leave a comment:


  • Random Axe
    replied
    Well, that was a good episode. Finally they are hitting their stride and making some suspenseful television compared to the drek they started out with. Now you can't trust anybody. Deathlok was waaaaay better than any of the stills would indicate. Plus, some leaked pics from future shows indicate further betrayals and hints at Graviton's return. This show just got very, very real folks. Definitely worth watching now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Operation:Mego
    replied
    Patton Oswalt has been cast as Eric Koeing, described as an old friend of Nick Fury's.

    "I got a call from my agent saying they want you on Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and I said ‘Hell, yes,’” Oswalt said. “I’m lucky that I’m visible enough that they wanted to bring me in to play this character. I’d worked with [executive producer Joss Whedon] before on Dollhouse, and I guess I wasn’t too annoying and they decided to put me on another one of his shows. So I was very lucky.”
    The actor also praised the ABC drama, which has struggled lately with diminishing ratings.

    “[They’re] a scrappy bunch of agents who are sort of working on the lower tier levels of the Marvel Universe and trying to stop threats before they even get to the Avengers-level threats. It’s almost like when you watch The Wire, and the guys like Pryzbylewski are just chasing the paper trail but that’s kind of the whole case. That’s where they can bring these guys down, is they’re doing the kind of brutal grunt work. There are these people doing the day to day that keeps the world from spinning into chaos. [They say,] ‘no, we don’t have the shiny Tony Stark, Hawkeye, Black Widow stuff, but we are in it up to our necks and we’re doing it. I really like that. There’s a great sense of camaraderie … They introduced Agent Garrett, who’s one of my favorite Marvel characters, and I kept asking them on the set, ‘is he going to be an android [like in the comics]. They’re just like, ‘You’ll have to wait and see.’”

    Leave a comment:


  • thunderbolt
    replied
    Originally posted by WannabeMego
    I was thinking her or Madame Web.

    Leave a comment:


  • Operation:Mego
    replied
    ^^^ Yep, and The Winter Soldier comic-prelude shows Cap, Widow, and Rumlow going after the people who have it.

    Leave a comment:


  • WannabeMego
    replied
    Did anyone else catch the fact that when Agent Carter gets a call that she will need 4-5 agents, the document she was writing the note on says 'Zodiac' in Big Red Rubber Stamp form...

    ...also the comic image of 'Nova' was clearly displayed during the sequence when they were discussing 'Guardians of the Galaxy'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Operation:Mego
    replied
    ^^^ That woud be a cool way to lead in the mystic side of Marvel, and perhaps even tie it in with the Dr. Strange film.

    Leave a comment:


  • WannabeMego
    replied
    Is this too obvious...?

    Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_...Claire_Voyant)

    Leave a comment:


  • hedrap
    replied
    Hydra is the next big wave.

    Deathlok kills me. I love that character. And you're right about the fabric. Why he's wearing knockoff Under Armour, no idea. Unless we're headed towards a bunch of jokey Bionic Man references.

    Leave a comment:


  • madmarva
    replied
    I can see why Feige is worried about demand. The theaters are crowded with super-hero product and it only gets more crowded with the FF and Superman/batman films in 2016 and Spider-Man evidently on a yearly schedule.

    Conventional wisdom says at some point the market will be oversaturated with costumed fantasies. Conventional wisdom isn't always right. Westerns were serial fare in the 30s, but became a solid feature film genre from the 40s until the early 70s.

    Super heroes may equate to today's cowboys and be accepted based on quality rather than being a fad. But for how long?Right now, all Marvel films makes is super hero movies. Feige has to worry about the well running dry.

    I think Feige does wonder about demand but also quality. Can Marvel produce 3 or 4 quality super hero films a year? With the increase would its product still dominate the competition - Spidey, X-men, Superman/DC.

    To me Marvel Success with movies is similar to Marvel Comics success in the 1960s. It's a relatively small operation putting all it's creative resources into a few projects. Adding films would mean more people involved but possibly less focus.

    Obviously, he doesn't want to put out a Green Lantern. The movie was average for a Sci-Fi/fantasy movie but was swallowed by the relative quality of the Thor, x-men and cap films that year. I think there was some super hero weariness on the part of critics and moviegoers in general when GL opened on the heels of better than expected Thor and X-Men films.

    A quality film might survive such a landscape but a mediocre one underproduces at the BO and looks terrible in comparison.

    As for SHEILD on the tube, it's billed as an extension of the Marvel U but it doesn't really deliver that other than the SIf episode.

    Why not use HYDRA as a rival? I would consider introducing Daredevil, Luke Cage and Iron Fist on the show and then pitching fans "if you want more, go to Netflix."

    Pick some Marvel heroes who likely won't be used as a star of a film and sprinkle them into the mix on SHEILD. In the films SHEILD is somewhat like CEREBRO in the X-men comics - seeking out super powered characters and recruiting them for the Avengers. And if the character does become a hit, what's wrong with spinning it into a film. A chunk of the films that get produced today are based on old TV shows. Or even create some original Marvels for the tube that could the. Be used in the comics or films.

    But Marvel has to do better than that Deathock photo - cheap breast plate and what looks like sweat pants.
    Last edited by madmarva; Mar 20, '14, 12:37 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Random Axe
    replied
    This is kind of a hard series to run without a film to tie in. On it's own, it struggled a bit in the beginning without an identity. It's hard to stick with a show that has no idea what it is or wants to be, it was an experiment. I do think they have sort of have an idea where to go from here, but the viewership is not supporting those theories or plans. They just have to move forward with their best efforts and just let whatever happens happen. I'd say this show has earned a second season, but the writing, marketing and scheduling airdates have GOT to be consistent to have any measure of sucess. There were too many running changes made, and its obvious some of this stuff was NOT in the plans in the begining. They need to map out an entire season outline and maybe leave a tiny bit of wiggle room to switch up aspects. This show can actually flourish if done correctly.

    Leave a comment:


  • sprytel
    replied
    Originally posted by hedrap
    I still see Agents getting a second-season pickup. It's DVR numbers are great. Except, that's how people get around watching ads so it's not something ABC can sell buyers on, which in turn hurts the returns. Sort of explains why they went to Netflix.
    Unless you view Agents of SHIELD as a giant commercial for the rest of the Marvel universe... which I do not think is an unreasonable way for Disney/ABC to look at it.

    Leave a comment:


  • hedrap
    replied
    Originally posted by madmarva
    Feige did not say Marvel was considering going to a 3 or 4 Marvel film a year model. A reporter asked him a question or really made a comment that Marvel had enough characters for that many films. Feige agreed there was enough material or characters, but he said there would have to be the demand. He didn't say the demand was there. Basically, the way I read his comments, is that Marvel is pretty happy with the two films a year model and isn't ready to push it further.
    http://badassdigest.com/2014/03/18/m...movies-a-year/


    I think television is filling some of that now, in terms of bringing out more product. That’s certainly the idea with the Netflix shows. But I don’t know that we will necessarily say “Okay, we’re now moving strategically to three a year, now we’re moving to four a year.” What I think is more likely - if [knocks on wood-like table] the next group of movies work and people want to see additional stories - we’ll have too many franchises and you can’t do one of each franchise every two or three years. We’d have to move to three a year, but that would have to be a natural move if it were to occur. We’d have a [script] draft, we’d have a filmmaker, we’d have a character the audience wants to see - let’s slot in a place for a third one. Or a fourth one.

    But it’s hard enough to deliver two quality, hopefully bar-raising movies a year.
    I think our definition of "considering" differs. Feige is saying the plan is/was to use cable as the content filler around their movie releases, but their movie timetable is too protracted due to the amount of potential franchises. So he's considering adding one more per quarter, but he doesn't know if the demand is there.

    I don't know why he would question movie demand since Spidey and the X films have done quite well. He says it's based on the audience liking the next group of characters, which is obvious, but nothing knew. I'd argue Cap and Thor were a harder sell than Strange or Ant-Man, and Guardians is about as crazy of a gamble they could have have chosen.

    That's why I think this is about Agents. It's doing normal primetime ratings which was not the expectation set by ABC last May at the unveil. All the problems stated by Marva, Axe and JW are spot-on and Marvel knows it. Only way to fix it, is ramp the budget which I thought that was coming with Deathlok...(cough). It then comes back to the case made by you guys about the original Flash show; when do costs outstrip returns? If you're Fiege, do you argue for higher production values for TV or put it towards more movies, where you at least have the formula down.

    I still see Agents getting a second-season pickup. It's DVR numbers are great. Except, that's how people get around watching ads so it's not something ABC can sell buyers on, which in turn hurts the returns. Sort of explains why they went to Netflix.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
😀
🥰
🤢
😎
😡
👍
👎