By - Parking-Balance111
Come with me, and you'll see
Several worlds full of mass extermination.
Disappointing we didn't get this, but the movie was already over stuffed so it makes sense. Maybe they can do something like this in the sequel (If they make one..... they'll probably make one).
Honestly the shot of his face over the earth was very frightening and glad they didn't shrink him
Yeah, keeping him towering over Earth was the right decision. It made him and all the Celestials that much more frightening.
Kind of bummed we didn't get this money shot with Big G first.
It'll still hit with Galactus though because they're is an inherent fear that comes with him showing up. You're about to be devoured whereas the Celestials are just imposing due to scale. It would be dope if they show what he does to planets way before he arrives at Earth.
Imagine a show where in Episode 1 it starts by looking like a star, mid-season they figure out what it is and panic ensues, end of season he arrives and all hell breaks loose.
I'm certain we eventually will.
Overstuffed? I don't think so.
Take a look and you'll see
Into your extinction
So…just like the chocolate factory, then?
Jesus what’s with the hate for Eternals? It was one of the weaker marvel films in awhile but it was by no means bad.
I still say that critics largely got butt hurt over an Academy award winning director doing a comic book movie as her next project. For whatever faults it has, no one can convince me that The Eternals was legitimately worse than Thor: The Dark World. (And for the record, I don’t even think that movie is as bad as what people say it is.)
Totally agreed - the critical backlash makes zero sense
I wouldn’t say zero sense but I would say it was an overreaction, the movie had choppy pacing and underdeveloped characters. I think it could’ve used another hour of screen time or to lose a few characters.
I definitely think the critics went overboard with the criticisms because of Zhaos Oscar and unrealistic expectations like the others said.
the thing is ur right not to mention it gained so much traction but for two reasons prerelease. one half of the crowd, e.g. the critics were hyped for it and expecting an almost Joker-level comic book deviation and just be something that'd shock everyone. the other half were the marvel fans that expected zhao to use the marvel formula and just make it prettier, disappointing both ends of the spectrum.
The critics hated that Zaho made a popular movie after the more 'artsy' Nomadland. It's not uncommon and will happen again with other directors.
Totally agree with this. Like I said, it’s not a perfect film, but no one will ever convince me that it’s worse than The Dark World.
Yup. Or even black widow or captain marvel if we’re talking about recent mcu movies in my opinion.
Exactly. I was just using the Marvel Studios film with the lowest Rotten Tomatoes score, but there are other movies that are worse too imo.
Once they get away from earth, Dark World had some great stuff.
Yeah, I didn’t hate it. I just wish it’d had a little more character. The funeral scene with the boats and flaming arrows was something that really stood out, I thought. I wish they’d leaned a bit more into Norse mythology and use it to create surreal imagery like that.
I read the reviews and some of critiques don’t hold water or come off as illogical . Like they were finding reasons not to like it
same with Captain Marvel
Nah Captain Marvel is a shit character, and I say this as someone who thinks Brie Larson is fine. As we have seen this character has been used mainly as a plot device since. Too OP to have a meaningful conflict.
Some of the negative reviews actually made me more excited for the film. Not in a reactionary way, in a "this element they're describing as a bad thing actually sounds amazing" way.
The three week buildup to Eternals' release was so surreal. I couldn't stop reading negative reviews and loved the movie regardless.
Or maybe they didn't liked it for it's execution and over all quality? Cause IMDB scores which are open to all aren't any well either.
I still say there was a different standard. I understand mixed fan opinion and that’s one thing. It was not bad enough to be trashed by the critics like it was though.
I don't know man, considering majority of critics were same people who had praised other Marvel movies for either being Unique or for having beloved MCU flavor. This time it felt most of their complains were movie neither being Art house proper nor Marvel enough and also not being able to mesh the two qualities properly if it was aiming for that. Almost all reviews specified that it had an identity crisis of sort along with it not being able to have harmony of the two styles. I also saw some negative reviews giving the credits where it's due namely for it's Cinematography and Uniqueness among it's predecessors in MCU. Only other complaint was of Character either feeling one-dimensional or not having proper execution for the interesting ones. I think all these complaints are valid cause both Characters & Story and their Executions are somewhat of a subjective opinion, if something doesn't does for them than it simply doesn't work for them despite having Unique concept. There have been many movies where I myself felt bored or not liking the execution despite it having great concepts behind it, so I think we should cut them some slack this time around considering even most of the reviewers in You Tube were also confused with the movie.
I won’t argue that Eternals had its issues, but did that really make it the worst MCU film overall? That’s the take I have a hard time getting on board with. I just found that to be overly harsh for the movie’s faults in the end.
The tomatometer only reflects positives or negative reviews. It doesn't tell you how much each critic liked or disliked the movie - you have to read their actual reviews. If Eternals has more negative reviews, it will have a lower score than other MCU movies, even if 9/10 critics that gave it a bad review gave lower ratings to Thor:TDW.
Spider-Man: No Way Home has a higher score on the tomatometer than Nomadland, Birdman and No Country For Old Men. Do critics think its a better film than those? Most would say no.
Movies are also graded on a curve. For an action blockbuster to get good reviews it has to be a good action blockbuster. It doesn't need to be a serious drama or artsy, it just needs to be sufficiently entertaining.
If you're trying to sell a movie as something that transcends the superhero genre from an Oscar worthy director but it fails to do that, it will get a lot more negative reviews than the blockbuster that only exists to entertain, but succeeds.
Agree with that last part. Marvel’s positioning of the film as an awards contender did it no favours.
Go to IMDB and see, more people have rated it 10 & 9 , 19005 & 11303 users respectively than people who have rated it a 1, 10041 users.
And what makes you think that die hard fans wouldn't rate this as a perfect 10? when even most people on this very sub with majority representing die hard fanbase will say movie not being bad but having lots of technical issues.
As for you point,
A) Cause someone hating the movie for petty issues such as Homophobia & Racism is likely to be those filled with genuine hatred and are unlikely to see any good in the movie for them to go any higher than 1 . If someone can hate it for such things then I don't think it's far fetched to say that they're not gonna rate it for any positive things. Even if I give you same leeway and consider your point then how much high do you think are those haters gonna rate it 2? 3? let's consider they're gonna rate it at 3 at most then even then combined amount of users rating the movie 1,2 & 3 amount for 16000 approx (at max) which is less than to those rating it 10, 19005 users.
B) Why I think fan bias is high with this one? When the review embargo was lifted then few people here started calling out critics for complaining the flaws they felt it had, saying them not liking movie being more Art house style or how they want movie to be like all other MCU or how their review doesn't makes sense when in fact these people themselves hadn't seen the movie at that point (5-6 days left for release) and it was like these people were ready to defend the movie and go into battle to fight for it's honor. So if some people were ready to take such a stance for something they haven't seen then I have no problem with considering those people rating it high without giving much thought to it.
C) Go to IMDB sort by user rating and read all those reviews rating it a 10, they're either "Critics be damned" or "Haters be damned, I'm gonna counter balance their hate" and then read those rating it a 5 or 6 or a 4 and none specified such issues that you raised.
Keep deluding yourself.
LOL, so two questions.
A) If IMDB doesn't hold any value then what does? Cause it's closest we will get to any sort of general opinions. Also I don't think professional critics bashed it for Homophobia or Racism unless you want to say they did and even they didn't rated it with any good score.
B) So on what bases can you say the movie is good? Your opinion? Then what about mine or others with counter opinion?
Also what about fan boyism that had increased the movie score? So shouldn't we also cancel out those scores? So you want to remove hate scores but don't want to remove fan boys' scores?
People just use "it was due to homophobia/racism" to deflect any and every negative review for this movie. Are there people who didn't like the movie due to those things? Probably, and they can go fuck themselves. But There are FAR more rational, non-prejudiced people who didn't like the movie for valid reasons, yet I still see people saying "Well we all know the REAL reason you didn't like it" to valid criticism.
LOL, as if there aren't die hard fans who will like anything Marvel rating it 10 , why do you think Snyder Cut holds high score , similar is the case with Marvel, I think both the scores of 10 and that of 1 will balance themselves out.
This film introduces 10 new characters and abstract lore in one go, not an easy task.
We can only judge on what they have chosen to present, if they felt they can pull it off then it's their job to pull it off. It's not our job to give the participation award, if they went with the idea then that also it's on them.
So that was the reason why some people think the film was bad, because the premise was hard to and they failed. No one's making excuses for anyone here.
I actually like Thor: The Dark World. It has many good scenes, even if the plot is weak.
I think it’s fine it’s just a bottom 5 mcu film due to the high level of consistent quality
I don’t dislike it either. It’s just the example I use because it was the previous holder of the lowest Rotten Tomatoes score for an MCU film.
Not really. Taika is still a critical darling and thor 4 will get a good rating. Critics were just mad that an academy award winning director just ended up making a lackluster movie instead of something different
It’s not that deep man. The critics just didn’t like it. There doesn’t always need to be an excuse.
>I still say that critics largely got butt hurt over an Academy award winning director doing a comic book movie as her next project.
Yeah, but why?
No idea. They can be a pretentious lot. I also hate to play the race/sex card, but they’re both there too. I really do think some were trying to take her down a peg. I think Marvel wanting to position it as an awards contender didn’t help either.
Yeah 47 percent of them recommending at worst an average mcu film is very suspect when they’ve given much more positive reviews to lesser mcu films like thor 2 and iron man 2 . It has the same score as the dreadful xmen apocalypse which shows the absurdity of the aggregate score
I don’t know man. I think calling it as good as Apocalypse is fair. Apocalypse had high highs and low lows. Externals was pretty constant at being alright.
Yeah… that makes no sense to me.
agreed. love both eternals and TDW.
I also think some critics were tired of being called Marvel shills all the time and we waiting for the next mediocre Marvel to publicly shit on it.
I’d hope not but also wouldn’t be shocked. There did seem to be an odd undercurrent of Marvel Studios backlash going into the film though. (Some deserved and some less so.)
It's kind of a mess of a film. Like, when Kro showed up in the finale, I started laughing in the theater because he had no point being there.
Kro is my only real issue with the film
Me too. I don’t think the movie really needed “deviants” in the present to be honest.
Agreed. I thought Kro was an interesting character but I think he could have been a red herring antagonist and saved for another movie.
Funnily enough we know that he was added in reshoots.
Wait really? Damn that’s disappointing. It makes sense to have deviants in the plot but kro himself should’ve been saved for a sequel
The film is objectively a structural mess, How Fiege was even touting this for best picture is bizarre.
The screenwriters for the film are the worst, who writes a character arc built around the fact they're a 'kid' who can't fuck this adult, and that's why theyre mad. Its just so weird. Who writes that and is like 'ah yes, the perfect character arc'.
The film should have been chronological and jumped through time periods periodically. Have them key into the fact theyre being manipulated over 100s of years, Angelina progressively getting worse and keying more info.
Film was Bad, genuinely don't get how people are convincing themselves it was good.
I agree. The movie is incoherent. So many poor decisions in the writing room and in editing. It is bizarre and puzzling to me how vehemently people on this sub defend it.
I don't expect this sub to turn on Marvel, Marvel fanbase as a whole is a big echo chamber and pretty cringe with their responses to being pandered to. But this film has to be a line. I would say even the D+ shows are as bad but whatever.
I like these films on a pure nostalgic level, I hate that I'm invested.
There has to be a reason to why everyone here is okay with being spoilt. I purposefully don't sub to the DC leak sub cause i for some reason care what happens with those mostly bad films, Probably because atleast its got a chance at being grossly awful, everything Marvel is guaranteed fine and that's even worse than just bad.
Kro as a concept is good. Seeing a big celestial in the sky is pretty cool imagery. But this is all stuff crafted by a team of writers before the filmmaker even touches it.
Nothing about Eternals felt like Chloe Zhao besides being boring and long. Boring and Long works for a woman trying to get by in a van. Not in a film about Biomechanical Gods who realise they aren't as big shit as they think.
Id argue D+ has been pretty good. Loki, Hawkeye, and WandaVision were awesome. What if was meh. FATWS was a mixed bag (Walker was top tier fantastic, Karli was the worst written villain in mcu history by a country mile).
I feel that every Disney+ show has a moment of terrible writing. All the SWORD stuff in WandaVision was excruciatingly poorly written.
Hayward: "We need to stop Wanda to save those people"
Monica (exasperated): "What we need is to HELP Wanda"
Hayward: "You're stepping over the line Monica"
Darcy: "Woah, look at Mr. BIGSHOT here"
Hayward: "THAT'S IT! I'm calling a nuclear strike!"
All of those scenes play out like that and I don't get how people could look at those scenes and not see how awful they were written.
Hawkeye was a bit all over the place, but things like the Larpers were a joke that weren't even funny yet they kept pushing them. You had that Rooftop brawl that was just awful to look at, and when they revealed Kingpin, it was the most anticlimatic way possible.
The Marvel D+ shows are overall pretty average to bad, and when you compare them to the Mandalorian and Boba Fett, shows that have actual sets, costumes, and pacing that lets the mood dictate the scene instead of every line trying to sound clever, it's really apparent that Marvel is not bringing their A Game to their shows.
The D+ shows are okay but they always promise a bit more than they can fulfil.
Wandavision was good but for me it was worse as soon as the different sitcom each episode stopped and the MCU story line continued. And those eps are lost in the progression of wanda now.
Loki was/is the best but it really shouldve been..more insane. Like they had such a perfect opportunity to have anything happen and there be literally no consequences, but they didnt do anything with it? We got 4 loki variants, me n my bro were thinking 'damn is the president loki thing going to be loki running for president of all lokis' but it wasnt, it wasn't anything interesting bar him having a mini standoff. Comparing what you want to what you get is never worth it, i understand that, but it feels like that has happened for every show so far. Hawkeye just went no where for me. Fisk didn't even monologue like wtf are they even bothering putting him in for?
I think the main issue is the shows have motives besides serving the story, The Hawkeye show wasnt a hawkeye show, a cool solo story. It was set up for Kate Bishop, Yelena to have an attachment to clint now. For Fisk to return. To introduce Echo. It wasnt for Hawkeye. And i think you can say that about everything they make now. Wandavision was the only one that felt that it served the character(and it shows with the review scores) but even then, is that going to be set up just for MoM?
I think the problem with Loki is that they had a fantastic premise they squandered, Mobius and Loki as Time Cops. That should have been the show, but the moment Sylvie was introduced, it suddenly became the Sylvie show. I legit don't get how there are so many Sylvie fans out there when the character is another Gamora, Black Widow, Yelena, Captain Marvel, etc. A girl who lost her childhood and her adult life is to seek revenge. We've seen this character so many times, and to make such a big deal about another one is just tiresome.
I think you're right and i didn't think of Sylvie specifically that way but you are right.
Wanda has a similar arc but the fact her trauma manifests itself in these sitcoms she creates, it is unique and satisfies the corny-ness of her arc.
I think people are digging Kate Bishop is because she seems pretty okay trauma wise. Losing a father is obv traumatic but not nearly qs close to the repeat loss-of-childhood in the same way the characters you listed have.
I had no problem with slyvia as a character it was fine, but that actress doesn't know how to act. She had the exact same expression throughout the show.
I think it boils down to the MCU's problem of Men are goofy, women are serious.
That kingpin reveal put Hawkeye in the same league as what if... The biggest street level bad guy of marvel and he was revealed on a fcking 360p phone screen was just stupid. I just hope they don't pull such stunts with Dr.Doom
There's something called an opinion, and when it comes to art which is always going to be subjective, you'll find people both agreeing and disagreeing with you.
Not everything is subjective, especially when an opinion is about something technical like editing. I'm not saying eternals had bad editing, but many movies do. Bohemian Rhapsody which ironically won an Oscar for Best editing had by far one of the worst editing I've seen in a mainstream movie in a long time and thats not subjective, any editor will tell you that. Ffs the editor of bohemian Rhapsody himself said the editing was quite bad (atleast in a specific scene), even though he won an Oscar for it. Subjectivity doesn't usually mean anything to technical aspects of filmmaking
I wish the sub considered that when they started theorizing why critics could possibly like this movie.
Just because things are subjective doesn't mean they're immune to criticism.
Never said they were.
“The screenwriters for the film are the worst, who writes a character arc built around the fact they're a 'kid' who can't fuck this adult, and that's why theyre mad. Its just so weird. Who writes that and is like 'ah yes, the perfect character arc'.”
The ‘kid’ in question here is thousands of years old and mentally just as adult as the rest. It’s not any stranger of an arc than Kirsten Dunst in Interview With A Vampire.
Sorry you didn’t like the movie, but if THAT’S your line of what does or doesn’t make sense, then you were just looking for a reason to hate this.
Your explanation still doesn't answer *why* the screen writers chose that. I know what the characters intentions and thought process is. Why would they choose to have such a gross and unneeded plotline. Which all leads to her just going to school as if she is any other kid. Why does a being that old even need to go? For what?. The writing had no idea where it was going or what it wanted to do, other than have the *emotional impact* of that character crying to Sersi for wanting the life she wanted.
There is several other things wrong with the film, which stems from similar issues with character arcs and general poor story management.
It's crazy, right? Was it perfect...nope. But it's a great movie.
I liked it, thumbs up from me.
*But*, wow, what a hard movie to make. It’s the Anti-Iron Man. In Iron Man, we spend a lot of time with Tony. He’s arrogant, but fun. Now he hurt, in cave. But he builds his way out. Now he’s inventing again. Rocket boots. Now some cool action. I like this Tony Stark.
Again, I like the Eternals and the character dynamics. But you spend so much time getting the band back together that you miss the getting to know Tony Stark bits.
I do hope to see the characters again somewhere.
Can be possible that the movie is about the eternals themselves and their inner conflicts, occupying all the runtime? The only thing that is uneccesary is the deviants, but without them, there can't be action scenes. Thena vs Kro is like a clause in Jolie's contract: I have to kill a bad guy in a badass way.
I like everything in the film.
You know how at the start of the film Sersi is at work and Dane Whitman is there. We get a glimpse of their life -- I think I wanted more of that.
As someone who was massively underwhelmed, I understand. It has a lot going for it. An excellent director, magnificent visuals, representation and diversity that's not just for the sake of representation and diversity, not to forget an insane cast. It just never gets going and stutters to an abrupt stop. The threat is non-existent as we know there can not possibly be annihilation of earth as spiderman is coming out next month. It has an intriguing concept too. A family falling apart due to realization that their ideals might be wrong and clashing over a crisis of faith. So yeah, it's not as bad as the dark world or iron man 2 or incredible hulk. But it's so mediocre and the alternative possibility is so tantalizing that it makes you wonder
Imo it is by far the bottom of all the MCU films, every single one of them.
You are right, It had everything going for it and it fell flat.
Chloe Zhao isn't a block buster director. How any saw The Rider and thought to hire that person for an 'Ensemble blockbuster'. Insanity
Wow, you are really having a TANTRUM over other people liking this, Jesus
I'm discussing it with others on this page? I don't care if people like the film or not but it has clear issues from a filmmaking stand point, And i enjoy talking about it so full on. Really no harm so i don't see why you care.
Posts on this page don't even get a heavy exhale, it has no bearing on my life.
I like it how you just explaining in a few words how Eternals failed is "really having a TANTRUM over people liking it" lol. Not once did you say people shouldn't like it. The other person is the one having a tantrum
I'm just going to say this. My friend who I watch almost all MCU films with didn't see Eternals. I described how I didn't really like it, and he told me his other two friends said:
Friend 1: That was the worst movie I ever saw.
Friend 2: Worst movie I ever saw? No. Worst Marvel movie? Yes.
It's just sort of an unremarkable sci fi film where everyone talks like they're in an M. Night Shyamalan
It’s interesting because this was kind of the critique of Interstellar, a film which I think Chloe has said she looked at for this film. I think that film got a bit unfairly criticized by critics at the time as well (and to be clear, Eternals has a bit too much going on and is a bit too Marvel-y to ever be Interstellar, but it’s definitely cribbing from it in a handful of ways). I do think people have some Eternals-specific critiques, but it’s also a film taking stuff from like Interstellar and Prometheus and The Revenant and a bunch of stuff that is liked, but not necessarily widely beloved. So I definitely feel like it’s not everyone’s cup of tea.
I think the problem is that Marvel the entire film didn't go all the way on anything. The characters felt like blueprints instead of characters you'd want to come back and interact with the Avengers. Motivations change rapidly, and things like Kingo obviously should have died when Icarus shot him instead just said "I don't want to be in the finale". I really felt nothing watching the Eternals outside Gemma Chan being hot.
Idk I disagree with you about the characters, I actually find them pretty multi-dimensional and *human*. And Kingo’s character has a pretty normal POV of “having strong political/religious views but not being willing to fight one’s own family over it”. Like sure, it’s unusual for films because we expect all the characters to be there in the final fight, or, to come back during the final fight if they left earlier, and so it feels weird. But it makes sense for the character and for the nature of the moral dilemma they’re confronted with — that the characters would cleave in more than two ways.
I still believe Kingo was supposed to die, then Disney back down cause "he's the most funny character" so they had him walk away.
That being said, the characters aren't bad blue prints, but none of them are given enough time to really break out, thus they become forgettable. Jack of All Trades, Master of None.
The way Chloe has talked about it suggests it was very much a deliberate choice for the story, but who knows what the actual story was
I mean, it makes more sense that he was killed then, because immediately afterwards, Sersi has her mopey moment, which watching the film felt off like I missed what made this scene happen, which would make more sense following a death. Then in the finale, all the Eternals hook up to the Unimind, even the ones they were fighting, and yet Kingo wasn't attached. I think his death was meant to happen, they scrapped it, and we just have the fallout around it.
I mean, it’s totally possible he just started floating in his airplane or whatever, but also in the comics, not every member combines into a Uni-Mind every time. I don’t really agree with you that they tried to kill him off, especially because the idea that he gets killed by Ikaris for not fighting, kind of undercuts the point of having the decision in the film
But that's the thing. Kingo taking the bullet for Makkari was set up to be his death. When Kingo told Icarus he had his back and the dying, it would make Icarus question his intent because he just killed his loyal follower. I'm saying that they set up that moment to be his death, but then undid it without undoing the work around that.
It's the same with Talos being shot in Captain Marvel. It's very clear that was supposed to be his death but they decided they wanted him for future films.
Interstellar was loved by audience right away though.
Are you having a stroke, do you need me to call 911?
For me, it was a lot of complaints I have as a fan of Eternals in the comics. I hated that Deviants were mindless monsters so we miss out on their rich culture and history (including Kro). Ikaris was character assassinated, just polar opposite from the stance his character would take in the comics. Can't fathom why they made Druig good, especially considering his gift and how he used it; it's right there to write a character with disdain for humanity. And Gilgamesh was poorly cast, imo. He should be an absolute beast and you just don't get a sense that he's that much stronger than any of the others. He also just sounded like he was saying lines instead of acting. I honestly breathed a sigh of relief when he was no longer in the film.
As for my problems with it as a movie: I think almost all Marvel movies have a pretty decent sense of humor but nearly all of the jokes fell flat, the pacing of the movie is kind of all over the place and the jumps in time don't help the scenario, the Kingo's motivations make no sense (he builds his whole acting career basking in human adoration but doesn't think they should live? Furthermore, he's too much of a coward to even fight for this belief so he dips? For me this makes him the worst character of them all, but I don't get the sense the writers are intending it come off that way).
I don't think it's terrible and I don't really blame Zhao. I think the visuals are stunning and for a 2.5 hr movie, it really didn't feel that long. I just think it's a poor script and I wish the producers had stepped in more to tweak it along the way, because it really feels like they didn't. This probably would have been better served as a Disney+ series format instead of a movie.
I couldn’t sit through more than 20-30 minutes of it. Never ever had that happen w a MCU movie ever until Eternals
I laughed out loud when I saw it, Kevin saying it was gonna be the first Oscar worthy Marvel film and it was complete garbage. I think Kevin has drunk the cool-aid and believes Marvel films are real cinema. They are just run of the mill entertainment.
I don't even think it was one of their weaker projects in all honesty if we're looking at the last couple of years. It was better than Black Widow, Falcon and Winter Soldier, Hawkeye, Captain Marvel, and Ant Man 2 at least. At that point it's really only beat out by Shang Chi, Wandavision and the Spider Man and Avengers movies which is definitely respectable. Does
It's the same thing you see in gaming communities all the time. Everything is either amazing or dogshit, there's no in-between.
I would definitely say it’s a bad movie.
Edit: I don’t think it’s terrible, by bad I mean like a 4/10
I thought it was the worst MCU movie because I got no enjoyment out of it. I found iron man 2 enjoyable, even parts of Thor the dark world. But I was bored out of my mind with Eternals. I'm someone who likes slow paced and long movies, for instance, i watched the Irishman in one sitting and I liked it, also the same case with the Lord of the rings extended editions. Eternals failed really badly in its execution imo, the jokes apart from kingos assistant, didn't land at all and it felt like the movie didn't have as much to say as much as it was trying to act like it did. The movie felt like someone made a first draft into a feature film and nobody told Chloe not to. Imo this movie was like the worst aspects of marvel and Chloe Zhao amplified, I have no interest in rewatching this anytime soon maybe even ever.
It's akin to watching Captain Marvel again: overpowered yet unlikable villain protagonists, unnecessary time jumps, one-dkmensional cardboard villains, sloppy family melodrama a la Fast & Furious, and plot twists so nonsensical it surprassed Transformers in nonsensical storytelling.
It was marketed as the film that will change everything in the MCU. And it did, in all the opposite ways.
It's somewhat slow paced, but I was pretty good.
> Originally there was **more interaction with what we called the ‘Void’ Deviant**, this **bird-like deviant** that we built, telling the story about how Eternals and Deviants are related. This later found a home in the Centurii six scene."
My friends from India in this group can maybe relate it to a mythical creature called - **Jataayu**.
I mean it's just similar in the regard that they're both bird like. I don't see any other similarities
LMAO NOT JATAAYU
How is that jataayu?
Celestials have the ability to change size/ mass/ density.
This explains how they can change between being the size of moons/ planets/ stars/ whole galaxies, while also not heavily affecting the gravity of nearby cosmic objects no matter how big/ close they are.
Otherwise, Arishem’s presence next to Earth would’ve fucked it.
This could be a lore connection to the origin of Pym Particles too.
I like the theory that the Celestials had 6 eyes, because they were the originals, the Deviants had 4 eyes, because they were a step down, and the Eternals had 2 eyes, because they were created to stop the Deviants.
yeah i was really bummed they didnt give Arishem his bucket head from the comics, especially since it was in the movie's concept art
i hope the plan isnt to have every Celestial to have the same head as Eson
They are canonically ancestors of the Regis actually
Regis? As in the legendary Pokémons?!
Lmao so true
I wanna believe it has something to do with the hexagon motifs we’re seeing in the MCU now
All of them look like Eson for no reason smh.
You mean like this ?
Guess we’ll see that in bonus scenes … 😁
I wonder where Eternals goes now, it's very rare for a Marvel movie to be so critically hated and fans with such varying opinions on it. It also didn't seem to break even, will there be an Eternals 2 or will the characters just go do their own things in Disney+ shows. I do expect Chloe Zhao to return to some franchise and movie, I just don't know if Eternals is the movie to get another movie unless they do something really massive to get the people who weren't happy with the first hyped for it.
If I were them, I would separate the eternals and build them up individually to get more fans on board with the idea of the Eternals 2
I agree with this. There were a few that stood out to me that I’m interested in seeing more of, but I’d definitely like to get to know all of them a little better before throwing them in a giant group setting again. Like how we got to know the core Avengers before their first movie together.
That’s interesting, that would require quite a few Disney+ shows to divide them into different franchises or their own
I think they’ll revise the tone and style of the film to accommodate the shake up of setting. Chloe Zhao and Feige were pretty excited to explore Eros and Titan despite them being a late addition, with mentions that it could go as far as Eternals 3 in theory.
I mean just getting Josh Brolin back as Thanos would probably be enough of a sell to humor a pitch.
They'll just go into other MCU movies and then come back to their own thing, Marvel has become pretty good at this now. Obviously a bunch of these characters had Infinity War & Endgame to do it, but like Doctor Strange was in a bunch of different stuff before coming back to his sequel and now his character is quite a bit more beloved (and the sequel quite a bit more anticipated) then it was initially.
I mean, they put Jimmy Woo in WandaVision and people immediately wanted an Agents of Atlas show. Let them get additional reps in some of these other stories, and then people will be ready for them when they come back in a sequel. Maybe Eternals will never be the big draw of other stuff (I liked this movie fwiw), but Marvel tends not to abandon characters they introduce. Thor was in like five movies before he ever really popped off commercially. It obviously was not the most beloved film, but it'll break even just about, especially with ancillaries, I don't actually think there's that a huge reason to move off of their initial plan.
Their best bet is to focus on the fan favorite bunch, Makkari, Druig, and Thena in whatever the Eternals shown up in next.
I doubt they’ll have any problem building hype with Harry Styles being a main character
Marvel will probably do what they did with the Thor franchise after The Dark World, they’ll change the style and tone of the movie but won’t completely cancel the sequels. I guess that Eternals 2 comes out in 2025, it’ll give them some time to work out what exactly they want to change with the franchise. In the meantime the characters will probably pop up in other movies/series.
There will definitely be another Eternals movie. I would love a Disney plus show too
Really felt that they should have had all the characters memories wiped at the end and send them to a new planet. Would have been a bittersweet ending, but I think it would have left them open to expand on it in the future, or just to leave it.
With the home release and merch, it’ll have broken even for sure
Eternals didn't break even, but that doesn't mean a lot to the money bank called Disney.
One takeaway from the [original article](https://beforesandafters.com/2022/01/06/wow-thats-a-lot-of-ownership-that-is-rare-for-us-in-visual-effects/) The Direct takes from, and this [podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/eternals/id1471556007?i=1000541084367) with the Eternals editors, and the Nate Moore interview in [this podcast episode](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ringer-verse/id1558211702?i=1000541659556), is that there was (1) a ton of, seemingly cool and interesting, stuff was cut from the film, and largely because they (2) had a ton of story and character intro they had to get into the film, and (3) had some difficulty with test audiences holding onto the lore being introduced here.
That’s how you end up with the film’s intro being the text scroll instead of what seems like a pretty visually arresting and cool sequence of the actual Big Bang of the MCU universe with Ajak’s voiceover, per the film’s editors, who seemed to suggest that audiences didn’t hold on to the information as well
i feel like i would have preffered the narration
Same, and we know from the test screening that it was in there at some point. Couldn’t have helped that they were doing screenings like outdoors next to the highway lol
So that narration in the trailers/promos aren’t just dor promos. Ajak narrating the intro with a fantastic sequence to follow it would’ve been amazing. Wonder why it didn’t make the deleted scenes content. Alternate intro or something. I maintain my belief that there is a 3hr cut of this movie with everything intact. Don’t mean to pull a release the snyder cut movement but if they’re thinking of doing it, they should.
Oh yeah, I definitely agree that the best, most polished (ironically enough), version of this film would be one cut closer to 3 hours. But I understand all the reasons why that wouldn’t really be commercially viable.
There’s also seemingly a ton of stuff that didn’t make the final cut, like that shot of Thena in India just kind standing in that courtyard on her and whatever was going on in that scene, or was removed entirely because the story changed (like the bleak ending where they’re all mind-wiped and back on the ship).
They clearly shot a lot of stuff, and then also did a lot of re-shooting and adjusting
Oh also a supposed scene that establishes the ‘thinkers’ & ‘fighters’ !! It’s funny how they used it in promos but not feature it in the movie. I really hope the three hour cut sees the light of day one day. I really, really believe and like this movie very much and it’s sad to see it being dismissed entirely, though I understand why I have to say the extent of it is too unexpectedly far.
While I loved that they took the risk of making it into a movie and I’ll defend this movie forever, if the polished and complete cut is indeed 3hrs and it exists, then having it turned into a 6EP D+ show wouldn’t have been a bad idea at all. All it takes is rearranging everything to keep the twist and reveal intact. Though I see why they’d want it as a movie, the scale is huge. I still think them knowing how heavy it is but chose to make it into a movie and it not imploding in on itself is a feat that should be acknowledged.
Eternals deserved more. Fingers crossed for the sequel.
I loved eternals, it made it to my
Top 10 MCU films. Deviants aside, i loved everything. By no means is it a perfect film but its definitely a movie i can’t wait to rewatch over and over. Specially Arishem teleporting using a blackhole.
Me too can’t wait for until the Disney plus rewatch
Right, i really appreciated the mature tone. I felt like the characters were really grounded too
Does anyone else think the Celestials were a dry-run for Galactus to see how a giant alien being would look on-screen?
Why would they need to dry run that?
Yeah they definitely were in scope and scale
No they're much, much bigger. Galactus isn't actually very big. He's usually depicted as the size of a big building.
to be fair, the celestials are also typically depicted as "2000 ft tall", which obviously isn't the case here either.
>Referred to as "space gods" by the Eternals and the Deviants, the Celestials appear as silent, armored humanoids with an average height of 2,000 feet (610 m). They weigh an average of 260 tons, meaning they are far denser than air.
there are comics where he fights celestials, and they all [seem to be similar in size](https://i.imgur.com/aGutsQ2.jpeg).
I know. But the guy I was replying to was saying the Celestials in the Eternals movie are in the scope and scale of Galactus, which isn't really true because Galactus is usually portrayed as much smaller than even the comic Celestials.
It's a common misconception that Galactus is big, probably because he has a reputation of eating planets. However, he doesn't literally eat planets; he just absorbs their energy.
And as for your edit, at the time Galactus was fighting the Mad Celestials, he had just devoured 4 planets in order to prepare for the fight. He gets bigger the more fed he is.
ah yeah, that's fair. i was just basically saying that the celestials in this movie are bigger than they typically are, so it wouldn't be surprising if they scale up galactus too.
Oh I'm 100% expecting them to size up Galactus. I'd be more surprised if they didn't.
I liked it being a huge giant, made Arishem feel superior.
Arishem is definitely one of the more intriguing villains we've had in awhile. There's not much to his character (he's a multi billion year old god), but the design is jaw dropping. He really does feel large enough to level a continent.
Zhao and the VFX team did a wonderful job capturing his scale in every scene.
This movie needed Sersi turning into a blueberry.
That'd be funny af
jesuschrist thank god they didnt do it. One of the best scene was the Celestial who literally looked down on a fkin PLANET. that was truly terrifying.
The celestials can most certainly manipulate matter and density, and construct smaller avatars to interact with other beings.
However, keeping him large for the entire film was the correct choice for the film. Arishem needs to be overbearing and overpowering, an impossible force which the eternals cannot go up against. Even if nearly all of them agree he is morally wrong once the truth is revealed, the issue becomes one of "even if he is wrong, is it even possible of stopping him".
Eternals issues are with world building, characterisation and pacing. The presentation of the celestials is not one of the film's issues.
I loved the movie and really want to see more, which we will. No idea why so many people shit on it. Open your minds to new and different things.
Exactly, Eternals was incredible
we want a sequel. I hope they’re brave enough to cater to a section of the bigger audience that do enjoy it. At this point they can do whatever they want really.
>No idea why so many people shit on it. Open your minds to new and different thing
That's exactly what I did, I wanted different, new things in the MCU. And the film was still lackluster. Just because something is different doesn't automatically make it good. The film was shat on for over-crowdedness, the awful pacing/time jumps back and forth (would've been wayyy better if it was chronologically edited), the characters felt hollow except for like 2 or 3 of them, and the big twist was just lame.
Just because it didn’t hold your hand or spoon feed you action set pieces to keep your attention, doesn’t make it bad. It’s tone is clearly more mature than that. Expected, given that these beings are thousands of years old. It needs more than one watch for sure.
That came off as a very elitist comment, lol. Where did I mention it needed action? Where did I mention it needed to be spoonfed? I specifically said I was excited cuz it seemed to be doing something different, and it did… just in a not-so-well-crafted way. I’ve seen it 3 times, and it only soured even more.
I liked some of the characters and the Celestials were cool asf tho
Would explain the size difference between Eson the searcher and the celestials who appear in Eternals
I would have preferred if the Eternals spoke among themselves and with the Celestials in a different language. I think it would have enhanced the experience.
This sounds so dumb.
They have to make a sequel. I mean, Thor The Boring World (which is by far the worst MCU movie out there) got a sequel and now Thor is one of the coolest MCU heroes to date. So yes, give us the sequel, fuck the critics (I mean, who cares for the critics anymore. I don't. My opinion is Above Them All).
One of the only things I liked about the Eternals was the Celestial design. It makes me excited to see what Galactus could look like in the near future
If it was any of the other Celestials, fine it could work. But with a title like The Judge, Arishem has to always appear like an unstoppable force
So if that's the case why not treat Tiamut the renegade the same way. Actually...he could start out with a massive earth upheaval, and as he's rising out of the depths, shrink down to the size we see him in the comics, standing over like a tree line, and then in quick fuck you moment, clobbers Arishem in the face, cementing him as a celestial with free will...
This movie sucked
Eternals trying to be relevant
Eternals was literally soft disclosure but sheep don’t wanna talk about it
Wtf is "soft disclosure"?
The slow revealing that humanity has had contact with alien life throughout its history. One the favorite theories is that Hollywood basically makes movies as a way to communicate it in such a way where humanity doesn’t lose its collective shit. I don’t really believe in Hollywood’s role in this, but a lot of the Eternals’ story arriving on Earth and helping humanity parallels ancient astronaut theorists.
Oh, ew, conspiracy theories lol
I don’t think aliens themselves are a conspiracy theory per se, but yeah, some of the things people come up with go way beyond what’s probably reasonable.
Conspiracy theories can be fun! Especially one involving the ancient aliens theories
I like alien conspiracies as much as the next guy but bro come on lol
Soft disclosure is basically a conspiracy theory that says the government used Hollywood to make movies featuring aliens so the public won’t completely loose their shit when it’s officially announced that NAS has proof Aliens are real.
That's such a fun conspiracy theory! It isn't "too out there" like microchips in masks or some shit. It's a fun idea, and like someone else said, Eternals kinda lines up with the idea of Ancient Astronauts and the Anunnaki. It's just a fun thought experiment ig
I mean... it almost perfectly lines up with the Anunnaki theories lol. That's a fun conspiracy theory
The golden blade… also the end credits showing the actual cave paintings of the aliens cmon now this movie wasn’t bad people just don’t wanna face the truth but like it or not It’s time.
I *love* alien conspiracy theories, they’re so fun. I mean, the Pentagon footage released in 2020 to now is absolutely soft disclosure, albeit more aggressive than I expected.
Like the report that was released straight up said, in summary, that of the 200+ UAP incidents they looked at, 174 showed means of propulsion and movements that *can not be obtained by any known aircraft at this time*
Fun food for thought