I hope it ends up much more Affleck's than Snyder's take. Hasn't deserved much trust when it comes to a "take" on a character.

can't get over the bone claws that Wolverine has... didn't they say in one movie that once Adamantium is solid, it cannot be destroyed? Stupid movie, stupid plot bout taking his powers... yet another letdown.

there's gonna be a couple of scenes were they won't have gotten their powers yet. And if the Ben Grimm au nature isn't convincing as a tough guy, the Thing won't be convincing.

expected a 7/10 at least (after D9), was majorly disappointed....

was definitely a piece of art cinema. but man did i lose interest in the story after 30 minutes or so...

fwiw: ceterum censeo, io9 sequatur me.

A show owes its fans just the obvious:

Josh Gad? Is the new FF movie supposed to be a comedy? I like the guy enough as an actor, but he doesn't really fit the tough guy Ben Grimm is supposed to be... or is this gonna be a six month bulking/fight training kind of deal?

Well, that's just BS. Everyone knows all Real Bad Guys are German!

I'm all for other villains, but isn't introducing Kryptonite something you'd do in tiny parts? If Kryptonite's the main power source for Metallo, Supes hasn't got a chance (don't know the comics, maybe he'd wear a lead suit?), as soon as the Kryp is gone, no more Metallo (or will he have multiple power sources?)...

they can't talk about the destruction too much, as that would imply there was something wrong with the ending. Which there can't be, cause this is Hollywood, the movie made good money, and DC/WB need it to be so. Critics be damned.

it's all the budget could pay for... maybe he'll make some enhanced jumps with that leg ;)

isn't Metallo a bit weak, powerlevel-wise? Enough of a danger for a whole movie? Or is this going to be a sideshow, while the main act is Batman meeting Superman etc.? Either way, feels off.

that's half right... but then, one of the big rules is: "show, don't tell". I'm with you when it comes to rehashing an origin story, where neither writer/director/actor adds anything to the stories we've gotten before.

i think the De Niro Frankenstein's Monster had some convincing scars... Eckhart just got pretty boy scars.

i appreciate a good nitpicking! :) guess i just remembered some movie from the 50s and didn't think further... but even those screws served some kind of function (lightning-wise, i think).

can't quote ceterum censeo without following up in Latin :)

Do the scars get explained? Don't need an 50s-style monster with screws in the head, but those look awfully... useless. How/why would anyone cut those ways during surgery/putting him together from different parts? Or is this an early case of body modification, and there simply wasn't any tattoo artist available for…

we'll not solve it here, i'll give you that. but i hope somewhere at ABC, there are productive discussions about how to make the show much, much better. And there it does help to separate causes from effects...

don't really have a problem with you still liking AoS and giving it time to work stuff out. That's cool in many ways... but in no way is AoS ambitious.