Bazza Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 As long as that goose keeps laying golden eggs, it stays fed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Pretty much. Yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 2 hours ago, massey said: “This is my hammer, Bork Bork Bork.” Hey, you can't say that -- that's our word! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Whomever holds this hammer, if he or she be worthy shall possess the power of Swedish Chef. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Right! Chaos and mayhem! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 MCU Thanos & Mistress Death part 1 of 3. For context, below is a text I sent to a friend suggesting how Thanos's crush on Mistress Death could have been incorporated into Infinity War. Explanation by Marvel Studios why it didn't happen http://www.vulture.com/2018/04/why-thanos-doesnt-woo-death-in-avengers-infinity-war.html Me: I've been thinking about that too. I decided that on Titan they show a young Thanos seeing Mistress Death (in her woman form not a skeleton) so he goes to buy a flower (or pick one) and when he turns around to give it to her she's gone. He fell in love/crushed on Mistress Death. Dr Strange identifies the character for the audience as Mistress Death, the embodiment of the concept of death, and calls Thanos mad -- as he is The Mad Titan -- to which he retorts back -- madly in love. He explains in a cool pragmatic philosophical way that he conceived of his plan to kill half the population of Life as death is a 'change agent' to bring equilibrium to the universe ('balanced as all things should be') and does this because of his infatuation with Mistress Death. He twists the common maxim "when good people do nothing evil wins" to "when death does nothing Life wins" which in his experience results in overpopulation and misery as inadequate economic resources--thus "death as a change agent" and "genocide as an economic policy". So it adds a philosophical edge to his cinematic motivation which stays the same. And we see Mistress Death for the first time, with a little explanation why Thanos's motivation, 1) infatuation and crush, 2) economic solution to overpopulation. After Thanos achieves his goal and looks at the sunset/sunrise we can add another appearance by Mistress Death in which she has rejected his "offering of love" which adds a level of Greek tragedy to the whole situation. We can see that all the heroes that died have been for nothing, Mistress Death rejected Thanos' philosophy -- "death as change agent to bring balance" and that Thanos WON, but really DID lose everything. After seeing all the heroes disintegrate, and the above scene it would be a second gut punch of emotion for the audience. And in a perverse way adds sympathy to the villain. As he did it in the name of love but was rejected. And all this in a "popcorn blockbuster" -- Greek tragedy in a superhero film. Thanos stated that after he achieved victory the universe would be "grateful", his words, but that doesn't include Mistress Death--she isn't grateful. He won, but he lost. So just a couple of minutes of extra screen time required to carry this off. And Thanos gets to keep his comic book motivation, and his new cinematic one. The end. (Of part 1) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Brace yourself for an onslaught of, "Bring me Thanos!" memes. In that vein, believe it or not, already on sale: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 About Thanos’ Motivations… They’re Kinda Dumb https://screenrant.com/avengers-3-thanos-motivation-goals-dumb/ Christopher R Taylor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Oh no... L. Marcus, Armory, massey and 2 others 1 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 It's possible Thanos' secret motivation was to protect all his video game high scores...it all makes sense now. zslane 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 I would call my hammer 'Swedish Fish' because they are unstoppable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massey Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 23 minutes ago, Starlord said: I would call my hammer 'Swedish Fish' because they are unstoppable. I think the word you are looking for is "inedible". Lutefisk. Yuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDU Neil Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 46 minutes ago, Starlord said: It's possible Thanos' secret motivation was to protect all his video game high scores...it all makes sense now. Now that's a motivation geek audiences could get behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 15 hours ago, Lord Liaden said: Except that mythic Thor's gauntlets were called Jarngreipr ("iron gripper"), and Thor's belt of strength was named Megingjoro (literally "strength belt"). Heimdall, or Heimdallr, carried Gjallarhorn ("yelling horn" or "loud-sounding horn"). Indeed, and thank you for helping to make my original point. For obvious reasons, none of those items were given American names by their Asgardian owners or the dwarves that made them, and it stands to reason (the same obvious reason, in fact) that Eitri would have given Thor's new hammer an appropriately Nordic name as well, not something that sounds like it came from a 70's-era American sword-and-sorcery novel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 5 hours ago, massey said: I think the word you are looking for is "inedible". Lutefisk. Yuck. There may be some slight differences between lutefisk and Swedish Fish®. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 2 hours ago, zslane said: 70's-era American sword-and-sorcery novel I think you mean 60's-era English sword-and-sorcery novel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 55 minutes ago, Pattern Ghost said: I think you mean 60's-era English sword-and-sorcery novel. Yeah, no doubt. I should have just said "contemporary English sword-and-sorcery novel" and not tried to get quite so specific. Pattern Ghost 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 You do accept that the sword-and-sorcery genre was inspired by real-world myth and folklore, right? Honestly, I don't see the big deal. The original names for these things are in Old Norse because that's what the people who named them spoke. If they spoke English the names would have been in English. But today's movies are aimed primarily at an English-speaking audience. If a particular name sounds classier in the original Norse, you use that. If it would be more evocative in English (like Stormbreaker), you use that. Otherwise you have to get into the debate of whether MCU Asgardians speak Old Norse, which I ain't opening on this thread. Armory 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Since I started the thread, and the Asgardians were in Norway during the 11th Century IIRC, do. the MCU Asgardians speak Old Norse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massey Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 They speak all languages. Everyone understands them in their own tongue. Mjolnir only translates as Mjolnir because it's already a proper name in English. It's basically what the humans expect to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Sure, but Thor calls his hammer Mjolnir in all the movies despite the fact that the viewing audience is composed primarily of people who have never heard that name before and wouldn't know any better if they'd changed it to "Godcrusher" as some sort of "loose translation" just for their benefit. The same instinct to keep the name Mjolnir should, in my view, drive the choosing of a similarly Nordic name for the new hammer. What's good for the goose (original hammer) is good for the gander (new hammer). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 So you propose naming the new hammer "Gasse"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 So if he gives the hammer to someone else would he be passing Gasse? wcw43921, Doc Shadow and BoloOfEarth 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.