Jump to content

The Eternals


Recommended Posts

long boring and pretentious could also be applied to Dune, yet they seems to have been kinder to that. I enjoyed Both films and both had beauty and a thoughtful message.

it seems to me, most of the backlash is because they had the audacity to include a homosexual couple and a character that challenges gender paradigms. though they'd never say it outright of course, it's in the subtext.

one of the reviewers said the ensemble cast made it hard to follow individual character stories. I have a learning disability and I had lost a lot of sleep the previous night and yet I could follow their stories easily. it's obvious there is something else going on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha okay you got me.  I was just parroting what has been said in other places. I'll try to be aware of doing that again.

I just thought there must be some stock in it because I have seen comments in places by people saying they were fed up of the marketing being all about the gay couple.. I never saw anything like that myself so I must be missing something somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tora Tan said:

haha okay you got me.  I was just parroting what has been said in other places. I'll try to be aware of doing that again.

I just thought there must be some stock in it because I have seen comments in places by people saying they were fed up of the marketing being all about the gay couple.. I never saw anything like that myself so I must be missing something somewhere.

I think Marvel is panicking.

I heard the other day they even only started on 'Eternals' because DC planned on doing a 'New Gods' movie (A horrible idea in and of itself) and they wanted a Kirby movie out, as well. DC canned it, though, maybe because their DCEU as a whole is kind of a disaster so they didn't want to risk it; and now Marvel was stuck with a movie that did not really fit in with their established movie universe, with an entirely new cast of characters that, in fact, did seem to pander to prevailing public opinion - or whatever they perceived it to be - and, well, they did their best, but you can't make gold out of straw.

In the context of pandering, though: I notice they made Ajak - briefly played by Salma Hayek, although Ajak was male in the comic - the leader of the Eternals, while the Eternals' ruler in the comics, Zuras, was nowhere to be seen or even mentioned. Too much masculine authority, I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Salkafar said:

I think Marvel is panicking.

I heard the other day they even only started on 'Eternals' because DC planned on doing a 'New Gods' movie (A horrible idea in and of itself) and they wanted a Kirby movie out, as well. DC canned it, though, maybe because their DCEU as a whole is kind of a disaster so they didn't want to risk it; and now Marvel was stuck with a movie that did not really fit in with their established movie universe, with an entirely new cast of characters that, in fact, did seem to pander to prevailing public opinion - or whatever they perceived it to be - and, well, they did their best, but you can't make gold out of straw.

In the context of pandering, though: I notice they made Ajak - briefly played by Salma Hayek, although Ajak was male in the comic - the leader of the Eternals, while the Eternals' ruler in the comics, Zuras, was nowhere to be seen or even mentioned. Too much masculine authority, I guess

This reminded me of an interview of Arnold Schwarzenegger about his rivalry with Sylvester Stallone (or was it the other way around?).  He mentioned that he tricked Sly to star in the Movie "Stop or my Mom will Shoot" by telling the producers that he was very interested in the movie.  Sly of course, doesn't want to be outdone by Arnie, so he pushed to get casted on the movie instead.  Turns out Arnie was trolling Sly. 

Getting back on topic, Eternals are not yet released in our theaters locally so I really have no means of watching it right now.  But based on a lot of comments I've read, it seems that the criticism suffers from woke-ism.  I can't comment yet because I really haven't seen it to give my own opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Okay. I finally watched it. It is much worse than I thought.

Neither the actors nor the director, it seems, had ever taken a look at the source material.

The sense of grandeur, of ages of ages, of the cosmic incomprehensible, is missing entirely. The Eternals attempting to fit in with humanity? Only Sersi ever trifled with that, and only as a diversion. Eternals defying the Celestials (something which they are biologically incapable of doing)? The Deviants reduced to mindless animals, with the only one striving to be more having his character arc clumsily severed without any payoff? And the Celestials... specifically Arishem... one of the factors that make them so imposing is that they never speak. This serves to illustrate meaningful communication between them and mortals, even Eternals, is as absurd as between a human and a germ. Celestials are mysterious, their means incomprehensible, their ends unknowable. Instead, in this movie, Arishem is an exposition device.

Arishem.thumb.jpg.753506e0c69110416744d9e25016206d.jpg

The movie does not fit into the MCU, just as the Eternals never really fitted in Marvel comics (Although Kieron Gillen is doing good work with them right now. I just wish he wasn't so eager to accept Jason Aaron's garbage. But he has always been polite that way).

How will the world deal with a mountain-sized alien statue sticking out of the ocean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They already changed so much in the MCU, it's clear they didn't want to copy the comics and in some cases it is very very different. Like Thanos not being in love with Death for example.  I don't read the comics though so I don't know how much any of this really matters.... but what I do know is that Ego was a celestial in the MCU, and I do know that the Eternals form some basis of the origin of mutants. As far as I was concerned, the Eternals movie served the main purpose of being some kind of laying the ground for the X-men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2022 at 6:35 PM, Tora Tan said:

They already changed so much in the MCU, it's clear they didn't want to copy the comics and in some cases it is very very different. Like Thanos not being in love with Death for example.  I don't read the comics though so I don't know how much any of this really matters.... but what I do know is that Ego was a celestial in the MCU, and I do know that the Eternals form some basis of the origin of mutants. As far as I was concerned, the Eternals movie served the main purpose of being some kind of laying the ground for the X-men.

The comics are why the movies exist in the first place. You can change some things, but if you change the ESSENCE of them you have failed, and that is what has happened here.

Quite apart from the fact that making an MCU movie for the Eternals was a mistake in and of itself.

No, the Eternals are not the basis for the origin of mutants... and they are unnecessary to that purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be in the minority, but both comics and mcu, the eternals are whats useless. Just plain and simple, useless. 

 

I never liked them, and their oufits/designs were just goofy overall...

And their mission statement alone is just... ugh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kirby never intended for the Eternals to be part of the Marvel universe.

And these Eternals...  they just took the concept and warped it, and the characters, to suit their ideas and it does not work.

It's all so obvious. And it makes me sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Salkafar said:

The comics are why the movies exist in the first place. You can change some things, but if you change the ESSENCE of them you have failed, and that is what has happened here.

Quite apart from the fact that making an MCU movie for the Eternals was a mistake in and of itself.

No, the Eternals are not the basis for the origin of mutants... and they are unnecessary to that purpose.

hmm.. some might argue that the reason the movies exist is Robert Downey Jr. XD

 

and according to most sources I read, the x gene came about due to the celestials and their tinkering with deviants and eternals? I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tora Tan said:

according to most sources I read, the x gene came about due to the celestials and their tinkering with deviants and eternals? I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere...

Originally, in the sixties, 'mutants' were simply a phenomenon. In pulp novels, the term 'mutant'  meant 'the sinister future race of superhumans with mysterious powers who will replace us all because they view us as animals', cf. 'The Power' by Frank M. Robinson. Stan Lee took this and went 'Yeah but what if they weren't sinister, what if they were just like us, only with superpowers', and created the X-Men. Except some of them still were sinister and evil, like Magneto and his followers.

In 1976, Jack Kirby (PBUH), after already creating Thor and the New Gods, and heavily influenced by Von Däniken's 'Chariots of the gods', created the Eternals as their own thing. They were not part of the Marvel universe; in fact, in their world, the heroes of the Marvel universe did exist, but they were fictional, like in our world.

In 1980, however, the Eternals and the Celestials appeared in 'Thor' in a story which firmly entrenched them in the Marvel universe's ancient history.

Now, in Kirby's original story, the Celestials had created intelligent life on Earth. They had taken Homo erectus (Kirby describes it as 'an ape') and from it first made the Deviants, who were deemed 'a failure'. Then they made the Eternals, who were like immortal, perfect gods. Finally they created humans, to be Earth's true inhabitants. Just like with Goldilocks and the three bears: humans were not 'too hot' like Deviants or 'too cold' like Eternals, but 'just right'. There was no suggestion they had been given special powers or abilities; to the contrary, it was even suggested they had not been altered at all, but had been left to evolve naturally.

[ Kirby basically picked up where he left off with his New Gods stories - the Deviants were very much like the evil gods of Apokalips - they possessed advanced technology, but their society was staggeringly brutal; cruel oppression of the weak and the casual sacrifice of their lives by a vicious tyrant was the norm. The Eternals were very much like the good gods of New Genesis - beautiful, pure of heart, serious and playful, in love with life, empathic and supportive of humanity. And, again, humanity was caught in their struggle, with the Celestials as the new element. ]

However, in 1980 it was also established, in an issue of 'What if?'  - not written by Kirby - which told of the hidden history of the Marvel Universe, that the Celestials had in fact altered humanity so that they would eventually develop super powers; in effect creating the so-called 'X-gene' which makes someone a 'mutant' when it activates. Much later, in the monumental series 'Earth-X' which attempts to reframe and realign all of Marvel's history, it was revealed the Celestials did this to outfit Earth with a planetary 'immune system' to protect it from alien threats and natural disasters, since an embryo of one of their own kind was gestating inside Earth and would destroy it when it hatched.

(Side note: I don't understand why. Celestials are large, in the comics, but not that large. At 2000 feet, there is no reason why a baby Celestial could not just emerge from a volcano or something, and leave Earth otherwise unharmed.)

All in all, in my opinion, this retcon has not been a positive influence on the Marvel universe. It throws everything off-kilter. But Marvel is greedy about Kirby, I guess; and I suppose they hoped to ensure this way that the Eternals would remain their property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Larz Zahn said:

I remember in jason Aaron's run, they explained that the humans gene to become super, mutants, altered, their potential to become more, was because the dying celestial died on earth and bled- oozed into the earth.

Yes, I remember that garbage story too. It was just another example of Jason Aaron expressing his hatred of and contempt for comic book creators and -fans. He revels in destroying and defiling classic storylines and heroes; so does his factotum Donny Cates. It it hard for me to believe this is not part of Sana Amanat's evil plan to leave Marvel comics in such shambles it can never really recover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just watched this last night, and I don't care if they are canon or not.  Heck, I don't even know much of the source material to critique.  Admittedly, It's a rather "meh" movie to me, but one that I feel I need to watch as this might be the launch of something eventful in the future.  They did confirm that the voice in the 2nd post credit scene to be that of Blade.  So there's that.  But the way I see it, this is something possible to connect with FF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tora Tan said:

okay, well this all sounds very political ^^

It's deeply personal.

Jack Kirby created the Celestials to illustrate that humans can have a cosmic destiny, but that they have to choose between good and evil.

Jason Aaron claims humanity exists because a Celestial died on Earth from a literal infection and its vomit, blood and pus oozed into the biosphere, and the other Celestials permitted Earth and humanity to continue to exist because they hoped they could make some kind of vaccine from this mess. It is so petty, hateful and ugly that it convinced me there is something very, very wrong with that man. (He did something similar during his run on 'Thor'. Kirby created Odin as a wise, strict, but ultimately kind and loving father figure to basically the universe. Jason Aaron turned him into a pathetic, literally alcoholic abusive tyrant. His relationship with his own father was pretty bad.)

Marvel used to be run by storytellers who either wanted to uplift us or just have fun. Now? It's a frickin' asylum.

The only lights left are Al Ewing and, on a good day, Kieron Gillen.

Both of whom are British, by the way. Probably not a coincidence. Almost all of Marvel's best and most lauded comics were penned by Brits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...