Lautarous

In the new trailer, when Chris Evans is talking with Hayley Atwell in the car, there're some angles in which the skinny head attached to the body doesn't look totally convincing. Beside that . . . the effect looks great when he is fighting in the alley, making push ups, covering the grenade and asking "is this a test?" . . . and more. That's a dedicated work!

So far, after seeing all the posters, photos and trailers of the film, I'm very glad with the art direction. "Captain America" really won in this area with Joe Johnston leading the project.

It not mentioned that Peter Falk also work with director (script writer and actor) John Cassavetes, a pioner of independet cinema in USA. Their society brought such quality films as "Husbands" (1970) and "A Woman Under the Influence" (1974).

I always tend to remember Falk's perfomance as himself in "Wings of Desire" (1987). It's a small role, but is very enjoyable.

My deep respect for Mister Falk. The memory about him will remain.

So far, this looks good for my taste. @yannick-decorte, I could agree with you that is too soon for raising the expectations about the film. But I don't think you gave the best three examples to prove your points.

1) "X-Men: First Class" definitively brought some interesting ideas, but they're treated so poorly. The special effects are not special, looking as they were made in the nineties. Many characters are just unidimensional. The principal actors are really the high points. Nevertheless, the script is built with uninspired development in the scenes or dialogues. Just a waste of money and time.

2) "Thor" is simply pop corn. Characters were better written. It has an acceptable work in special effects and art direction. But, in general, we're dealing with an unrisky and soulless film.

3) "Green Lantern" has received many many bad reviews. I haven't seen the film yet, but it seems that CGI can't cover the holes of a crappy storytelling.

Maybe, "Captain America" will be a bad film. Who knows? But isn't fair to compare the nature of one hero (using a ring to fight evil) with another (using a shield and gun to fight evil). Captain America is not the average superhero, he is more like a hero. He has a special condition (like a super athlete), but yeah . . . he doesn't have special powers. At least for me, is far more interesting to see how this guy gets creative and deals with a powerful villain.

Looking fine.

I'm sorry for his family and friends. But this is the cost of living a life of excess. Actually, I'm not surprised . . . many of these dudes are eternal and uncontrolled party-goers . . . or worse.

You have to see the doc*mentary about Steve-O . . . he is a serious case!

James Mangold has a variety of bad and good films. His last two were mediocre. So, I'm not convinced . . . not one bit.

Cool and simple.

I'm sorry, but the original film was stupid . . . more stupid than that . . . is a f*cking remake!

It seems like a smart move from the writers. They're really interested in the strong connection between Captain America and WW2. For them, this is such a rich opportunity to revisit the period, bringing more parallel adventures of the hero.

We can't ingnore how Hollywood works . . . big studios are in the business of making movies and money . . . as many as they can. Why do only one successful film about something? . . . let's do three of the same, not wait . . . five, but . . . seven is better!

Too expensive for your pocket George? I'm so sorry . . .

How about to spend money in creativity for once after 30 years of crap?

Not liking this at all . . .