@Th3solution Earlier this year I watched all of the MCU films in chronological order in preparation to see Endgame at the cinema. Unfortunately I never got round to actually going because I was unwell. Looking forward to watching the home release!
It was really interesting watching the series progress; earlier ones are far more patchy in their quality, whereas I found I really enjoyed all of the more recent films. The Incredible Hulk is downright mediocre, Captain America The First Avenger quite dry and I'm not a massive fan of Age of Ultron. My favourites are easily Ant Man, the Guardians of the Galaxy films and Thor Ragnarok - simply because of how fun they are.
@LN78@RogerRoger Thanks, I’m impressed anyone actually made it through that huge wall of text. 😅 I didn’t realize how long I droned on.
But yeah, LN, you bring up a good question, which I’ll try to not take too many paragraphs to discuss. 😛
In general, if one compares CA: TFA to CM, there is just an overall polish to the more recent film which was absent early on. Special effects are more dazzling, dialogue is more sharp, editing keeps the tone more even, and characters are easier to invest in. This is just my opinion, of course.
Also there is clearly a change in tone from the early films to the latter ones, as I remarked before. Namely the humor and lighthearted nature they were able to deftly weave into the rather somber set of events. It does cheapen the impact of death and destruction but it makes for the movies to be more accessible to a younger audience.
The side by side comparison of the two Captains’ (America and Marvel) entry films is a good example of this phenomenon. The other obvious thing that jumps out is how much bolder and socially conscious the latter entries become. (Not trying to get political here, just making an observation) With Captain Marvel being the first film with a female lead (and many profess that clues suggest is a lesbian as well), it does bring out a certain fresh take on the superhero theme. I would agree with some people that there is a hint of heavy-handedness (culminated by the now famous ‘girl-power’ sequence in End Game that is so memorable) but I don’t think it’s as terribly manipulative as some have made it out to be. But that’s a whole other discussion in and of itself that I’m not qualified to make, nor am I interested to. I only know that as a viewer, the diversity seems to keep the “cookie cutter” to a minimum.
And as far as that homogeneity is concerned, you’re absolutely correct. When you strip it down, each of the entries is the same basic format —> person is weak and common, person has some fantastical event to grant super powers (or discovers some preexisting superior genetic heritage), person has to learn how to deal with and use these powers, evil entity also has super power, hero fights the evil all for some societal and morally altruistic motivation. Mix in some ‘coming of age’ type of epiphany and voila! - There’s your superhero origin story.
This has been the core of fantasy/Sci-Fi drama for ages. So, it is ironic how the presentation is made of the wonderful ‘diversity’ achieved in Captain Marvel for example, but at its core, it’s the same kind of recycled story as Captain America, Spider-Man, Hulk, Ant-Man, Superman, Luke Skywalker, etc.
Is the same basic story told better in the latter film vs. the former? Well, I think CM does flow a little better as pure entertainment and when viewed side by side without the bias of superhero fatigue, Disney has improved in the storytelling department imo. Others may disagree. (Again, the whole Stark thing just bothers me, so I might be biased)
I think in the end, this homogeneity might be what kills the superhero boom. There are only so many ways to tell the superhero arc. Now last night I watched Captain America: The Winter Soldier (#12!) and this is a really smart film. It takes on some of these tropes and is able to tell a story that creates legitimate concern for our heroes’ plight and has a clever overarching theme - that the ‘Greatest Generation’ was able to defeat evil head on in WW2, so Hydra countered through subterfuge and went about defeating freedom by gradually creating safety concerns over many years such that we willfully gave up those freedoms in the name of protection and safety. It’s a theme that is remarkably germane to current society. As far as impact, the fact that many secondary staple characters of SHIELD have been double agents for Hydra all along is a great reveal. I think it’s one of the MCU’s best because of the wonderful intrigue, the different style of storytelling, great action and choreography, and the stellar performances (such as Robert Redford who seems to command the screen every times he’s in a scene). If Disney/Marvel can mix up the genre with novel approaches like this, then the next phase might avoid getting stale.
Oops... went long again. Oh well. That’s probably more than you wanted 😛.
Anyways, I’ll keep posting further thoughts as I make my way to the End Game. I’ll try not to take too much space though and keep things to just a few entries in the coming weeks.
—
@mookysam I saw your post after I had already created that long discourse above. Interesting to hear your thoughts and when you do see End Game I’ll be curious about your take on it. I hope I haven’t inadvertently spoiled anything about it! I thought everyone had seen it already 😅.
@mookysam Oh shoot I forgot Ragnorok when I listed my fave super hero films the other day. I love Taika Waititi's direction and like you said such a fun movie.
Life is more fun when you help people succeed, instead of wishing them to fail.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
It's funny you guys are talking about the Ocean's films, as I watched Ocean's 11 just last night. Very enjoyable. I think we're planning on watching the three of them — it'll be interesting to see the difference between 11 and 12.
@Frigate I really enjoyed it. It seems that even with KotM being directed by a kaiju fan - they still can't seem to make a Godzilla film that feels really satisfying.
It was a good watch, but I still felt like we should've had more monsters and less Millie Bobby Brown.
PSN: KALofKRYPTON (so you can see how often I don't play anything!)
Twitter: @KALofKRYPTON (at your own risk, I don't care if you're offended)
"Fate: Protects fools, little children, and ships named Enterprise." - Cmdr William T. Riker
@Frigate@KALofKRYPTON Both the story and human characters were very weak in the sequel. When it becomes available on Netflix, I'll be skipping all the human scenes when I rewatch KoTM.lol
Saw Ready or Not in theaters recently. One of the best black comedies I've seen in years, with solid casting, a consistently witty script, surprisingly suspenseful direction, and a fantastic climax. It's also quite realistically gory, although the impact of these deaths is softened somewhat by the often extremely dry humor surrounding death in this film.
@KALofKRYPTON The best part of Ocean's 8 was Sarah Paulson by far and away. I enjoyed the cast overall, but definitely was nothing special. Fun while watching, but ultimately forgettable.
@WanderingBullet I really hope they move ahead with casting Emily Blunt! I'm really not into the MCU, but that would make me automatically excited. She deserves the recognition. Somewhat the same effect that casting Brie Larson for Captain Marvel had on me. She's the only reason I even willingly went to see Captain Marvel and Endgame opening weekend.
@Ralizah I WISH Ready or Not was showing in either local cinema, but unfortunately it isn't. Looks really fun. I'm glad to hear it didn't disappoint, and possibly even exceeded expectations! It'll be interesting to see Kristian Bruun in such a role as well after his pure, innocent performance of Donnie in Orphan Black.
@LN78 Room is one of my all-time favourite movies, so I adore Brie Larson. I would've gone either way, but Brie Larson being a part of it was the only reason I was actually excited to see it and not dreading the three-hour slog. It ended up exceeding my expectations though, I'll give it that, even with Brie having barely anything to do in the movie.
"A searing adaptation of one of most controversial books about the Holocaust divided critics at the Venice film festival Wednesday, with some fighting each other in the dark to get out of its first screening."
"One day they’ll make a film about the first public screening of The Painted Bird, inside the Sala Darsena at the 2019 Venice film festival. It will feature the man who fell full-length on the steps in his effort to escape and the well-dressed woman who became so frantic to get out that she hit the stranger in the next seat. The centrepiece will be the moment 12 viewers broke for the doors only to discover that the exit had been locked."
lol
I love it. Every time some pretentious three-hour exploitation film releases at Venice, half the critics stampede from the theater. What exactly did they think a film version of The Painted Bird, one of the most thoroughly unpleasant novels ever written, would look like, exactly? I wonder if these are the same idiots that raise a stink everytime they attend the premiere of a von Trier film.
@LN78 Well, it was always marketed as fiction, so even though the author was outed as a bit of a liar and narcissist, it didn't result in some huge public shaming. It's not a Million Little Pieces situation. Anyway, it's still considered to be a bit of a classic.
I'll take the satirical obscenities of a Marquis de Sade novel any day, personally.
Not to bring the level of discussion crashing down, but yesterday evening I watched Die Hard and now, have just finished watching Die Hard 2: Die Harder.
I've been on a bit of an old-school action flick trawl of late, so it was only a matter of time before I revisited the adventures of John McClane. Having watched them once on DVD about a decade ago, my opinion has certainly changed over the years. I used to say that prefer the sequel, thinking it a little more complex and spectacular, but today I found it far, far less fun than its forbearer.
Die Hard is defined by two relationships; the supportive brotherhood between McClane and Powell, and the teasing brinksmanship between McClane and Gruber. Both of these elements, and the three actors presenting them, are near-perfect. The film uses every clever trick in the book, even contriving a way for hero and villain to meet before resetting back to the winning radio-based formula, to keep a simple premise from feeling stale. It's a classic, hands down, and I was wrong to ever doubt it... because whilst still a perfectly entertaining couple of hours, Die Hard 2: Die Harder lacks any equivalent spark of character. It swaps out a nefarious hostage-heist with some rushed political commentary on Iran/Contra and some larger-than-life plot twists that are unfortunately telegraphed from the get-go. Heck, even McClane himself seems to be scowling a lot more, with very few witty remarks (most of which appeared to have been dubbed in post). There are a couple gratuitous moments of gore, too, which seem to exist purely to "up the ante" and make the previous film's blood squibs seem cartoonishly tame by comparison.
I always feel a little guilty describing mature, claret-soaked, f-bomb-dropping action films as "fun" but the truth of the matter is, Die Hard is fun to watch. The villains sneer, our hero quips, everything's directed like a money shot and it's all just so ridiculous, it works. Die Hard 2: Die Harder isn't fun. It's entertaining, but it takes itself a little too seriously to be fun.
Watching for the first time on Blu-Ray was also interesting. I was surprised at the high number of obvious stunt double shots, particularly for Bruce Willis. Quite often, his particular brand of 80s "action star" got famous because they could shoot, punch and fall and then maybe, or indeed hopefully, do a bit of acting in between; clearly the opposite is true here, as even the simplest of engagements revealed a stranger's face in HD. There was also a moment in the second film where I did a double-take and skipped back to check, because I saw feet walking around at the top of the frame during a shot of a military aircraft in mid-flight. Ever wondered how they used to do aerial photography? Seems you take a model kit and a fog machine to the middle of the desert.
Despite my opinions having developed with age, I remember seriously disliking Die Hard With a Vengeance, mostly because it wastes a brilliant premise and tanks around the halfway point. I'm curious to see whether I think that's still true; at the very least, I can look for more bloopers in the increased resolution as I head towards the more modern releases in the franchise.
Yippie ki-yay, melon farmer.
"We want different things, Crosshair. That doesn't mean that we have to be enemies."
Forums
Topic: The Movie Thread
Posts 2,581 to 2,600 of 8,906
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic