Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Marvels - MCU

Options
1234689

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,066 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Nope - I have no problem with folks saying the cinematic quality in MCU isn't great, because it isn't despite some good moments that many ignore.

    My issue was a poster who was stating that well respected directors 'don't understand cinema' and implying that MCU isn't cinema. I was also simply pointing out there is minimal correlation and zero evidence of causation of cinematic quality and 'enticing the audience' like the poster claimed. None of their examples stood up.

    Fair opinion on the movie. Given you'd have no idea of the cinematic quality, I'd argue that your feelings towards going through the effort to see it wouldn't have been tied to the likely cinematic quality of this movie, more a general malaise towards the MCU



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,066 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    It isn't your opinion though, you're coming in to regurgitate what you've 'heard'.

    That approach is just weird. Plenty of movies I wouldn't have any interest in seeing and I wouldnt think about going into the thread on what I've heard about the movies. Firstly it wouldn't be my opinion and secondly I wouldn't be able to back it up.

    Folks like you are why the thread has been 90% off topic. People want to talk/complain about the MCU in general because they haven't seen this movie



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,600 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Since it seems you can't engage without insults, I think I'm going to stop wasting time on this. We're done.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I've blocked the user cos I've been around the block a dozen times and this is how it usually goes; it's just looking increasingly desperate and tedious when the MCU has just become lazy dogshít. And certainly not gonna waste time defending why the aforementioned blockbusters are better "movies" than the MCU TV aesthetic 🙄

    The Hunger Games Prequel and a new Trolls film are out domestically this weekend with a wide release. If this stays at number 1 I'll be very surprised, even if the Hunger Games is probably not gonna set the world alight. This is on its way to be the MCU's first bonafide bomb.

    I think a 30+ streak was pretty good but it was bound to end eventually.

    Post edited by pixelburp on


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,894 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    "It comes down to this. Marvel needs to man up, grow up and get serious."

    Every critic of the existence of Disney.

    Post edited by flazio on


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,600 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    You're a lot better at critiquing films than I am. I'm not sure why someone is so desperate to defend the most bland, anodyne corporate output I think there's ever been. I don't understand what you mean by "TV aesthetic" but I know that I only saw the last few films due to a combination of my Cineworld card, boredom and the fact that the cinema is a 15 minute walk away.

    It was always going to end, you're right. However, it seems like Marvel have given up altogether any hope of doing anything but repeating the same tired old formula over and over again. The closest there is to a plot is more characters, more powers and teasers for the next cookie cutter MCU installment.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The Variety article showed a studio coasting and a whiff of presumption they could low effort anything and get eyeballs. Secret Invasion and now this has been a bit of a noisy public riposte, even if The Marvels is reviewing much better on balance.

    Honestly talking what looks "cinematic" is tough cos it's one of those "I know it when I see it" kinda scenarios. I don't feel that knowledgeable to get it across. While in many ways TV shows now look more like movies than many blockbusters do now. Film directors producing TV shows and so on, like Fincher on Mindhunter. So it's a bit trite to say something has a "TV aesthetic" cos much of TV looks great now.

    I suppose what I mean is the visual language of the MCU has no depth, no fluidity, no sense of using the language of cinema to convey emotion or any sense of "this is cool", or "this is important, look here". It's all very point and shoot, the colours flat and lifeless, the movement nonexistent except for CGI mush. I suppose one way to explain the idea of what a "movie" should look like is take the cinematic equivalent of typing in Caps Lock: Michael Bay (to rob a YouTube comment)

    I hate the way he cuts action but you cannot deny his films look arresting, aggressive animals. it's never flat, never banal. Even dialogue has the camera aalwys in motion, nothing's "small". I'm sad Very Frame a Painting stopped cos it's a fantastic channel to understand cinema...

    Or how simple blocking of a camera can really sell the stakes or dynamics of a scene:

    I really like Patrick Willems and this video goes onto the somewhat contradictory and meaningless sense of the word "cinematic" in the first instance. Things have changed so much the word is a bit meaningless.

    This one is a bit tangential but I love how classically "movie making is madness" it is. Stock footage of a plane landing? No. Let's spend 80k making it look fúcking awesome.




  • Registered Users Posts: 23,269 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Marvel thought Marvel was what sold so they greenlit absolute rubbish for these phases.

    Theres no characters or overarchinh story worthwhile active at the moment. THATS the problem.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    Kang the conquerer is the overarching storyline. It is however messy and stuck with the real life drama effecting the Kang actor.

    It is obvious the Marvel movies are in trouble now and that that they need more effort put into Kang storyline.

    I think it is fair enough not to listen to criticism of a film by someone who has not seen that film.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,066 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Wait, where did I insult anyone in my post to you?? What are you getting defensive about now? All I did in that post was point out the errors in their logic.

    Calling an opinion snobby is similar to you calling mine 'over-sensitivity' - neither is an insult or a personal attack. We're all big boys and girls here, I haven't and won't be crying about the other poster you're backing up actually personally attacking me, which you strangely seem to have no issue with.

    I've been proved right about the MCU trajectory far more than that poster has over the years and not even just me being positive about the MCU, for this movie I said from way out that it was going to be in trouble, along with the next batch that they have pushed to 2025. The other poster has been making their same tired complaints for a decade and is now crowing about being right when in truth their complaints have little to do with the MCU problems.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,600 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    If it is, it's abysmal. He's appeared in one film and a Disney+ series non-subscribers won't have seen. He's as forgettable in the Quantumania film as Malekith was in the second Thor film. Not a good start for this phase of the MCU.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,066 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    I think you're both right.

    They had the multiverse and Kang being the overarching storyline but due to in part their writing and partly the impact of COVID it isn't feeling connected or moving forward like the early phases.

    A huge mistake was not having an Avengers type movie at the end of Phase 4. That brings all the characters together, resets their paths, and makes the world feel joined and that they're now on an overarching story to something. This is especially important when so many of the characters are B-D tier heroes.

    If people don't care about the overarching story they aren't pushed to go see the characters they don't care about. The two Captain Marvel movies are perfect examples of this - where MCU overarching story was at its peak between Infinity War and End Game and lowest point right now and the impact it has on the box office is clear (difference in marketing plays a part too). This movie is as good or better than the original yet is going to do a fraction at the box office.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,269 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    And the Kang character just hasnt been great, or even that involved in a lot of the goings on of his supposed arc, and furthermore ignoring Majors IRL issues some of his versions of the character have been dreadful.

    Its a huge quality issue.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,019 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    Ahem

    Back on the topic of the film this thread is about, I watched it last night. As with Captain Marvel before it, I enjoyed it (despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth from fans that means you now functionally have to disregard any first weekend reviews if you want a Normal Human Being review of an MCU film).

    Specific things I liked:

    • The runtime being under 2 hours, and paced accordingly. Marvel has had a bad habit of padding runtime, so it was a nice change to see that not in effect here.
    • The panache of the opening scene - someone clearly likes the Spiderverse films (and possibly the Mitchells vs The Machines too), and I'm very much in favour of it.
    • The choreography on the fight scenes was well-put-together so that, even when there was a bunch of body-swapping going on everything was still easy to follow.
    • Kamala Khan is a great character. I haven't seen Ms Marvel yet, but will now be catching up on it. For me, the character lands in the way I think Tom Holland's Spider-man lands for others (but it's been decades since Peter Parker's Spider-man could get anything beyond a shrug from me).
    • The Second Planet they go was great (not saying more because it deserves to be seen blind). It's the sort of thing that would be best served by leaving it be and not trying to weave it into the Wider Lore, but the MCU doesn't have much room for that doing thst
    • The plot was fairly simple, as was the villain, but I appreciated that it still had clear and personal stakes - and specifically the notion that maybe just punching villains isn't actually the way to solve problems or help people... And to be fair, MCU villains are weak whenever it's a day that ends in y 😁

    For context, when I say I enjoyed this - I had already started to lose interest in the MCU overall before Infinity War/Endgame, because I CBA with the whole "watch all of the things to get the 'full' story". So at this point what I hope for out of an MCU film is what you might call a 6.5-7/10 kind of film, with at least a bit of personality and actual humour (as opposed to the "everyone sounds the same" quippy crap that too often is used as a placeholder for humour).

    I do wish that some of the visual flair from Dacosta's Candyman could have been displayed here, but that's the ongoing issue with the Visual Beigeness of MCU films, where if you're lucky you get a few cool scenes or moments but that's about it.

    I can't help but find it strange that this is the film where audiences may have finally lost patience with Marvel when, to my (admittedly Filthy Casual) eyes there's been tedium and bloat in increasing quantities for years, and this is actually a welcome example of paring things back. But I guess some of it isn't about the film but just however many films/series before it people have felt burned by...



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    I'd say the lack of interest is because Captain Marvel is a much weaker character than Dr strange, Thor and Antman. Each of those characters have had better individual movies. Even Nick fury has been diminished by the secret invasion series.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The Majors stuff has overtaken the narrative but honestly I've been slow to buy into Kang as this enemy to look forward to. Neither Quantumania or Loki left me stoked, and TBH found Majors' performances too affected at times, especially in Loki. So far just a lot of standing around, wearing a bunch of silly costumes. So did Thanos to be fair, but at least his proxies increased the sense of interference. We'll see where it all goes.

    Captain Marvel has the Superman problem really; too earnest, too straight faced, too powerful all by design and that makes for a fairly rubbish character compared with many and most of the MCU. And not sure Larsen can carry that either. She doesn't need baggage but Danvers lacks the kind of hook that might make you root for her.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    Most definitely agree with the Superman comparison. Superman has a great supporting cast of characters with his parents, Lois Lane and Jimmy Olson and a great nemesis lex Luthor

    Captain Marvel only has Nick Fury.

    Perhaps Captain Marvel 2 should have used the secret invasion plot where brain more so than brawn would have been used to defeat the enemy. I dont think Brie larson has excelled in action movies too



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,019 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    Horses for courses I guess. while his power-set offers interesting possibilities, I find Strange as a character pretty dull. Ant-man is even worse, in that I know I watched the first film but can't remember a thing about it. (Oh, if only we'd gotten the Edgar Wright version...) I thought Thor in Ragnarok was interesting, but there seemed to be a real "what do we do with this guy now?" feel to Love & Thunder.

    I agree that Carol Danvers as a character hasn't exactly got a lot of depth (definitely has that feel of a Superman-type character), but I assume that's why Monica and Kamala are also joint protagonists in this one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    Dr strange is weak but I thought the origin story was more interesting than Captain marvel. The Jude Law character was interesting but everyone else was just boring. Captain Mavel needs a kryptonite not two side kicks who are of average interest.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,019 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh



    Yeah, I agree that Captain Marvel / Danvers as currently positioned is more of a plot device than a character. I liked the idea of what this film was going for with Monica and Kamala both providing different perspectivs on Carol/Captain Marvel that challenge her ideas of herself, but that's the kind of arc that would genuinely be better suited to a series than a film. (It also depends on how much you enjoy watching those other characters - I thought Kamala was great while Rambeau was just ok, but if you didn't warm to either of them then there's not really much else to latch on to...)

    Similarly the somewhat simple gimmick of Carol's power simply amplifying the villain's power (i.e. you can't just punch your way out of this one, so what else can you think of?) was a nice way of introducing a challenge for Carol.

    But those are both "fine for one film" things, and don't help to resolve the question of what you can do with Danvers as an ongoing character in a shared universe. Based on where this film ends the most honest trajectory for the character I can see would be a sort of Doctor Manhattan arc, of losing her connection to humanity and just going off to do something else instead. But that's a bit... leftfield for what the MCU tends towards doing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,066 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    If what you're liking about the opening scene is what I think it is then you'll like Ms Marvel (along with the characters).

    It is unique in the MCU when it comes to those type of visuals yet it hasn't resonated with the wider audience.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 461 ✭✭jface187


    Overall a fun film.

    Negative when captain marvel started banging on about her memories again. I thought she got them back in the last one?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    So is this movie going to perform even worse than the flash, black Adam and Shazam? I would usually be happy if this means there are less superhero movies in future as they seen to have repetitive plots but I would worry that this could result in cinemas losing alot of money eith blockbusters doing badly and closing down



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Oof. So yeah, Trolls and the Hunger games prequel has instantly shoved this down to joint number 3 at the weekend box office, and would have been 4 had Thanksgiving sold a few more tickets. Somewhere in Marvel HQ Feige is chain smoking like a maniac.



  • Registered Users Posts: 60,392 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    The Hunger Games prequel has done a $44m opening weekend.

    The original Hunger Games did $152m opening weekend

    The Hunger Games 2 did $159m opening weekend

    The Hunger Games 3 part 1 did $122m opening weekend

    The Hunger Games 3 part 2 did $102m opening weekend.

    Sometimes it's just diminishing returns.

    Over all Disney/Marvel released 3 movies in 2023 with a total budget of about $700m and they made a return so far of $1.5B so a nice tidy profit of $800m.


    With Deadpool the only movie being released next year it gives fans a breather and Disney/Marvel one which they probably should have taken after Endgame.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,506 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    Profit isn't just box office less budget.

    The budgets don't include promotion, and box office numbers don't take into account gross split between studios, Cinemas, and regional distributors.

    The normal napkin maths is 2.5x budget to break even.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    you made a wee mistake with the maths possibly, is the 1.5B ~ half of the box office?

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yeah I don't think anyone had particularly generous projections for Songbirds, but at 100 million budget it might plug away enough to work out fine. The Marvels immediately dropping to joint 3rd is nasty and is unlikely to hold that either.

    And it's a shame in many ways cos I've read enough good will for this that, as someone already said, this shouldn't be the one that failed. Quantumania and Thor 3 were broadly hated yet IIRC did fine.



Advertisement