Captain Marvel (2019)

Drumpot · 20-03-2019 6:02pm

GavRedKing wrote: »

I think both were poor but had far less time for IM3, that could be because it was the next film after Avengers and it just felt very flat because of it.

I can see that, I remember not being too excited when it came out and didn't find the twist particularly shocking. . IM3 was no WS , CW, GOTG or ever TR but its actually decent bit of fun on repeat viewing.

But IM2 is always dogsh*t, no matter how you watch it . .

flazio · 20-03-2019 6:28pm

I always find whenever talking about which is the worst ever MCU movie, everyone forgets The Incredible Hulk exists. Even Marvel Studios.
That has to be the clear winner.
I have to agree with the sentiment that the goose was more like something out of Men in Black rather than the MCU.

blue note · 20-03-2019 6:40pm

flazio wrote: »

I always find whenever talking about which is the worst ever MCU movie, everyone forgets The Incredible Hulk exists. Even Marvel Studios.
That has to be the clear winner.
I have to agree with the sentiment that the goose was more like something out of Men in Black rather than the MCU.

I thought the incredible hulk was alright. At a minimum better than thor 2 and iron man 2. I'd have it on a par with this, doctor stange, avengers 2, gotg 2.

pixelburp · 20-03-2019 6:42pm

One thing in the 'bad' films favours - which mostly seem to be misfires from Phase 1 & 2 - they looked better; the more recent MCU films are so god-awfully flat and boring to look at. Flat, bland compositions with flat, dead colour palettes in flat, bland locations. That the big Team Fight in Civil War took place at an airport terminal was a nadir for me. I kept waiting for the fight to be suddenly moved to somewhere more interesting, but ... nope. Grey, grey grey.

The White Wolf · 20-03-2019 6:58pm

Haha you have to love your average fan. A battle at an airport is too boring yet Zack Snyder allegedly ruined childhoods with his destruction porn. It's hard to please.

As far as pure drama goes the airport scene in Civil War is as good an action scene that you're going to see.

pixelburp · 20-03-2019 7:08pm

The White Wolf wrote: »

Haha you have to love your average fan. A battle at an airport is too boring yet Zack Snyder allegedly ruined childhoods with his destruction porn. It's hard to please.

As far as pure drama goes the airport scene in Civil War is as good an action scene that you're going to see.

Well I never even mentioned Synder, so think you're having your own debate there. Nor did he ruin my childhood, destruction is a completely different problem but ... that's not the point?

Having a big battle in a car park was a bland, boring location for, as you say, the films most dramatic moment. The Phase 1 movies had a bit of vibrancy and colour about them; then at some point (Winter Soldier?) that simple cinematic flourish took a backseat for bland, slightly dreary visuals.

It's not asking much to bring a little life into a comicbook movie, if nothing else it might stop the MCU feeling so samey and rote.

kerplun k · 20-03-2019 8:25pm

pixelburp wrote: »

That the big Team Fight in Civil War took place at an airport terminal was a nadir for me. I kept waiting for the fight to be suddenly moved to somewhere more interesting, but ... nope. Grey, grey grey.

Sorry to butt in, but I thought that scene was one of, if not the, best moments of the MCU. Okay, you didn’t like it, each to their own and all that, but too call it the lowest point of civil war is crazy.

pixelburp · 20-03-2019 8:34pm

kerplun k wrote: »

Sorry to butt in, but I thought that scene was one of, if not the, best moments of the MCU. Okay, you didn’t like it, each to their own and all that, but too call it the lowest point of civil war is crazy.

Which again, was not what I was saying. The airport scene had a boring, grey setting and typified just how bland and mundane the pallette / settings had become, particularly with the Russo films.

I'm talking the aesthetics here, not the content. I thought that was clear enough the first time around.

In an era of SpiderVerse, I'd like to see the MCU go back to at least giving its films some panache and vitality in its images.

Baggly · 20-03-2019 8:38pm

They all can't be in a super collider/ triskellion / floating city.

Sooner or later they were gonna fight in an airport.

pixelburp · 20-03-2019 9:13pm

So if the mundanity continues we'll eventually find ourselves watching Avengers 8: Tesco Wars I guess?

Baggly · 20-03-2019 9:15pm

pixelburp wrote:

So if the mundanity continues we'll eventually find ourselves watching Avengers 8: Tesco Wars I guess?

Don't be so facetious. You know they don't number avengers films.

kerplun k · 20-03-2019 9:32pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Which again, was not what I was saying. The airport scene had a boring, grey setting and typified just how bland and mundane the pallette / settings had become, particularly with the Russo films.

I'm talking the aesthetics here, not the content. I thought that was clear enough the first time around.

In an era of SpiderVerse, I'd like to see the MCU go back to at least giving its films some panache and vitality in its images.

It’s been a long time since I last seen it, so just watched that scene now and admittedly, it is very... grey. I actually never noticed it before

SpiderVerse does set the bar tho, It’s visually stunning and really pops off the screen.

DesperateDan · 20-03-2019 10:09pm

Color palette was perfect. Toned down / sparse airport let us focus on the characters. If it was in times square or on another planet we would be lost. Not only does it let the audience focus on what the Russo's can do when they flex their action sequence muscles, it also let super-colorful spidey dominate the scene.

I think most people can agree that intro was peak cinematic spiderman.

Calhoun · 20-03-2019 10:23pm

I love this thread, arguing over something as simple as an airport and im still learning something about the MCU.

pixelburp · 20-03-2019 11:22pm

DesperateDan wrote: »

Color palette was perfect. Toned down / sparse airport let us focus on the characters. If it was in times square or on another planet we would be lost. Not only does it let the audience focus on what the Russo's can do when they flex their action sequence muscles, it also let super-colorful spidey dominate the scene.

I think most people can agree that intro was peak cinematic spiderman.

I think that underestimates the audience a little: it's fair to say that by Civil War "we'd seen it all," and if James Gunn managed to stage character + action within the MCUs wildest and most esoteric setting, without sacrificing visual splendour, the Russos could have found somewhere a little more engaging. Epic, even.

Setting and aesthetics are not mutually exclusive to character, in fact the great movies use the visual language of cinema to sell whatever emotion or drama we're meant to be feeling / experiencing through geography, colour, sound etc. They're all tools for manipulation.

I'd argue that in setting the fight in such a drab, flat exterior location, with such flat lighting, it left the Civil War fight feeling undercooked, kinda insignificant. Like a couple of gangs scrapping behind a bar. Maybe the Russos just thought the goodwill and love for the characters was enough - and to be fair the solo scrap between Cap & Iron Man looked much better (but precisely because the setting was visually arresting, brutal and harshly lit. The setting served the action)

The Russos deserve so much credit for making Infinity War work, but these are comicbook movies! The films should be bold, brazen and colorful IMO. One of the best character is a literal taking racoon, I think the palette can handle a little extravagance in its earth settings.

El Duda · 21-03-2019 10:32am

Saw this again last night. Enjoyed it even more this time. A lot of my reservations were a bit misplaced.

The de-aging effect is incredible. Let's hope The Irishman is up to this standard.

Baggly · 21-03-2019 1:35pm

I made a joke about Tesco Wars in the Endgame discussion thread and it just clicked with me that Pixel made that joke here and not there and no-one there knows what im talking about.

Happy Thursday!

pixelburp · 21-03-2019 1:46pm

Pter.

Nobody ever has any idea what you're talking about.

Baggly · 21-03-2019 1:56pm

That too is an excellent point.

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2019 3:35pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Well I never even mentioned Synder, so think you're having your own debate there. Nor did he ruin my childhood, destruction is a completely different problem but ... that's not the point?

Having a big battle in a car park was a bland, boring location for, as you say, the films most dramatic moment. The Phase 1 movies had a bit of vibrancy and colour about them; then at some point (Winter Soldier?) that simple cinematic flourish took a backseat for bland, slightly dreary visuals.

It's not asking much to bring a little life into a comicbook movie, if nothing else it might stop the MCU feeling so samey and rote.

Really?

Avengers: Infinity War
Guardians of the Galaxy 2?
Spider-Man Home-Coming?
Ant-Man and the Wasp?
Doctor Strange?
Thor Ragnarok?

Bland and Dreary?

Completely disagree.

pixelburp · 21-03-2019 3:58pm

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Really?

Avengers: Infinity War
Guardians of the Galaxy 2?
Spider-Man Home-Coming?
Ant-Man and the Wasp?
Doctor Strange?
Thor Ragnarok?

Bland and Dreary?

Completely disagree.

If you kept reading, you'd have seen I mentioned GoTG in another post as an exception

and I think I've explained my thinking enough; yes, a lot of the Earth based films, especially those by the Russos, have a bland colour palettes, and some bizarrely dreary locations. And yes, I absolutely include the Asgard parts of Thor: Ragnarok, Ant-Man and Spider-Man Homecoming. Good entertainment, but dull compositions, with Spidey's suit looking criminally washed out.

Go watch the Sam Raimi Spidey films - or SpiderVerse - then watch Homecoming and tell me the MCU film looks even half as arresting. Not the story, the visuals.

Anyway, I've banged the drum enough and should be plainly obvious by now I'm not having a pop at the stories or characters. Imagine someone on a film forum wanting nice looking images!

batgoat · 21-03-2019 4:19pm

It's a bit akin to what first person shooters tend to do. Everything looking incredibly drab to add to drama but really being incredibly dull and grey appearance wise.

Gbear · 21-03-2019 5:58pm

pixelburp wrote: »

If you kept reading, you'd have seen I mentioned GoTG in another post as an exception and I think I've explained my thinking enough; yes, a lot of the Earth based films, especially those by the Russos, have a bland colour palettes, and some bizarrely dreary locations. And yes, I absolutely include the Asgard parts of Thor: Ragnarok, Ant-Man and Spider-Man Homecoming. Good entertainment, but dull compositions, with Spidey's suit looking criminally washed out.

Go watch the Sam Raimi Spidey films - or SpiderVerse - then watch Homecoming and tell me the MCU film looks even half as arresting. Not the story, the visuals.

Anyway, I've banged the drum enough and should be plainly obvious by now I'm not having a pop at the stories or characters. Imagine someone on a film forum wanting nice looking images!

I really don't agree with your point.

I think there was certainly a deliberate effort to do that for CA to ground it a bit as a more orthodox spy film (until the helicarriers, I suppose), but there's plenty of diverse colour choices and effects in pretty much all the other films.

Infinity War has all the various powers + different effects from the gauntlet and some pretty wild settings, Ant Man(s), Thor(s), GOTG, Dr Strange, Black Panther, are all visually arresting, and I think it would be mental to suggest otherwise about any of them, Spiderman had a mixture of scenes, but they usually included wild bright-coloured effects, and you had big airy bright scenes like the boat, or Washington Monument vs more subdued ones or darker ones, and even then, they served to bring out the contrasts like the pink lasers, or Vulture's bright green glowing eyes, or the reflective effects of the fire in the finale amidst the bits of the crashed plane.

Maybe Spiderman has some merit in the argument, but I don't think having one film to hang your argument's hat on does it much favours, especially when it's the debut film with a "street level" superhero and I think grounding him was a good way to start. Mysterio and set pieces that take place in Venice looks like they're not wasting any time in diversifying the visual appeal.

I think the only real one I'd give you is Age of Ultron, which while perhaps not the worst film in the franhise, was IMO, the biggest let down in most departments. The Hulk/Hulkbuster fight was probably the only thing of interest, but even then, it was extremely brown.

FunLover18 · 21-03-2019 6:26pm

Just an observation but I'm confident when I say that this conversation has been had in every single thread for the last five or so Marvel films.

Gbear · 21-03-2019 10:44pm

Well, at any rate PB, this guy agrees with you.

(Specific references to visual style appear in the 2nd video at about 15:40)

I enjoy his videos. He's an Irish American (in the sense that his parents, who sometimes appear in his videos, are from Galway or something) film youtuber and I've enjoyed a few of his videos.

I have to say, having watched those vidoes, I did find myself physically recoiling from how claustrophobic I felt during some of the clips he showed from the films. I suppose I hadn't really considered things like colour palette to the same degree for just "walking around" shots, because I had no expectations of beauty for those shots, but maybe that was just down to lowering expectations for super hero guff, and that's not really something film watchers should take as a given.

pixelburp · 21-03-2019 11:11pm

That's freaky cos lately YouTube has been pushing his videos on me, had been meaning to take a stab. He any good?

Though swinging back to the original thread, and still after the fact this is the first MCU film since Dr Strange where I simply didn't care for the titular character. For all the talk of flat cinematography, I enjoy the MCU for the characters and interplay. Danvers left me a bit ... shoulder shruggy.

A bit concerned that when the phase 1 crew retire, their replacements won't be able to carry the franchise. We'll see.

Gbear · 21-03-2019 11:24pm

pixelburp wrote: »

That's freaky cos lately YouTube has been pushing his videos on me, had been meaning to take a stab. He any good?

Though swinging back to the original thread, and still after the fact this is the first MCU film since Dr Strange where I simply didn't care for the titular character. For all the talk of flat cinematography, I enjoy the MCU for the characters and interplay. Danvers left me a bit ... shoulder shruggy.

A bit concerned that when the phase 1 crew retire, their replacements won't be able to carry the franchise. We'll see.

I think he's entertaining and thoughtful. I have a near limitless apetite for assorted Youtube film videos though, so YMMV.
He has a measured video about the Last Jedi, and I feel that sorts the wheat from the chaff in some respects.

She's won an Oscar hasn't she? Not that that means that much, but surely the woman herself has the competency? The only other time I've seen her was a fairly minor role in Scott Pilgrim vs the World, and she was fairly electric there, albeit that musicals tend to give an easier route to that than a drama (even a light, comic-booky one).

Gbear · 21-03-2019 11:50pm

Gbear wrote: »

Well, at any rate PB, this guy agrees with you.

At the end of the 2nd video he notes there's going to be a part three (presumably in a week or so).

One of the topics he's going to cover (presumably in contrast) is Thor Ragnarok.

Thinking back on it, it's remarkable both in theory and in execution (not like Black Panther, which despite having someone like Ryan Coogler on board, I still thought was kinda crap and large chunks of it didn't have a stamp of personality on it) how distinct a film it is, not just in getting on board the visual style and timing and visual comedic flair of Taika Waititi, but perhaps even more so, in bringing in someone like Mark Mothersbaugh, who from his filmography has worked on lots of garbage, as would be expected for someone who has done the music for probably hundreds of productions in tv and film, but in this film you're getting the full Devo experience, and it's just a million miles away from anything else in the MCU.

It's kinda hard to piece together how Marvel work, with on the one hand being willing to totally push the boat out for the third in perhaps the weakest of the big 3 solo film trilogies and get a really unique vision and sound for the film, and on the other hand, whether you like it or not, having otherwise so consistent and grounded a throughline through all their other films, and Captain Marvel is no exception.

22-03-2019 11:34am

El Duda wrote: »

I think the main issue with this film is that while it was admirable to come at the origin story from a different angle, glossing over some of the typical tropes meant that it was hard to relate to Carol Danvers as a character.

It was ambitious for them to gloss over the crucial milestones in her upbringing; karaoke, box car racing etc... by using memory search flashbacks. The problem is that it doesn't give the audience any meat to hook onto. Some of those scenes needed to be expanded on. I appreciate the attempt to avoid what would most likely have been pretty cliché, but a mainstream audience needs some of that.

Also, the way she just remembered things without any ceremony. Like when she remembered her nickname for the little girl. They chose not to have a 'moment of realisation' cliché and instead just drop the line without warning.

Appreciate the attempt of subverting expectations but not sure it quite worked. It's a midtable MCU entry imo.

I did enjoy it though and i'm going to see it again tonight with the Mrs.

It's not the "moment of realisation" but there was no emotion associated with it.
Like when "you remembered" there was no payoff, no "ha yeah, cool" or such, it was just "yeah, I did" *small smile*.

So disappointed with this and not because it was bad, just because it was not good. It was a solid Meh, got the same feeling from the first Thor film. Everything was there and seemed set up to work but there was just no meat to the key points. The difference in Thor was is that they at least nailed Thor and Loki characterisation.

I've been loving the idea of a Captain Marvel film since my first glimpse of the character in the 90's X-Men cartoon, where she was mentally absorbed by Rogue.
Then read the stories and they tried so much to show the blank-slate Carol, but the film missed by showing as if that it hadn't affected her much at all. 3 days or no there should have been real anger/despondency/hate/loss just well... something!

Regardless of her not being able to make a good points in public, without contracting complete foot in mouth, I am not going to lay this on Larson, yet. Endgame will show a lot but seeing as most of my issues with Captain Marvel film is with direction it's unfair to judge the actor too harshly. Yes Jackson was great as Fury but that is an established character and he knows how to play him, regardless.

Overall it was a 5/10 for me which, in a way, is more disappointing that it being bad.

spacecoyote · 22-03-2019 12:32pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not the "moment of realisation" but there was no emotion associated with it.
Like when "you remembered" there was no payoff, no "ha yeah, cool" or such, it was just "yeah, I did" *small smile*.

So disappointed with this and not because it was bad, just because it was not good. It was a solid Meh, got the same feeling from the first Thor film. Everything was there and seemed set up to work but there was just no meat to the key points. The difference in Thor was is that they at least nailed Thor and Loki characterisation.

I've been loving the idea of a Captain Marvel film since my first glimpse of the character in the 90's X-Men cartoon, where she was mentally absorbed by Rogue.
Then read the stories and they tried so much to show the blank-slate Carol, but the film missed showing that it affected her much at all. 3 days or no there should have been real anger/despondency/hate/loss just well... something!

Regardless of her not being able to make a good points in public, without contracting complete foot in mouth, I am not going to lay this on Larson, yet. Endgame will show a lot but seeing as most of my issues with Captain Marvel film is with direction it's unfair to judge the actor too harshly. Yes Jackson was great as Fury but that is an established character and he knows how to play him, regardless.

Overall it was a 5/10 for me which, in a way, is more disappointing that it being bad.

Would agree with this in general (though I do have a bit of a soft spot for Thor)

The movie was just fairly unremarkable. Went with the Missus, who's generally a big MCU fan, and she found it relatively boring. She was really disappointed in the Annette Benning character.

I found it all a little bit too on point. The soundtrack was painfully unsubtle, there was no real emotional focus-point, and a good portion of the jokes missed their marks.

The effects were impressive on the whole.

I've rewatched a number of the MCU films on a couple of occasions, but this one definitely feels like a one & done movie for me. If they tried a sequel, I don't think I'd be too bothered with a cinema trip for it, and I'd really struggle to get my better half to go along.

Captain Marvel (2019)

Comments