I think it's wrong to think that "just fun stuff" doesn't need to be shot better, because that equals fun and disposable. Raiders of the Lost Ark isn't deep, it's a ride of a movie, yet it's shot more or less perfectly. The MCU has nice moments and it's generally competently shot at least, but just because it's fun doesn't mean it couldn't be better, and cinematography is one of the ways in which this is true.
Raiders is the movie my mind always goes to when I hear someone use the "it's just an action movie, it doesn't need to be great" line. It's beautifully made and while none of the characters are particularly deep they were perfect on a fundamental level. The heroes are likable and relatable, and the villains are hatable and provide a compelling foil for the protagonists, circling around each other in a way that's almost Disneylike in its simplicity.
And, of course, they action is superb, as good as the genre has to offer IMO. Many modern action flicks cost ten times the price of Raiders and still come off as a boring, anodyne mess.
I'm not even going to pretend to be an objective observer of that film, but every time I see it, it amazes me how well it just works on cylinder.
I think it's wrong to think that "just fun stuff" doesn't need to be shot better, because that equals fun and disposable. Raiders of the Lost Ark isn't deep, it's a ride of a movie, yet it's shot more or less perfectly. The MCU has nice moments and it's generally competently shot at least, but just because it's fun doesn't mean it couldn't be better, and cinematography is one of the ways in which this is true.
Raiders is the movie my mind always goes to when I hear someone use the "it's just an action movie, it doesn't need to be great" line. It's beautifully made and while none of the characters are particularly deep they were perfect on a fundamental level. The heroes are likable and relatable, and the villains are hatable and provide a compelling foil for the protagonists, circling around each other in a way that's almost Disneylike in its simplicity.
And, of course, they action is superb, as good as the genre has to offer IMO. Many modern action flicks cost ten times the price of Raiders and still come off as a boring, anodyne mess.
I'm not even going to pretend to be an objective observer of that film, but every time I see it, it amazes me how well it just works on cylinder.
Back to the Future is probably my favorite example of a "fun" movie that is excellently shot and tightly written.
It's one of the reasons why I'm not too unhappy Whedon isn't directing these any more. I think he works well with actors, and he's got occasional ideas that are cool and work pretty well, but he's by no means a consistently good director, at least when it comes to action and VFX.
Seeing as how the director they tend to hire aren't action movie director it's not likely to change the look and style of these films of Whedon stops making them. The new guys will just focus on the interpersonal stuff and hand the rest over to the house action effects team.
I guess that's how the 2010's movie style is going to be remembered. Hundreds of movies with all their effects done by the same effects studio with no real input from the directors that leads to a real homogenous look in almost every movie.
Seeing as how the director they tend to hire aren't action movie director it's not likely to change the look and style of these films of Whedon stops making them.
I'd say the Russos have already been an improvement in that respect. Not sure I believe Harry's point that they have so much of an influence on story and characterisation, but they're better at making the MCU style work consistently for action scenes.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Spielberg in his prime is kind of a high bar. Putting aside the MCU for a moment, is there anybody of that caliber in the entire industry right now?
0
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
I'd put Alejandro Inarritu, Quentin Tarantino, Coen Bros and Alfonso Cuaron above Spielberg, in that even their weakest movies never really approach anything less than great.
Oh brilliant
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Spielberg in his prime is kind of a high bar. Putting aside the MCU for a moment, is there anybody of that caliber in the entire industry right now?
The Coens
Tarantino
maaaaybe Chris Nolan
I mean, Spielberg isn't even as good as Spielberg anymore. He's made like 10 movies this century and zero of them were on my Top 100 list for the Kraken, and I kinda got the impression Astaereth's list was similarly bereft
I'm starting to get the impression (and I may be wrong) that Nolan is very much a one trick pony. All his films look the same, it's easy to look at TDK series/Inception/Interstellar and know they're all by the same person, and it's all very dour.
I can't really think of any BIG directors anymore, like a Spielberg film used to carry weight. Some people get a lot of rope because of their past, but Spielberg has had so many uninteresting films in the interim that I just don't care about him at all anymore, much like I don't think he cares anymore.
I'd give Ridley Scott, Cameron, and Zemeckis a lot of chances because of their past successes, and I'd love to see some of their better days rub off on current films. Or Richard Donner or ...John McTiernan? The Die Hard guy?
I think the day of the director being the big part of the film are over. The marvel films do well but I couldn't tell you who directed the bulk of them. We know Whedon because of his constant promotion, and the Russos because they made the best films in the series.
0
Options
FakefauxCóiste BodharDriving John McCain to meet some Iraqis who'd very much like to make his acquaintanceRegistered Userregular
The overall visuals of the MCU are quite homogenous, even with the different little subgenres they try and fit into. Doctor Strange could be very different, depending on how much of the movie actually is crazy kaleidoscope cities and other various magic trance stuff. Could be the whole movie is one wild ride like that, or maybe it's the same visual style as the others with some great gimmick shots thrown in...
I get the impression that, even if some of the visuals are much more inventive than past Marvel films, the plot is going to seem very familiar and that will bog it down somewhat.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Inarritu is a worse single-gimmick equine than Nolan, I'd argue
At least Nolan remembers that films are supposed to tell stories
Inarritu is a worse single-gimmick equine than Nolan, I'd argue
At least Nolan remembers that films are supposed to tell stories
I've read some criticism of Inarritu that I could subscribe to, but this doesn't ring true to me. For one thing, I'd say that Amores Perros is a very different film from Birdman, which in turn is very different from The Revenant (which, mind you, I wasn't a huge fan of). Yes, he does use certain stylistic features repeatedly, but IMO he puts them to different use, and that's no different from a huge number of other directors. In addition, all of the films I've mentioned do tell stories. I'm sure those stories can be criticised, but the films aren't storyless. I'm sure you have points to back up your criticism, Atomika, but right now I understand what you've just said about as much as I understand the average TexiKen post.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
+3
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
The overall visuals of the MCU are quite homogenous, even with the different little subgenres they try and fit into. Doctor Strange could be very different, depending on how much of the movie actually is crazy kaleidoscope cities and other various magic trance stuff. Could be the whole movie is one wild ride like that, or maybe it's the same visual style as the others with some great gimmick shots thrown in...
I get the impression that, even if some of the visuals are much more inventive than past Marvel films, the plot is going to seem very familiar and that will bog it down somewhat.
I was mildly annoyed to see a thing appear in one of the posters for it.
His Eye of Agamotto amulet appears to have the green Infinity Stone in it. Which makes me a lil' apprehensive that the plot is gonna be a fight over that. Buuut. They gotta have 2 more show up before the end anyway, and there's always the chance that Infinity Stone is just one of the items Doc Strange uses in the movie, and the plot doesn't revolve around it.
The plot otherwise seems to be a fight with Mads Mikkelsen across multiple dimensions, which has a lot of potential. I'm hoping he's a herald for a beyond comprehension nightmare demon. I just don't really want it to be a fight over the Infinity Stone, y'know? :P
absolutely spot on that " '90s cool" has aged the worst out of any kind of visual style in modern times.
I don't know what's particularly 90s cool about Blade, its an action film, and it's a damn fun film overall. Plus I liked Deakin Frost. The RLM guys are pretty pretentious when they want to be. It's like when they complained that Harley Quinn suddenly has a mobile phone, ignoring the scene where she is handed a mobile phone.
It's the aesthetic they're talking about, not the nature of the film (which balances itself perfectly and is stylish and kewl and doesn't get the recognition it should for ushering in some now standard action stuff).
The trenchcoats, Oakleys, leather look, wet styled hair, chicks with pale makeup and dark lip liner often accompanied with some sort of tank top and bell bottom look all to the tune of Smack My Bitch up all the time always, it's very, very dated compared to something like the 80's or early 90's, the latter's biggest problem being the cars at the time.
I think the writing could have been a bit better, as it gave me a lot of tonal whiplash. Also, as a person without any children, some of the moments didn't resonate with me.
Otherwise an enjoyable movie, that risked a bit more and tried a bit harder than some of the other movies that came out this year, (Hello Ghostbusters and Star Trek), and for that, I'm willing to grade it on a curve and recommend it to others.
EDIT: Also, do not start running out of the theater at the end of the movie, before the credits roll there are some poignant interviews with the actresses and their moms about raising children.
Gnome-Interruptus on
MWO: Adamski
+1
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
I mainly just want them to not waste Mads Mikkelsen. He's to cool a guy to waste.
They've gotta have heard the criticism about villains not sticking around. Here's hoping. And with Doctor Strange at least they're keeping one around (comic thpoilerth but they're kinda basic and obvious)
Chiwetel Ejiofor is playing Mordo in the movie, Strange's nemesis. But he appears to be a good guy who's teaching Strange the magical ropes! So they're probably developing him as a multi movie villain, at least. I can't imagine they'll have him pull a heel turn and kill him off in this one.
If Mads isn't dead, probably exploded or disintegrated, by the end of the film, I will be very surprised.
Iron Man - villain dead
The Incredible Hulk - villain alive
Iron Man 2 - villain dead
Thor - villain alive but more of a tweener
Captain America: The First Avenger - dead/teleported away
Marvel's The Avengers - alive
Iron Man 3 - dead
Thor: The Dark World - dead
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - alive but a hero
Guardians of the Galaxy - dead
Avengers: Age of Ultron - dead probably
Ant-Man dead
Captain America: Civil War - alive but its Russos so they know what they're doing
Doctor Strange - ?
Basically the only ones alive are the Abomination, and then Loki, the super popular tweener who skews the figures by virtue of being in multiple films.
Only 4 unique villains are alive and one is an anti hero and the other is a tragic villain. The only actual villains are the forgotten Abomination and Zemo, the guy without any powers.
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
AlphaRomero on
+2
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The way Marvel deals with both protagonists and villains means that their most consistent thematic lesson is that achieving your personal destiny requires an act of murder. Ultron, Red Skull, Stane/Whiplash/Killian, etc, each villain symbolically or literally is shown to embody some aspect of the hero, and this implicit critique/comparison is refuted through a violent killing.
+3
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
At some point they transitioned from having Cap gun people down to not even holding firearms. He's not used a gun in either Civil War or Winter Soldier IIRC. Meanwhile Iron Man's arsenal has been skewing more towards non lethal in the more recent movies, but he did outfit Rhodey with a wall of death...
Also, Ant-Man's villain
might fall in the same technicality hole as Red Skull. There's a slim chance he survived, just got sucked into the microverse.
that reminds me I should make a new MCU thread. This one went quick! :O
Dark Raven X on
Oh brilliant
0
Options
FakefauxCóiste BodharDriving John McCain to meet some Iraqis who'd very much like to make his acquaintanceRegistered Userregular
I mainly just want them to not waste Mads Mikkelsen. He's to cool a guy to waste.
I think, unfortunately, you're going to be disappointed.
+5
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
X-Men Apocalypse is still great upon rewatch, but the special effects for the Quicksilver scene look really good on a smaller screen. There's only one person in that whole slo-mo bit that looks weird or stands out (the girl who he saves before he surfs the table out of the mansion).
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
At some point they transitioned from having Cap gun people down to not even holding firearms. He's not used a gun in either Civil War or Winter Soldier IIRC. Meanwhile Iron Man's arsenal has been skewing more towards non lethal in the more recent movies, but he did outfit Rhodey with a wall of death...
Also, Ant-Man's villain
might fall in the same technicality hole as Red Skull. There's a slim chance he survived, just got sucked into the microverse.
that reminds me I should make a new MCU thread. This one went quick! :O
Didn't he get turned inside out or something?
0
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
At some point they transitioned from having Cap gun people down to not even holding firearms. He's not used a gun in either Civil War or Winter Soldier IIRC. Meanwhile Iron Man's arsenal has been skewing more towards non lethal in the more recent movies, but he did outfit Rhodey with a wall of death...
Also, Ant-Man's villain
might fall in the same technicality hole as Red Skull. There's a slim chance he survived, just got sucked into the microverse.
that reminds me I should make a new MCU thread. This one went quick! :O
Didn't he get turned inside out or something?
Ant-Man trashed his suit, making him shrink down in pieces, probably tearing him apart. But ultimately he just disappeared in a lil blip, kinda implying he just lost all regulation and shrank down into nothing just like Ant-Man did.
Oh brilliant
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Inarritu is a worse single-gimmick equine than Nolan, I'd argue
At least Nolan remembers that films are supposed to tell stories
I've read some criticism of Inarritu that I could subscribe to, but this doesn't ring true to me. For one thing, I'd say that Amores Perros is a very different film from Birdman, which in turn is very different from The Revenant (which, mind you, I wasn't a huge fan of). Yes, he does use certain stylistic features repeatedly, but IMO he puts them to different use, and that's no different from a huge number of other directors. In addition, all of the films I've mentioned do tell stories. I'm sure those stories can be criticised, but the films aren't storyless. I'm sure you have points to back up your criticism, Atomika, but right now I understand what you've just said about as much as I understand the average TexiKen post.
In short (because I'm at work), Inarritu's work comes across as made by someone with a great amount of self-satisfaction with his visual strengths, which in effort to put them more prominently on display results in shaggly, poorly-paced, self-important films.
Inarritu is a worse single-gimmick equine than Nolan, I'd argue
At least Nolan remembers that films are supposed to tell stories
I've read some criticism of Inarritu that I could subscribe to, but this doesn't ring true to me. For one thing, I'd say that Amores Perros is a very different film from Birdman, which in turn is very different from The Revenant (which, mind you, I wasn't a huge fan of). Yes, he does use certain stylistic features repeatedly, but IMO he puts them to different use, and that's no different from a huge number of other directors. In addition, all of the films I've mentioned do tell stories. I'm sure those stories can be criticised, but the films aren't storyless. I'm sure you have points to back up your criticism, Atomika, but right now I understand what you've just said about as much as I understand the average TexiKen post.
In short (because I'm at work), Inarritu's work comes across as made by someone with a great amount of self-satisfaction with his visual strengths, which in effort to put them more prominently on display results in shaggly, poorly-paced, self-important films.
The word you're looking for is pretentious.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
+2
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
At some point they transitioned from having Cap gun people down to not even holding firearms. He's not used a gun in either Civil War or Winter Soldier IIRC. Meanwhile Iron Man's arsenal has been skewing more towards non lethal in the more recent movies, but he did outfit Rhodey with a wall of death...
Also, Ant-Man's villain
might fall in the same technicality hole as Red Skull. There's a slim chance he survived, just got sucked into the microverse.
that reminds me I should make a new MCU thread. This one went quick! :O
If Mads isn't dead, probably exploded or disintegrated, by the end of the film, I will be very surprised.
Iron Man - villain dead
The Incredible Hulk - villain alive
Iron Man 2 - villain dead
Thor - villain alive but more of a tweener
Captain America: The First Avenger - dead/teleported away
Marvel's The Avengers - alive
Iron Man 3 - dead
Thor: The Dark World - dead
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - alive but a hero
Guardians of the Galaxy - dead
Avengers: Age of Ultron - dead probably
Ant-Man dead
Captain America: Civil War - alive but its Russos so they know what they're doing
Doctor Strange - ?
Basically the only ones alive are the Abomination, and then Loki, the super popular tweener who skews the figures by virtue of being in multiple films.
Only 4 unique villains are alive and one is an anti hero and the other is a tragic villain. The only actual villains are the forgotten Abomination and Zemo, the guy without any powers.
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
In regards to Iron Man 2 while Ivan Vanko did die, they just carted off Justin Hammer to jail.
I would LOVE to see Sam Rockwell come back to reprise that role, but a lot more bitter, jaded and capable, but still able to do a jaunty little dance when he succeeds.
Inarritu is a worse single-gimmick equine than Nolan, I'd argue
At least Nolan remembers that films are supposed to tell stories
I've read some criticism of Inarritu that I could subscribe to, but this doesn't ring true to me. For one thing, I'd say that Amores Perros is a very different film from Birdman, which in turn is very different from The Revenant (which, mind you, I wasn't a huge fan of). Yes, he does use certain stylistic features repeatedly, but IMO he puts them to different use, and that's no different from a huge number of other directors. In addition, all of the films I've mentioned do tell stories. I'm sure those stories can be criticised, but the films aren't storyless. I'm sure you have points to back up your criticism, Atomika, but right now I understand what you've just said about as much as I understand the average TexiKen post.
In short (because I'm at work), Inarritu's work comes across as made by someone with a great amount of self-satisfaction with his visual strengths, which in effort to put them more prominently on display results in shaggly, poorly-paced, self-important films.
The word you're looking for is pretentious.
I don't think I know that word
<_<
>_>
+5
Options
ZampanovYou May Not Go HomeUntil Tonight Has Been MagicalRegistered Userregular
If Mads isn't dead, probably exploded or disintegrated, by the end of the film, I will be very surprised.
Iron Man - villain dead
The Incredible Hulk - villain alive
Iron Man 2 - villain dead
Thor - villain alive but more of a tweener
Captain America: The First Avenger - dead/teleported away
Marvel's The Avengers - alive
Iron Man 3 - dead
Thor: The Dark World - dead
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - alive but a hero
Guardians of the Galaxy - dead
Avengers: Age of Ultron - dead probably
Ant-Man dead
Captain America: Civil War - alive but its Russos so they know what they're doing
Doctor Strange - ?
Basically the only ones alive are the Abomination, and then Loki, the super popular tweener who skews the figures by virtue of being in multiple films.
Only 4 unique villains are alive and one is an anti hero and the other is a tragic villain. The only actual villains are the forgotten Abomination and Zemo, the guy without any powers.
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
In regards to Iron Man 2 while Ivan Vanko did die, they just carted off Justin Hammer to jail.
I would LOVE to see Sam Rockwell come back to reprise that role, but a lot more bitter, jaded and capable, but still able to do a jaunty little dance when he succeeds.
BTW, I just saw an encyclopedia of post-apocalyptic films at the book store. It's called "World Gone Wild: A Survivor's Guide to Post-Apocalyptic Movies" for those interested.
BTW, I just saw an encyclopedia of post-apocalyptic films at the book store. It's called "World Gone Wild: A Survivor's Guide to Post-Apocalyptic Movies" for those interested.
If Mads isn't dead, probably exploded or disintegrated, by the end of the film, I will be very surprised.
Iron Man - villain dead
The Incredible Hulk - villain alive
Iron Man 2 - villain dead
Thor - villain alive but more of a tweener
Captain America: The First Avenger - dead/teleported away
Marvel's The Avengers - alive
Iron Man 3 - dead
Thor: The Dark World - dead
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - alive but a hero
Guardians of the Galaxy - dead
Avengers: Age of Ultron - dead probably
Ant-Man dead
Captain America: Civil War - alive but its Russos so they know what they're doing
Doctor Strange - ?
Basically the only ones alive are the Abomination, and then Loki, the super popular tweener who skews the figures by virtue of being in multiple films.
Only 4 unique villains are alive and one is an anti hero and the other is a tragic villain. The only actual villains are the forgotten Abomination and Zemo, the guy without any powers.
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
If you can say only one thing good for DC films, they keep their villains around.
Posts
Raiders is the movie my mind always goes to when I hear someone use the "it's just an action movie, it doesn't need to be great" line. It's beautifully made and while none of the characters are particularly deep they were perfect on a fundamental level. The heroes are likable and relatable, and the villains are hatable and provide a compelling foil for the protagonists, circling around each other in a way that's almost Disneylike in its simplicity.
And, of course, they action is superb, as good as the genre has to offer IMO. Many modern action flicks cost ten times the price of Raiders and still come off as a boring, anodyne mess.
I'm not even going to pretend to be an objective observer of that film, but every time I see it, it amazes me how well it just works on cylinder.
There are a lot great performances in the movie, but the true star is Kurt Russels mustache
Back to the Future is probably my favorite example of a "fun" movie that is excellently shot and tightly written.
... and apparently almost no one went to see it when it was in cinemas, while Kingsman will get unnecessary sequel. Of course.
Once again, i am dissapointed by humanity.
Seeing as how the director they tend to hire aren't action movie director it's not likely to change the look and style of these films of Whedon stops making them. The new guys will just focus on the interpersonal stuff and hand the rest over to the house action effects team.
I guess that's how the 2010's movie style is going to be remembered. Hundreds of movies with all their effects done by the same effects studio with no real input from the directors that leads to a real homogenous look in almost every movie.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
The Coens
Tarantino
maaaaybe Chris Nolan
I mean, Spielberg isn't even as good as Spielberg anymore. He's made like 10 movies this century and zero of them were on my Top 100 list for the Kraken, and I kinda got the impression Astaereth's list was similarly bereft
I can't really think of any BIG directors anymore, like a Spielberg film used to carry weight. Some people get a lot of rope because of their past, but Spielberg has had so many uninteresting films in the interim that I just don't care about him at all anymore, much like I don't think he cares anymore.
I'd give Ridley Scott, Cameron, and Zemeckis a lot of chances because of their past successes, and I'd love to see some of their better days rub off on current films. Or Richard Donner or ...John McTiernan? The Die Hard guy?
I think the day of the director being the big part of the film are over. The marvel films do well but I couldn't tell you who directed the bulk of them. We know Whedon because of his constant promotion, and the Russos because they made the best films in the series.
I get the impression that, even if some of the visuals are much more inventive than past Marvel films, the plot is going to seem very familiar and that will bog it down somewhat.
At least Nolan remembers that films are supposed to tell stories
:snap::surprised:
It's like you've invented a whole new way to be wrong
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I was mildly annoyed to see a thing appear in one of the posters for it.
The plot otherwise seems to be a fight with Mads Mikkelsen across multiple dimensions, which has a lot of potential. I'm hoping he's a herald for a beyond comprehension nightmare demon. I just don't really want it to be a fight over the Infinity Stone, y'know? :P
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It's the aesthetic they're talking about, not the nature of the film (which balances itself perfectly and is stylish and kewl and doesn't get the recognition it should for ushering in some now standard action stuff).
The trenchcoats, Oakleys, leather look, wet styled hair, chicks with pale makeup and dark lip liner often accompanied with some sort of tank top and bell bottom look all to the tune of Smack My Bitch up all the time always, it's very, very dated compared to something like the 80's or early 90's, the latter's biggest problem being the cars at the time.
I think the writing could have been a bit better, as it gave me a lot of tonal whiplash. Also, as a person without any children, some of the moments didn't resonate with me.
Otherwise an enjoyable movie, that risked a bit more and tried a bit harder than some of the other movies that came out this year, (Hello Ghostbusters and Star Trek), and for that, I'm willing to grade it on a curve and recommend it to others.
EDIT: Also, do not start running out of the theater at the end of the movie, before the credits roll there are some poignant interviews with the actresses and their moms about raising children.
MWO: Adamski
They've gotta have heard the criticism about villains not sticking around. Here's hoping. And with Doctor Strange at least they're keeping one around (comic thpoilerth but they're kinda basic and obvious)
Iron Man - villain dead
The Incredible Hulk - villain alive
Iron Man 2 - villain dead
Thor - villain alive but more of a tweener
Captain America: The First Avenger - dead/teleported away
Marvel's The Avengers - alive
Iron Man 3 - dead
Thor: The Dark World - dead
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - alive but a hero
Guardians of the Galaxy - dead
Avengers: Age of Ultron - dead probably
Ant-Man dead
Captain America: Civil War - alive but its Russos so they know what they're doing
Doctor Strange - ?
Basically the only ones alive are the Abomination, and then Loki, the super popular tweener who skews the figures by virtue of being in multiple films.
Only 4 unique villains are alive and one is an anti hero and the other is a tragic villain. The only actual villains are the forgotten Abomination and Zemo, the guy without any powers.
Although that list says more about Iron Man than anyone else. Captain America has (potentially) teleported one villain away, saved another and then defended the same one against a nutjob serial killer in robot armor, while leaving Zemo alive.
At some point they transitioned from having Cap gun people down to not even holding firearms. He's not used a gun in either Civil War or Winter Soldier IIRC. Meanwhile Iron Man's arsenal has been skewing more towards non lethal in the more recent movies, but he did outfit Rhodey with a wall of death...
Also, Ant-Man's villain
that reminds me I should make a new MCU thread. This one went quick! :O
I think, unfortunately, you're going to be disappointed.
Didn't he get turned inside out or something?
In short (because I'm at work), Inarritu's work comes across as made by someone with a great amount of self-satisfaction with his visual strengths, which in effort to put them more prominently on display results in shaggly, poorly-paced, self-important films.
The word you're looking for is pretentious.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
In regards to Iron Man 2 while Ivan Vanko did die, they just carted off Justin Hammer to jail.
I would LOVE to see Sam Rockwell come back to reprise that role, but a lot more bitter, jaded and capable, but still able to do a jaunty little dance when he succeeds.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
I don't think I know that word
<_<
>_>
Yes
PSN/XBL: Zampanov -- Steam: Zampanov
I gotta get a dictionary, I guess
Gonna get yerself some guzzoline, eh?
Steam | XBL
If you can say only one thing good for DC films, they keep their villains around.