MCUniverse- Captain Marvel Rises!

[A True Kaniggit]

The thread about the Marvel Universe Stuff.

She's gonna save the world. Twice.

[Jaxom 1974]

As my seven year old daughter randomly comes to me telling me I must see this movie with her, I consider it a big win. 

[Relic]

1 hour ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

As my seven year old daughter randomly comes to me telling me I must see this movie with her, I consider it a big win. 

You asked last thread what Black Panther did to make some people dislike it. I'd ask what it did to make so many people love it so damn much.

If you set aside the astounding cultural impact it had due to the sad nature of basically all other comic book movies/major hollywood productions being white-washed AF, it was a completely paint-by-the-numbers movie that did absolutely nothing new. It delved into the deepest tropes, featured bland characters doing bland character shit,  had a protagonist that literally did nothing that we have not seen a billion times before, and featured giant CGI animals impacting the outcome of the climax.  Was there ever any question as to how this movie would end other than how it did?

I understand liking this movie as a kid newly exposed to these types of movies. I understand cheering for there finally being a giant movie that basically had no white people in it. I don't understand looking at this as a "good movie" from a purely aficionado perspective. 

Then again, i felt this way about that last Wolverine movie, the Deadpool movies, the Avengers movies, and ummm, well, pretty much every Marvel movie I've seen not called Captain America 2, and Ironman 1. So maybe i'm the wrong person to ask. 

[A True Kaniggit]

I enjoyed Black Panther because it's a fun as hell movie.

My only complaint is that M'Baku is somehow able to kick ass with only a rock on a stick. As soon as he appeared with it I thought he was going to slam it into the ground,  or something along those lines,  and do something amazing because of Vibranium. 

Nope, he was able to fight on even terms with the most technologically advanced army in the world with rock on a stick.

 

[DaveSumm]

BP had a villain who had a point, and our protagonist concedes the point and adjusts accordingly at the end. That’s fairly rare.

I haven’t seen it since the cinema and I tend to be awful at judging Marvel movies in the first watch, so I should really rewatch. But as to the suggestion that there’s too much action from the last thread, ultimately these are superhero and people expect fights and explosions. Saving those kind of things for the team up movies will just mean no one will bother to see the team ups. I do hope Marvel take more risks as things proceed though, maybe have something akin to Logan (not necessarily the R rating, but the lower key, personal story and not a young sexy person in sight). I think Civil War has a great rhythm to it, a good action sequence in the middle and then a more personal ending.

[red snow]

Relic, i think killmonger was an interesting character with a motivation that, in a different (possibly even better) movie could have had him be the protagonist calling to justice a nation who stood by and watched slavery of their fellow Africa for centuries when they had the ability to wipe the floor with europeans.

The CGI rhinos and scenes with black panther fighting in the dark were bad.

Basically i don't think it's as bad or amazing as people make out although i can understand the backlash at average/films that don't suck being hailed as exceptional. I felt similarly about "baby driver" which had a unique gimmick but was otherwise an average film and did feel like if the majority of films weren't bad/uninspiring it wouldn't stand out so much. A bit like black panther which besides the cultural event is still just another marvel movie (although i feel marvel films are all great popcorn movies)

[red snow]

1 hour ago, A True Kaniggit said:

I enjoyed Black Panther because it's a fun as hell movie.

My only complaint is that M'Baku is somehow able to kick ass with only a rock on a stick. As soon as he appeared with it I thought he was going to slam it into the ground,  or something along those lines,  and do something amazing because of Vibranium. 

Nope, he was able to fight on even terms with the most technologically advanced army in the world with rock on a stick.

 

Good point. That's an upgrade they need to reveal in the sequel. I guess the rock could be vibranium and impact from it is increased over that if just a rock?

 

4 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

BP had a villain who had a point, and our protagonist concedes the point and adjusts accordingly at the end. That’s fairly rare.

I haven’t seen it since the cinema and I tend to be awful at judging Marvel movies in the first watch, so I should really rewatch. But as to the suggestion that there’s too much action from the last thread, ultimately these are superhero and people expect fights and explosions. Saving those kind of things for the team up movies will just mean no one will bother to see the team ups. I do hope Marvel take more risks as things proceed though, maybe have something akin to Logan (not necessarily the R rating, but the lower key, personal story and not a young sexy person in sight). I think Civil War has a great rhythm to it, a good action sequence in the middle and then a more personal ending.

I think this is most likely going to occur on the Disney+ TV shows where budget limitations will force them to limit the action. If this encourages scripts that can't distract you with a flashy action scene it may well prove to be the best thing that happened to the mcu in terms of creativity/tone. Also these shows aren't by the people making the pre-existing marvel tv shows and they've hopefully noted the criticism in pacing for the vast majority of marvel Netflix. They are also using characters (loki, scarlet witch, vision and winter soldier/falcon) which are much trickier to plug into "street fights in new York" setting. All three have potential eg wild fantasy/comedy for loki, scarlet witch/vision (should really just adapt "the vision" comic) and super espionage with winter soldier/falcon.

[Heartofice]

I’d say the majority of Marvel movies suffer from a ‘big CGI battle at the end’ problem. Even movies I generally liked , such as GotG tend to fall back on the idea that a lot of flashing spaceships and lasers is meant to be exciting. In 2019 I’d suggest that we’ve seen enough of these large scale battles to not find them interesting anymore. 

The exception to this is the Russo brothers movies, Winter soldier, Civil War and Infinity War.

What they have learnt to do is make action inventive , and have it tell a story. Civil Wars big battle is 2/3rds of the way through and it’s gloriously entertaining , each character putting their skills against the other as a way of telling a narrative. Civil War ends with a personal battle between Cap and Iron Man , and the fight is a demonstration of their relationship more than anything. 

 Infinity War carried it on and every battle is thrilling and full of suspense and invention.

 

[Jace, Extat]

10 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I’d say the majority of Marvel movies suffer from a ‘big CGI battle at the end’ problem. Even movies I generally liked , such as GotG tend to fall back on the idea that a lot of flashing spaceships and lasers is meant to be exciting. In 2019 I’d suggest that we’ve seen enough of these large scale battles to not find them interesting anymore. 

The exception to this is the Russo brothers movies, Winter soldier, Civil War and Infinity War.

What they have learnt to do is make action inventive , and have it tell a story. Civil Wars big battle is 2/3rds of the way through and it’s gloriously entertaining , each character putting their skills against the other as a way of telling a narrative. Civil War ends with a personal battle between Cap and Iron Man , and the fight is a demonstration of their relationship more than anything. 

 Infinity War carried it on and every battle is thrilling and full of suspense and invention.

 

I can condone this take. Although I was less than enamored with Cap 2 myself.

Particularly with Civil War you get to see how Tony's arrogance and impetuousness leave him alone with only his machines to help him while Cap rallies others to his aid by putting himself between them and danger. 

Tony had allies because his position carried legitimacy. Cap had allies because he's a leader.

[red snow]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

I’d say the majority of Marvel movies suffer from a ‘big CGI battle at the end’ problem. Even movies I generally liked , such as GotG tend to fall back on the idea that a lot of flashing spaceships and lasers is meant to be exciting. In 2019 I’d suggest that we’ve seen enough of these large scale battles to not find them interesting anymore. 

The exception to this is the Russo brothers movies, Winter soldier, Civil War and Infinity War.

What they have learnt to do is make action inventive , and have it tell a story. Civil Wars big battle is 2/3rds of the way through and it’s gloriously entertaining , each character putting their skills against the other as a way of telling a narrative. Civil War ends with a personal battle between Cap and Iron Man , and the fight is a demonstration of their relationship more than anything. 

 Infinity War carried it on and every battle is thrilling and full of suspense and invention.

 

They are still big cgi battles (except for winter soldier) - the key difference is that we give a shit about who they are fighting in the films you mention. In civil war it's hero vs hero so we are invested in both quite easily. While infinity has hordes of faceless cgi (the least entertaining parts of the film), we care because they also have the heroes fighting Thanos who has enough characterisation to make us care about the stakes and their interactions. 

The problem in the majority of marvel films (and in some other superhero/action films) is that the finale is either wave after wave of faceless cgi drones where the only interaction is how the hero kills them or they transform a human villain into some weird giant CGI thing the hero can no longer interact with besides fighting.

Age of Ultron would have been much better if they were just fighting ultron and scarlet witch and quicksilver but they ruined by having them fight shit tons of iron man suits. Yawn. Honestly if it wasn't for the scene where cap almost lifts mjolnir and Thor's reaction that movie would be irredeemable for me.

They had the indiana jones films on over Christmas (the trilogy anyway) and i was reminded of how well those films handle action. Most of the times he's just fighting a couple of nazis or henchmen but so many of them are memorable eg when he shoots the guy with tbe sword (and the callback where he tries the same trick but has no ammo) or the plane propellor fight. When it's "faceless" things like a pit if snakes they emphasis is on indy's reaction to them and not 5 minutes of him stamping, shooting, burning and ither inventive methods of snake killing because the film makers know we wouldn't care. It's probably unfair to compare any Marvel movie to raiders of the lost arc but it shows how big CGI doesn't work if it's just fighting. Crystal skull itself proves this (although the screenplay is a mess too).

[Heartofice]

10 minutes ago, red snow said:

They are still big cgi battles (except for winter soldier) - the key difference is that we give a shit about who they are fighting in the films you mention. In civil war it's hero vs hero so we are invested in both quite easily. While infinity has hordes of faceless cgi (the least entertaining parts of the film), we care because they also have the heroes fighting Thanos who has enough characterisation to make us care about the stakes and their interactions. 

The problem in the majority of marvel films (and in some other superhero/action films) is that the finale is either wave after wave of faceless cgi drones where the only interaction is how the hero kills them or they transform a human villain into some weird giant CGI thing the hero can no longer interact with besides fighting.

Age of Ultron would have been much better if they were just fighting ultron and scarlet witch and quicksilver but they ruined by having them fight shit tons of iron man suits. Yawn. Honestly if it wasn't for the scene where cap almost lifts mjolnir and Thor's reaction that movie would be irredeemable for me.

They had the indiana jones films on over Christmas (the trilogy anyway) and i was reminded of how well those films handle action. Most of the times he's just fighting a couple of nazis or henchmen but so many of them are memorable eg when he shoots the guy with tbe sword (and the callback where he tries the same trick but has no ammo) or the plane propellor fight. When it's "faceless" things like a pit if snakes they emphasis is on indy's reaction to them and not 5 minutes of him stamping, shooting, burning and ither inventive methods of snake killing because the film makers know we wouldn't care. It's probably unfair to compare any Marvel movie to raiders of the lost arc but it shows how big CGI doesn't work if it's just fighting. Crystal skull itself proves this (although the screenplay is a mess too).

I think the temptation these days is just to shove as much 'splosions and shooty shoots on screen at once so that the trailer looks epic and then your job is done. 

The Indiana Jones movies are a really great example of how to do action well. Indy isn't even great at fighting or super athletic, but when there is a fight scene it uses the situation and surroundings to great effect to create tension and interest. I think of standard action scenes, fighting by a WW2 bomber or inside a truck, there was a hell of a lot of variety and twists in each conflict. 
You also get the comparisons of OT Star Wars light sabre battles and Prequel ones. Clearly the fight at the end of Phantom Menace involves far more athleticism and skill than in Empire or Jedi.. but the the OT fights were almost a metaphor for the conflict between characters. Prequel fights were just flips and jumps for the sake of looking cool.

Infinity War seems to understand that idea, and each fight on some level is about more than just people hitting each other, there is internal conflict in almost every action.

Winter Solider as well uses physical stunt work and fantastic open shot camera work to really make it feel real. Something they couldn't do in Infinity War as much but still managed to make each hit seem real. I can't say the same thing about BP which looks like a phone advert most of the time, or even GotG or Dr Strange or Ant Man.

[polishgenius]

I actually don't think 'it's all just battling hordes of goons that is the problem' is the right take- as I alluded to before, it's about knowing how to set those conflicts up properly, a different art to setting up individual fights. That's why you've all singled out Infinity War for special praise despite the fact that the finale contains a battle that is far more 'faceless mook' than Black Panther, a fight which has multiple factions all with a different personal stake.

Like don't get me wrong personal stakes definitely help but it's keeping the focus on them that, partly, the art lies in - and if you're good you can build a personal stake out of nothing in an action scene. The Russo bros excell at this. Coogler excells in the set-up portion but has things to learn about maintaining that connection in the action itself (he does one-on-ones great, though).

Like, no-one criticises Lord of the Rings for being about massive CGI battles (and I know someone's gonna mention the amount of in-camera work there, but there was still loads of CG obviously). No-one lamented The Battle of the Bastards because we didn't know who most of the soldiers were.

[Heartofice]

It is about setting up the action but its also about how you follow through and actually direct that action, and I really think the Russo's are excellent at that. The large 'hordes of monsters' battle at the end of Infinity War initially made me groan, but it was done with an understanding of the nature of that battle, using the monsters as fodder for the bigger more interesting fight to come. 

And I always think about the fight between Iron Man, Spidey etc and Thanos, how they took advantage of each characters attributes to maximise the tension, so that it wasn't just about people slogging it out, but the contrast between each of their powers. Recently watching the latest season of Daredevil I noticed how much I enjoyed how fights between him and Bullseye played out due to their very different skillset. 

Maybe that is the problem with many of these battles. For instance in Black Panther, you really have 2 Black Panthers fighting each other, there is very little variety or tension, there is no real narrative or contrast. Just seeing Black Panther fight in Civil War was 100 times more interesting than anything he did in his own movie, and thats quite sad.
In GotG there are a horde of faceless spaceships vs another horde of faceless spaceships. Ant Man fights.. another Ant Man (the only interesting element being they are small). 

To be fair to Lotr though, it came out at a time where these huge battles weren't everywhere. The best battles in those movies are those in FotR anyway which are more personal conflicts. They aren't about fightng orcs only.
 

[red snow]

There was a great bit in daredevil season 3 where he purposefully changes his fighting style in response to having an opponent like bullseye. I loved that.

I also agree with the idea that hordes of humours are more palatable than alien robots. I think there's a tendency to switch off when you know you are watching greenscreen. Even if the humans are animations it's easier to be fooled. 

Good points about GOT battles too. I think they mix live action with SFX a bit more than the marvel films do. Although it's just a shame battle of the bastards was stupid but shows how well executed set pieces can distract from silliness. It's been a while since i watched vikings but i felt there small scale battles were some of the best - they felt raw and were usually about the fight and less about spectacle. Or take "outlaw kingdom" which had an excellent final battle tgat actually incorporated strategy and was only slightly marred by an unnecessary and silly one on one showdown at the end

[Jace, Extat]

10 minutes ago, red snow said:

There was a great bit in daredevil season 3 where he purposefully changes his fighting style in response to having an opponent like bullseye. I loved that.

I also agree with the idea that hordes of humours are more palatable than alien robots. I think there's a tendency to switch off when you know you are watching greenscreen. Even if the humans are animations it's easier to be fooled. 

Good points about GOT battles too. I think they mix live action with SFX a bit more than the marvel films do. Although it's just a shame battle of the bastards was stupid but shows how well executed set pieces can distract from silliness. It's been a while since i watched vikings but i felt there small scale battles were some of the best - they felt raw and were usually about the fight and less about spectacle. Or take "outlaw kingdom" which had an excellent final battle tgat actually incorporated strategy and was only slightly marred by an unnecessary and silly one on one showdown at the end

Vikings managed a 'large' scale battle about as well as I've ever seen in some of the early seasons when a few dozen guys one each side smash shieldwalls. And it was because they put the camera right there in the action so we see our characters reacting to the battle rather than us reacting to an outcome. Pretty choreography will get you cheap applause. But if you want to raise the heart rate of an audience it's all about imparting the danger and fear so that we can experience it vicariously.

[polishgenius]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

It is about setting up the action but its also about how you follow through and actually direct that action,

Yeah, I worded it clumsily but I think we're saying the same thing, more or less.


Although I disagree that the best battles in LotR were necessarily in Fellowship (though that was the best film overall). Think the later films did a good job of imparting personality to the orcs- although the pertinent point that it's easier when you can read the personality of the opposition holds up. That's why spaceships and stuff are harder. You've got to be able to see the armies reacting. One of my most memorable moments in Avengers 1, despite that not being that good an action scene overall, was when the Chitauri freak out after the Hulk shows up.

[sifth]

Wakanda was a complete joke in that film. The most advanced civilization on the planet, using trial by combat to pick their king................really, REALLY.

 

The fact Killmonger was the first evil king they had that wanted to take over the world is such a joke, since apparently the only requirements to become king in this crazy society is being good at killing someone in one on one combat.

 

Speaking of Killmonger, the fact that he just murders Forest Whitaker on the spot, without anyone raising an issue seems to be a huge problem as well. The guy just out right murders an old man, but everyone in Wakanda is perfectly fine with letting that yoyo still have a chance to become king.

[The BlackBear]

Ok two things on the ceremonial fight:

1. It's clearly a vestige of an older system, that probably wasn't used all that often, that just remains, T'Challa wasn't really meant to be challenged there, M'Baku turning up was a surprise. Look at all the weird ceremonial bullshit that's still around the British Parliament, I'm sure there are countless examples of strange vestigial political practices around the world.

2. The Black Panther is king second, he's the protector of Wakanda first. If he can't fight, he has no place being the Black Panther. Which is why the combat is important. But also that defensive protective mindset is drilled into every Wakandan from birth, Killmonger is the first who comes in from the outside, which is why no one has wanted to do what he's does before.

[Heartofice]

Yeah I actually no problem with the odd ceremonial nature of their traditions, you can see how such traditions could carry over. I think there are odder mixes of modern technology and Stone Age tech going on in the movie that was a bit more jarring.

My main complaint for those fights was just how awful they looked, some of the worst CGI I’ve seen in years.

[sifth]

1 hour ago, The BlackBear said:

Ok two things on the ceremonial fight:

1. It's clearly a vestige of an older system, that probably wasn't used all that often, that just remains, T'Challa wasn't really meant to be challenged there, M'Baku turning up was a surprise. Look at all the weird ceremonial bullshit that's still around the British Parliament, I'm sure there are countless examples of strange vestigial political practices around the world.

2. The Black Panther is king second, he's the protector of Wakanda first. If he can't fight, he has no place being the Black Panther. Which is why the combat is important. But also that defensive protective mindset is drilled into every Wakandan from birth, Killmonger is the first who comes in from the outside, which is why no one has wanted to do what he's does before.

See now you're just making stuff up to fill in plot holes. The fact that the most advanced civilization on the planet uses a cave man type ritual is just a joke. Also I'm pretty sure The British Parliament doesn't pick it's Prime Minister using a celebrity death match, the fact that you're comparing the two is just silly.

If you want to make a Star Trek like society, where you have a cure for all diseases, you can heal most wounds, hunger is no longer an issue and so on, that' fine. However you can't give it elements of the Game of Thrones universe, because the two fictions don't mix. The fact that they have two of these stupid duals in the movie and Killmonger just murders and old man in cold blood in one, without anyone even giving a dam, is just insane.

On top of all that you bring up yet another plot hole the film has. T'Challa is already the Black Panther during the events of Civil War and the early parts of the movie. So let me get this right, he's allowed to be The Black Panther when his dad is king, but has to be de Black Panthered after his dad died, to prove himself again, so he can be re Black Panthered? Anyone else find this whole thing a little convoluted, because I certainly do, lol