The Film Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30 ... 187, 188, 189  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:49 am    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
Scorcese on the Marvel Cinematic Universe:

"I don't see them. I tried, you know? But that's not cinema. Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks."

https://twitter.com/charles_kinbote/status/1179924761457115137


Gotta disagree with Marty about MCU movies being devoid of any human, psychological or emotional qualities. Maybe he watched Thor Dark World or The Incredible Hulk, or any of the lesser ones. At its best, the MCU can definitely offer rich, character-driven moments. But I can totally see why big studio mega franchises aren't his jam.

Call me a cynic, but I think the human, emotional, and psychological qualities are present as four quadrant appeasing window dressing with a touch of actual human introspection now and then from the occasional indie director turned Disney studio yeoman.

Remember the huge battle between Cap and Iron Man at the end of Civil War which tore two friends and colleagues apart and pitted them against one another in a battle to the (near) death? Bucky killed Tony Stark's parents and Tony and Steve had a whole surveillance state debate going on or something. How did that whole character arc get resolved in Endgame?


It was touched on in Infinity War when Tony still didn't want to call Steve for backup. Then in the opening of Endgame it's directly discussed when Tony returns to the compound and berates Cap for not being there. He asserts that he was right - that they needed "a suit of armor around the world". And then he doesn't talk to Cap again for 5 years. After the visit Tony realizes he's tired of holding a grudge that is nearly 10 years old by then and decides to make amends by returning the shield. Plus they had their whole bromance on the the time heist trip with the "do you trust me" as they looked deep into each other's eyes lol.

Now this is all coming from a person that is a comic book reader and grew up on super hero cartoons so that explains my high interest in these movies. And that's what they are, movies - not films [like Marty makes]. But for Marty to say they're only "rides" is incorrect and pretty smug of him, IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:30 pm    Post subject:

I caught Judy when I was in Las Vegas. Great but sad movie, the performance from Zilwegger was nothing short of amazing.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:07 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
Scorcese on the Marvel Cinematic Universe:

"I don't see them. I tried, you know? But that's not cinema. Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks."

https://twitter.com/charles_kinbote/status/1179924761457115137


Gotta disagree with Marty about MCU movies being devoid of any human, psychological or emotional qualities. Maybe he watched Thor Dark World or The Incredible Hulk, or any of the lesser ones. At its best, the MCU can definitely offer rich, character-driven moments. But I can totally see why big studio mega franchises aren't his jam.

Call me a cynic, but I think the human, emotional, and psychological qualities are present as four quadrant appeasing window dressing with a touch of actual human introspection now and then from the occasional indie director turned Disney studio yeoman.

Remember the huge battle between Cap and Iron Man at the end of Civil War which tore two friends and colleagues apart and pitted them against one another in a battle to the (near) death? Bucky killed Tony Stark's parents and Tony and Steve had a whole surveillance state debate going on or something. How did that whole character arc get resolved in Endgame?


Haven't watched Civil War in some time. But I believe Bucky was brainwashed by Zemo (Daniel Brühl's character) thus doing his bidding. By the end, Bucky opts to enter cryogenic sleep in Wakanda until they can come up with a cure for his brainwashing. Or something to that effect, right? Now you've made want to rewatch Civil War-Endgame lol. I will say I really enjoyed that arc you mentioned, it was basically Cap trying to balance his loyalties to his present (the Avengers) and his past (old pal Bucky), and prevailing in spite of a litany of collateral damage. It also had some interesting political stuff (although admittedly that's not really my bag) pitting Stark's new age theory of global sovereignty against Cap's inherent moral duty to prioritize imminent peril over international framework...

Sure, these movies are made to entertain and to profit. It's Disney. Doesn't mean they're automatically devoid of artistic merit. Appealing to both the masses and to the critical observer isn't mutually exclusive. Amidst a couple of stinkers here and there, I'd argue that the MCU has accomplished just that. But like I said, I get Marty's position. To me it's a generational issue, like Spielberg suggesting that Netflix movies shouldn't be considered for awards, and now Scorsese is about to disprove that (Roma wasn't bad either). Speaking of Spielberg, I wonder if his buddy Marty would say the same to him, since he made a movie about an actual theme park. In short, these old guys are legends, but they're still prone to offering outdated takes from time to time.

I don't know that it's purely generational. I imagine there are a number of younger filmmakers and aspiring filmmakers the world over enjoying Scorcese's take without his clout to say something similar in public, but maybe that's just my own fanfic headcanon extrapolated from a few younger film nerds I follow on Twitter.

Theme park rides have artistic merit, I'd argue, but they're mostly there to be admired as feats of engineering you get a quick, visceral thrill from riding - the roller coaster as a simulation of risk. The whole MCU enterprise seems to me to be a marketing exercise in removing artistic risk, which has always been most studio heads' wet dream: how can they turn such expensive, time and labor intensive artistic/entertainment products into Coke? Nothing wrong with a homogenized cultural product on its face, but it contributes to a new Disney-dominated monoculture at multiplexes that squeezes out mid-tier movies that may be messier or kinkier (the MCU movies are neutered); the aspirational failures, the movies that take some kind of artistic or even marketplace risk rather than the focus-tested-to-death $150-250M MCU behomeths that cobble together a veneer of risk-taking and depth through a hodge podge of co-opted cultural references when at their core they support a status quo in which you're never moved to do much more than come back and give them your money 3-4 times per year.

Is there artistic merit in that? I guess so. There's certainly craftsmanship.


I get what you're saying. I've never been one to pay any mind to the promotional machinery adjacent to all these pictures. But then again these are in demand IPs, they're owned by Walt (bleep) Disney, and we live in a capitalist society. So open wide the flood gates. Doesn't mean the movies can't still be good. You can have gloss and substance served on the same dish. Ultimately though, it boils down to opinion. You can like or dislike comic book movies. To me, they speak to my inner child; and at their best they can be enthralling character sagas full of breadth and imagination (independent from all the CGI and bright color palettes). To someone else that may not say much, and that's fine. Different strokes, different folks. However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies, well that sounds dangerously similar to wannabe intellectual Ben shapiro suggesting that rap isn't real music. Hate to put Ben and Marty in the same sentence, but the old sucker has put me in this predicament.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:11 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:19 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.


He said they're not cinema. Just talented actors doing their best under the circumstances.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:20 pm    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.


He said they're not cinema. Just talented actors doing their best under the circumstances.


Right. That’s different from saying they have “no valid filmmaking qualities”.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:31 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.


He said they're not cinema. Just talented actors doing their best under the circumstances.


Right. That’s different from saying they have “no valid filmmaking qualities”.


Can't have cinema without the filmmaking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:40 pm    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.


He said they're not cinema. Just talented actors doing their best under the circumstances.


Right. That’s different from saying they have “no valid filmmaking qualities”.


Can't have cinema without the filmmaking.


Sure, but I think the lack of cinematic quality to the Marvel movies is pretty evident and that’s what Scorsese is getting at. Even as spectacle they’re more akin to the 1960s Batman TV show than The Dark Knight.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:46 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.


He said they're not cinema. Just talented actors doing their best under the circumstances.


Right. That’s different from saying they have “no valid filmmaking qualities”.


Can't have cinema without the filmmaking.


Sure, but I think the lack of cinematic quality to the Marvel movies is pretty evident and that’s what Scorsese is getting at. Even as spectacle they’re more akin to the 1960s Batman TV show than The Dark Knight.


Will disagree with you there, but I fully respect your position. As well as Scorsese’s.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:50 pm    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
ocho wrote:
Quote:
However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies


He didn’t say that though.


He said they're not cinema. Just talented actors doing their best under the circumstances.


Right. That’s different from saying they have “no valid filmmaking qualities”.


Can't have cinema without the filmmaking.


Sure, but I think the lack of cinematic quality to the Marvel movies is pretty evident and that’s what Scorsese is getting at. Even as spectacle they’re more akin to the 1960s Batman TV show than The Dark Knight.


Will disagree with you there, but I fully respect your position. As well as Scorsese’s.



_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:51 pm    Post subject:

I don't think there's anything wrong with liking a Chik-fil-a chicken sandwich either.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:53 pm    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
Scorcese on the Marvel Cinematic Universe:

"I don't see them. I tried, you know? But that's not cinema. Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks."

https://twitter.com/charles_kinbote/status/1179924761457115137


Gotta disagree with Marty about MCU movies being devoid of any human, psychological or emotional qualities. Maybe he watched Thor Dark World or The Incredible Hulk, or any of the lesser ones. At its best, the MCU can definitely offer rich, character-driven moments. But I can totally see why big studio mega franchises aren't his jam.

Call me a cynic, but I think the human, emotional, and psychological qualities are present as four quadrant appeasing window dressing with a touch of actual human introspection now and then from the occasional indie director turned Disney studio yeoman.

Remember the huge battle between Cap and Iron Man at the end of Civil War which tore two friends and colleagues apart and pitted them against one another in a battle to the (near) death? Bucky killed Tony Stark's parents and Tony and Steve had a whole surveillance state debate going on or something. How did that whole character arc get resolved in Endgame?


Haven't watched Civil War in some time. But I believe Bucky was brainwashed by Zemo (Daniel Brühl's character) thus doing his bidding. By the end, Bucky opts to enter cryogenic sleep in Wakanda until they can come up with a cure for his brainwashing. Or something to that effect, right? Now you've made want to rewatch Civil War-Endgame lol. I will say I really enjoyed that arc you mentioned, it was basically Cap trying to balance his loyalties to his present (the Avengers) and his past (old pal Bucky), and prevailing in spite of a litany of collateral damage. It also had some interesting political stuff (although admittedly that's not really my bag) pitting Stark's new age theory of global sovereignty against Cap's inherent moral duty to prioritize imminent peril over international framework...

Sure, these movies are made to entertain and to profit. It's Disney. Doesn't mean they're automatically devoid of artistic merit. Appealing to both the masses and to the critical observer isn't mutually exclusive. Amidst a couple of stinkers here and there, I'd argue that the MCU has accomplished just that. But like I said, I get Marty's position. To me it's a generational issue, like Spielberg suggesting that Netflix movies shouldn't be considered for awards, and now Scorsese is about to disprove that (Roma wasn't bad either). Speaking of Spielberg, I wonder if his buddy Marty would say the same to him, since he made a movie about an actual theme park. In short, these old guys are legends, but they're still prone to offering outdated takes from time to time.

I don't know that it's purely generational. I imagine there are a number of younger filmmakers and aspiring filmmakers the world over enjoying Scorcese's take without his clout to say something similar in public, but maybe that's just my own fanfic headcanon extrapolated from a few younger film nerds I follow on Twitter.

Theme park rides have artistic merit, I'd argue, but they're mostly there to be admired as feats of engineering you get a quick, visceral thrill from riding - the roller coaster as a simulation of risk. The whole MCU enterprise seems to me to be a marketing exercise in removing artistic risk, which has always been most studio heads' wet dream: how can they turn such expensive, time and labor intensive artistic/entertainment products into Coke? Nothing wrong with a homogenized cultural product on its face, but it contributes to a new Disney-dominated monoculture at multiplexes that squeezes out mid-tier movies that may be messier or kinkier (the MCU movies are neutered); the aspirational failures, the movies that take some kind of artistic or even marketplace risk rather than the focus-tested-to-death $150-250M MCU behomeths that cobble together a veneer of risk-taking and depth through a hodge podge of co-opted cultural references when at their core they support a status quo in which you're never moved to do much more than come back and give them your money 3-4 times per year.

Is there artistic merit in that? I guess so. There's certainly craftsmanship.


I get what you're saying. I've never been one to pay any mind to the promotional machinery adjacent to all these pictures. But then again these are in demand IPs, they're owned by Walt (bleep) Disney, and we live in a capitalist society. So open wide the flood gates. Doesn't mean the movies can't still be good. You can have gloss and substance served on the same dish. Ultimately though, it boils down to opinion. You can like or dislike comic book movies. To me, they speak to my inner child; and at their best they can be enthralling character sagas full of breadth and imagination (independent from all the CGI and bright color palettes). To someone else that may not say much, and that's fine. Different strokes, different folks. However, for Marty to suggest that there is *no* valid filmmaking qualities to be found in such movies, well that sounds dangerously similar to wannabe intellectual Ben shapiro suggesting that rap isn't real music. Hate to put Ben and Marty in the same sentence, but the old sucker has put me in this predicament.

American Splendor and Ghost World are comic book movies I enjoy.

As an aside, did you read Tom King's Vision miniseries that came out a few years ago? I would love to see that adapted for the screen.
_________________
Under New Management


Last edited by Baron Von Humongous on Sat Oct 05, 2019 6:37 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:00 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
I don't think there's anything wrong with liking a Chik-fil-a chicken sandwich either.


Of course not! So long as we’re calling it a Chick-Fil-a sandwich.

(Honestly Popeyes has really muddied the waters here)
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 6:35 am    Post subject:

Scorcese has been trying to create personal art through accessible pop cinema his entire career. He gave a new language to American movies while trying to bore down into issues of his own faith, masculinity, and America's obsessions with violence, greed, and celebrity. None of his movies are escapist, but even in some of his more contemplative films his stylistic brio has a propulsive, seductive, and highly entertaining power. It's usually downright fun to watch a Scorcese movie even when you want to look away.

Whereas I'm confused what I should care about in the MCU except superheroes who are kinds of brands themselves. Like in the comic books we're now going to get new Thors and new Captain Americas and new Iron Mens until the cultural zeitgeist eventually moves on. There's an overall preoccupation with fathers and sons (or daughters in the Ant-Man movies), alternative families, and a low-lying paranoia about supreme power and how to weild it responsibly. Quite interesting themes depending on how they're explored, but the MCU depictions of power tend to be muddled; the alternative family dynamics in the GOTG, Avengers, and Ant-Man movies have been mostly entertaining, but now seem kind of like wheel-spinning*; our heroes experience incredible trauma and grief, but then reverse universal genocide through time travel and sacrifice themselves because loss is something they can control - don't worry, there is no death in the MCU except those that are contractually demanded, and you'll still get a new Cap in 2025!

Anyway, the project as a whole is mindlessly entertaining, but it comes across as passionless and neutered to me. I think the actors are doing valiant work, but what are the actual stakes when everything in universe gets reset every 5-10 years by the studio execs? What's there to get angry about? What's there to get passionate about? Heck, the source material has often been weirder, kinkier, angrier, etc. than anything we're getting in Disney's sanitized MCU.

Lastly, I guess I see a $100M franchise sequel like Mad Max: Fury Road or inexpensive action flicks coming out of China, Hong Kong, South Korea, Indonesia, etc. - heavy influences on the John Wick cinematic universe - that have far more visceral, visually interesting, and coherent action set pieces than anything in the MCU, and I wonder why the movie marketplace dominating popcorn action flicks can't be so much better given the resources pumped into them. And the obvious answer is that idiosyncratic style is subordinate to, and maybe even counter to, brand consistency.

-- end rant --


* - I think one of the reasons the family dynamic issues seem somewhat stale after ten years is that the movies are far more sanitized of sex and desire than the comic books have been in decades. The closest we got to a new relationship was Banner's vague teenage boy crush on Natasha that pissed off a bunch of fans and was retconned after Whedon was dumped. And now Natasha is dead just as BannerHulk got super hot.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 7:48 am    Post subject:

My biggest gripe with Marvel isn’t that it fails to explore deeper themes than it does. It’s that it fails as spectacle. The action is of the “Biff! Pow!” variety. There can’t be violence, because it has to be PG-13. There can’t be stakes because nobody can die, and if they do die we time travel and bring them back. It’s a funny gag when Hulk grabs Loki by the ankle and slams him into the ground repeatedly, but it’s also the kind of gag you find in a Roadrunner cartoon. Loki gets right back up and shakes it off. The first Avengers movie had our heroes bashing nameless, faceless robots for an hour. For movies that stretch across earth, space, micro realms and multiverses the scope always feels so small to me. The theme park comparison is astute. At the end of Endgame when all the heroes were brought back to life my theater erupted in applause. Story wise it was a cheap betrayal of the first chapter, but the audience was at Disneyland seeing all their favorite characters.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:14 am    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
My biggest gripe with Marvel isn’t that it fails to explore deeper themes than it does. It’s that it fails as spectacle. The action is of the “Biff! Pow!” variety. There can’t be violence, because it has to be PG-13. There can’t be stakes because nobody can die, and if they do die we time travel and bring them back. It’s a funny gag when Hulk grabs Loki by the ankle and slams him into the ground repeatedly, but it’s also the kind of gag you find in a Roadrunner cartoon. Loki gets right back up and shakes it off. The first Avengers movie had our heroes bashing nameless, faceless robots for an hour. For movies that stretch across earth, space, micro realms and multiverses the scope always feels so small to me. The theme park comparison is astute. At the end of Endgame when all the heroes were brought back to life my theater erupted in applause. Story wise it was a cheap betrayal of the first chapter, but the audience was at Disneyland seeing all their favorite characters.

To that end, what recent-ish spectacle movies (say, this decade or this millennium) stand out to you?

Also open to the rest of the board, obvs.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:41 am    Post subject:

I probably won't catch a Joker screening until later this week, but given reviews and my narrow experience with Todd Phillips' ouevre, I wonder if he shouldn't embrace being the true nihilist of mainstream Hollywood directors. The Hangover 2 is not a good movie, but it is soulless and bleak in a fascinating way that most edgelord genre aping flicks by the likes of Eli Roth, etc. can only come close to approximating.

Any early Joker takes?
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53714

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:44 am    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ocho wrote:
My biggest gripe with Marvel isn’t that it fails to explore deeper themes than it does. It’s that it fails as spectacle. The action is of the “Biff! Pow!” variety. There can’t be violence, because it has to be PG-13. There can’t be stakes because nobody can die, and if they do die we time travel and bring them back. It’s a funny gag when Hulk grabs Loki by the ankle and slams him into the ground repeatedly, but it’s also the kind of gag you find in a Roadrunner cartoon. Loki gets right back up and shakes it off. The first Avengers movie had our heroes bashing nameless, faceless robots for an hour. For movies that stretch across earth, space, micro realms and multiverses the scope always feels so small to me. The theme park comparison is astute. At the end of Endgame when all the heroes were brought back to life my theater erupted in applause. Story wise it was a cheap betrayal of the first chapter, but the audience was at Disneyland seeing all their favorite characters.

To that end, what recent-ish spectacle movies (say, this decade or this millennium) stand out to you?

Also open to the rest of the board, obvs.


As far as blockbuster action goes I love the John Wick series (though I think it was time to end it in Chapter 3). The Fast and/or Furious movies continually produce clever and exciting action set pieces. Off the top of my head...the last few Mission Impossibles (especially Fallout), Dark Knight, Edge of Tomorrow, Fury Road, the first few Planet of the Apes reboots.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 12:03 pm    Post subject:

Scorsese's MCU comments have opened a strange portal into the minds of some writers and directors whose creative output seems to make more sense in the context of their reactions:
Quote:
C. Robert Cargill
@Massawyrm
Great cinema doesn't just need to make you feel smart for being able to figure it out. It should also be able to widen the eyes of a child and inspire them to grow up and make movies of their own.

https://twitter.com/Massawyrm/status/1180171489754128384

Yes, yes. Figuring out Stagecoach took a few tries, but I did feel smarter after I did. And that Last Year at Marienbad isn't cinema because it didn't inspire me as a child to make movies of my own.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 12:25 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ocho wrote:
My biggest gripe with Marvel isn’t that it fails to explore deeper themes than it does. It’s that it fails as spectacle. The action is of the “Biff! Pow!” variety. There can’t be violence, because it has to be PG-13. There can’t be stakes because nobody can die, and if they do die we time travel and bring them back. It’s a funny gag when Hulk grabs Loki by the ankle and slams him into the ground repeatedly, but it’s also the kind of gag you find in a Roadrunner cartoon. Loki gets right back up and shakes it off. The first Avengers movie had our heroes bashing nameless, faceless robots for an hour. For movies that stretch across earth, space, micro realms and multiverses the scope always feels so small to me. The theme park comparison is astute. At the end of Endgame when all the heroes were brought back to life my theater erupted in applause. Story wise it was a cheap betrayal of the first chapter, but the audience was at Disneyland seeing all their favorite characters.

To that end, what recent-ish spectacle movies (say, this decade or this millennium) stand out to you?

Also open to the rest of the board, obvs.


As far as blockbuster action goes I love the John Wick series (though I think it was time to end it in Chapter 3). The Fast and/or Furious movies continually produce clever and exciting action set pieces. Off the top of my head...the last few Mission Impossibles (especially Fallout), Dark Knight, Edge of Tomorrow, Fury Road, the first few Planet of the Apes reboots.

I get all of this except for F&F, but that series doesn't seem to be made for me.

I even liked Cruise in Oblivion and the two Alien prequels well enough.

Fan of The Raid?
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:13 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
American Splendor and Ghost World are comic book movies I enjoy.

As an aside, did you read Tom King's Vision miniseries that came out a few years ago? I would love to see that adapted for the screen.


No, but thanks for the recommendation. I'll try to track it down. I've been getting back into comics lately, finally having some extra time. I enjoyed King's work on Batman. Recently got into The Shadow upon recommendation (mostly the older pulps and some of the newer-ish graphic novels). I plan on rewatching the Alec Baldwin 90s flick, as I haven't watched it in ages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:15 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ocho wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ocho wrote:
My biggest gripe with Marvel isn’t that it fails to explore deeper themes than it does. It’s that it fails as spectacle. The action is of the “Biff! Pow!” variety. There can’t be violence, because it has to be PG-13. There can’t be stakes because nobody can die, and if they do die we time travel and bring them back. It’s a funny gag when Hulk grabs Loki by the ankle and slams him into the ground repeatedly, but it’s also the kind of gag you find in a Roadrunner cartoon. Loki gets right back up and shakes it off. The first Avengers movie had our heroes bashing nameless, faceless robots for an hour. For movies that stretch across earth, space, micro realms and multiverses the scope always feels so small to me. The theme park comparison is astute. At the end of Endgame when all the heroes were brought back to life my theater erupted in applause. Story wise it was a cheap betrayal of the first chapter, but the audience was at Disneyland seeing all their favorite characters.

To that end, what recent-ish spectacle movies (say, this decade or this millennium) stand out to you?

Also open to the rest of the board, obvs.


As far as blockbuster action goes I love the John Wick series (though I think it was time to end it in Chapter 3). The Fast and/or Furious movies continually produce clever and exciting action set pieces. Off the top of my head...the last few Mission Impossibles (especially Fallout), Dark Knight, Edge of Tomorrow, Fury Road, the first few Planet of the Apes reboots.

I get all of this except for F&F, but that series doesn't seem to be made for me.

I even liked Cruise in Oblivion and the two Alien prequels well enough.

Fan of The Raid?


YES! Iko is the new Jackie... don't @ me
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:32 pm    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ocho wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ocho wrote:
My biggest gripe with Marvel isn’t that it fails to explore deeper themes than it does. It’s that it fails as spectacle. The action is of the “Biff! Pow!” variety. There can’t be violence, because it has to be PG-13. There can’t be stakes because nobody can die, and if they do die we time travel and bring them back. It’s a funny gag when Hulk grabs Loki by the ankle and slams him into the ground repeatedly, but it’s also the kind of gag you find in a Roadrunner cartoon. Loki gets right back up and shakes it off. The first Avengers movie had our heroes bashing nameless, faceless robots for an hour. For movies that stretch across earth, space, micro realms and multiverses the scope always feels so small to me. The theme park comparison is astute. At the end of Endgame when all the heroes were brought back to life my theater erupted in applause. Story wise it was a cheap betrayal of the first chapter, but the audience was at Disneyland seeing all their favorite characters.

To that end, what recent-ish spectacle movies (say, this decade or this millennium) stand out to you?

Also open to the rest of the board, obvs.


As far as blockbuster action goes I love the John Wick series (though I think it was time to end it in Chapter 3). The Fast and/or Furious movies continually produce clever and exciting action set pieces. Off the top of my head...the last few Mission Impossibles (especially Fallout), Dark Knight, Edge of Tomorrow, Fury Road, the first few Planet of the Apes reboots.

I get all of this except for F&F, but that series doesn't seem to be made for me.

I even liked Cruise in Oblivion and the two Alien prequels well enough.

Fan of The Raid?


YES! Iko is the new Jackie... don't @ me

You shant be @ted for a correct opinion!
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:44 pm    Post subject:

High Life, one of the great movies, is streaming on Amazon Prime.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 1:11 pm    Post subject:

SPOILERIFFIC JOKER REVIEW

Saw it last night, took sone time to process, and I can confirm that Joker is a shallow, muddled, and misanthropic movie. And it's occasionally entertaining because it is so misanthropic: Phoenix gives the best dancing after a murder scene since Denis Lavant as Galoup in Beau Travail and if you ever wanted to see late career Robert De Niro shot in the face for phoning in a performance, this flick might be for you. And if you like visual gags about people with dwarfism, this is definitely the movie for you!

Overall it's an incoherent hodge podge of better influences and hot button topics from the past decade awkwardly and pointlessly tied into the Batman narrative. "Hey guys, how do we link Occupy Wall Street, Taxi Driver, and the murder of Thomas and Martha Wayne together?" Phoenix is fine, but he struggles to find depth beyond a series of tics with the weak script he's given. And watching Arthur Fleck's delusional, psychopathic descent as he's beaten, fired, rejected, finds out the truth about his parentage, and loses everyone and everything he cares about is too often a humorless slog with repetetive shots of a shirtless, bony Phoenix bent over or him in clown costume dancing as he wallows in his own crapulence. The really funny thing is that Phillips is more than competent behind the camera and the movie has moments of real visual flair (shot in lovely 35mm) but he's such a sociopath who fails to understand actual human emotion that Joker ends up being a vacuous, violent 2 hour gag about how no one likes Todd Phillips' midget jokes anymore.

Lastly, is the movie aware of Arthur Fleck's racism or is the movie just kind of racist?
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30 ... 187, 188, 189  Next
Page 29 of 189
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB