Post by Tristan's Journal on Dec 24, 2018 14:06:57 GMT
Also, I always thought the main criticism of MCU looks was that the movies fall chromatically flat with a formulaic greyscale color grading….? (personally never cared about that) And the other one was that they are formulaic and childish…? (so true)
But if you feel like a victim again, pls point out on the Aquaman doll where the evil DC fanboys touched you.
When will you finally face up to the truth that not everyone is a biased fanboy like you? 
The fact that I like maybe half a dozen MCU movies and zero DCU movies doesn't make me a biased deluded fanboy with my head buried in the sand like you
. It means I like good movies and dislike shitty ones
.
. It means I like good movies and dislike shitty ones. Who'd o' funk it???
And begone, troll! I shall not derail this thread with your pointless fanboy comparisons. Your trollish defiance just strengthens my unwavering compliance.
Just kidding, Mods and Admin are after me 24/7, pal. Just two strikes and I'm a goner, a dead man. Don't tell King Kong or any of the MCU trolls please. But into medias res:
First thank you for sparing me having to discuss that juvenile, tone deaf bastardization called Thor:Fragglerock again.
TWS is more like it! It may be the best MCU film next to Avengers. But why your random wish to compare these two? They have nothing much in common? But let's see what I can do for you, Norm: I do not think either movie is "better" as both films have pros and cons.
TWS: TWS's plot is largely a rip-off of essentioal Star Wars plot points: beginning with infiltration/order 66 of Jedi-Shield Order, Mace Fury (Sam Jackson) is assassinated, heroes go underground to strike back, Palpatine-Redford reveals himself, Masked Winter-Vader leader is revealed to be former friend brainwashed by Sith-Hydra, hero fights for redemption of Winter-Vader from the dark side, he comes back etc (see my thread on this).
As a SW fan I like that story. But it's kind of a glib MCU facsimile without real stakes here: Mace Fury does not really die in TWS (formula won't allow), people at Shield survive...nobody really dies despite the serious tone. That's pretentious. Also, Bucky is no Vader, looks like my little brother in costume (lol). Also, the Hydra story goes nowhere, in Cap3 (which is an Avengers1.5 film) they have suddenly vanished - but that is bad MCU worldbuilding and not the fault of TWS.
Still, the action sequences in TWS were solid, especially during Order 66, and the tone is much more suspenseful and action orientated than in you usual MCU movie (it's closer to Snyder DCEU movies). Not that much CGI here, which is good for this type of action film. I do not remember one raccoon turd except maybe the fake deaths and stake-less MCU formula prevailing, but: no ape grunt, sensitive nipple or hide-the-zucchini dialogue.
Aquaman I have extensively discussed in my Aquathread, it's derivative a screenplay too: it's essentially the King Arthur myth (Arthur!) blended with the MoS structure and some mythology. But all cooked up to be a fun, corny 80s action adventure with all pros and cons this entails. The unique/novel selling point here is visionary cinematography and especially
the extensive underwater world building (never done before). Also, the great action set pieces and beautiful score.
Neither of the films have deep messages, they are action films for kids, one about become a leader and ocean pollution, the other about evil organization taking over and the redemption of a friend from the dark side.
Characters: Aqua and Cap are hard to compare as leads: Cap in his 2 films is from the start a good-guy without a proper character arc who gets a magic potion to become BEEFCAKE!!! Similar, in TWS he is more of a PoV-lead reacting to a flawed new world rather than being a flawed character with an arc, his mission is simply to save his friends and do the right thing/fight the good old fight - US-patriotic WWII nostalgia incarnate (down to the costume). Aqua is shallow too, he has a taking- responsibility/becoming-a-leader arc and undergoes a showing-leniency change, but he's essentially the nice tough-guy next door type.
Rating: I think back then I rated TWS 7/10. Aqua I would now rate after seeing it 3 times at 7/10 too (I do not share your double standards and actually watch movies properly before criticizing them).
Which one is better? Up to your personal preferences. Cherio, chapio.
Let's take the most DCU friendly of the MCU movies - TWS. Tell all the readers how Aquaman is a better movies than TWS. I'm sure it won't make you look in any way ridiculous or biased.
TWS is more like it! It may be the best MCU film next to Avengers. But why your random wish to compare these two? They have nothing much in common? But let's see what I can do for you, Norm: I do not think either movie is "better" as both films have pros and cons.
TWS: TWS's plot is largely a rip-off of essentioal Star Wars plot points: beginning with infiltration/order 66 of Jedi-Shield Order, Mace Fury (Sam Jackson) is assassinated, heroes go underground to strike back, Palpatine-Redford reveals himself, Masked Winter-Vader leader is revealed to be former friend brainwashed by Sith-Hydra, hero fights for redemption of Winter-Vader from the dark side, he comes back etc (see my thread on this).
As a SW fan I like that story. But it's kind of a glib MCU facsimile without real stakes here: Mace Fury does not really die in TWS (formula won't allow), people at Shield survive...nobody really dies despite the serious tone. That's pretentious. Also, Bucky is no Vader, looks like my little brother in costume (lol). Also, the Hydra story goes nowhere, in Cap3 (which is an Avengers1.5 film) they have suddenly vanished - but that is bad MCU worldbuilding and not the fault of TWS.
Still, the action sequences in TWS were solid, especially during Order 66, and the tone is much more suspenseful and action orientated than in you usual MCU movie (it's closer to Snyder DCEU movies). Not that much CGI here, which is good for this type of action film. I do not remember one raccoon turd except maybe the fake deaths and stake-less MCU formula prevailing, but: no ape grunt, sensitive nipple or hide-the-zucchini dialogue.
Aquaman I have extensively discussed in my Aquathread, it's derivative a screenplay too: it's essentially the King Arthur myth (Arthur!) blended with the MoS structure and some mythology. But all cooked up to be a fun, corny 80s action adventure with all pros and cons this entails. The unique/novel selling point here is visionary cinematography and especially
the extensive underwater world building (never done before). Also, the great action set pieces and beautiful score.
Neither of the films have deep messages, they are action films for kids, one about become a leader and ocean pollution, the other about evil organization taking over and the redemption of a friend from the dark side.
Characters: Aqua and Cap are hard to compare as leads: Cap in his 2 films is from the start a good-guy without a proper character arc who gets a magic potion to become BEEFCAKE!!! Similar, in TWS he is more of a PoV-lead reacting to a flawed new world rather than being a flawed character with an arc, his mission is simply to save his friends and do the right thing/fight the good old fight - US-patriotic WWII nostalgia incarnate (down to the costume). Aqua is shallow too, he has a taking- responsibility/becoming-a-leader arc and undergoes a showing-leniency change, but he's essentially the nice tough-guy next door type.
Rating: I think back then I rated TWS 7/10. Aqua I would now rate after seeing it 3 times at 7/10 too (I do not share your double standards and actually watch movies properly before criticizing them).
Which one is better? Up to your personal preferences. Cherio, chapio.