|
Post by darkpast on Feb 10, 2018 6:55:06 GMT
Marvel is in a position to take chances, we don't want cookie cutter movies
even if you fail, i would respect Marvel more, if they took a chance for once
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Feb 10, 2018 8:02:16 GMT
What kind of chance would you like to see them make?
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Feb 10, 2018 12:17:56 GMT
Ummm. What marvel movies are you watching? They've all been very different from each other.
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Feb 10, 2018 12:24:34 GMT
What kind of chance would you like to see them make? MCU could have taken Thor 3 far more seriously and made it more like LOTR as it should be based, on the story arc. Spiderman Homecoming should have been more like the Raimi movies in tone and feel than a Disney channel production
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Feb 10, 2018 13:06:30 GMT
How about make a film thats on the same level of quality as Logan or Dark Knight for starters. But we know Disney dont have the guts to make an adult & mature CBM.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Feb 10, 2018 13:20:38 GMT
What kind of chance would you like to see them make? MCU could have taken Thor 3 far more seriously and made it more like LOTR as it should be based, on the story arc. Spiderman Homecoming should have been more like the Raimi movies in tone and feel than a Disney channel production They took Thor seriously for 4 films and people didn't really like it, so for their 3rd an possibly last solo outing they gave the actor what he wanted and allowed the director free reign to tell the story how he wanted to tell it, they flipped the Thor franchise on it's head in that movie, that's a risk.
Spidey was again a risk because they made the conscious choice of doing as little already done and there by stale story elements from the 5 previous films as possible, and it shouldn't have mirrored the Raimi films because as part of the MCU specifically the earth based MCU it needs to fit into the MCU universe.
When something works it shouldn't be something else, that's what you say when a different approach is used but fails, when it works but it could have been better going another way that's what that is it's not should have been but could have been, but then that's an assumption, could a Raimi style Spidey film have killed? yeah but it could have also died a horrible death, we know homecoming worked as it was so anything else is blind speculation, and seeing how Homecoming is the 2nd highest grossing Spidey film it seems evident they made a smart play, same goes for Thor.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Feb 10, 2018 13:32:20 GMT
They took Thor seriously for 4 films and people didn't really like it, so for their 3rd an possibly last solo outing they gave the actor what he wanted and allowed the director free reign to tell the story how he wanted to tell it, they flipped the Thor franchise on it's head in that movie, that's a risk. Its not a risk at all, infact its the most risk averse decision they could have made. They gave Ragnarok the Guardian's of the Galaxy treatment, basically making the film a feel good comedy to attract the families and children audience that went to see the Guardian's movies. Its the easy way out because they know they will make a ton of money usng that formula. Ragnarok is a deconstruction of Thor in previous movies, everything you know about him from his style and personality is destroyed and made a joke out of. Its a brutal dissection and i wouldnt put it past Marvel to do the same to even a character like Cap if he ever didnt fly with audiences. And it would have happened with Wolverine if MCU were in charge. The first 2 wolverine solo films were not that much loved collectively. But Fox let them produce R rated Logan and it was a big success and big risk. No doubt if Disney were in charge they would have made logan a deconstruction comedy to appeal to the widest audience to rake in the most money
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Feb 10, 2018 13:42:46 GMT
They took Thor seriously for 4 films and people didn't really like it, so for their 3rd an possibly last solo outing they gave the actor what he wanted and allowed the director free reign to tell the story how he wanted to tell it, they flipped the Thor franchise on it's head in that movie, that's a risk. Its not a risk at all, infact its the most risk averse decision they could have made. They gave Ragnarok the Guardian's of the Galaxy treatment, basically making the film a feel good comedy to attract the families and children audience that went to see the Guardian's movies. Its the easy way out because they know they will make a ton of money usng that formula. Ragnarok is a deconstruction of Thor in previous movies, everything you know about him from his style and personality is destroyed and made a joke out of. Its a brutal dissection and i wouldnt put it past Marvel to do the same to even a character like Cap if he ever didnt fly with audiences. It is a risk as just because audiences like the comedy of GOTG doesn't mean they want that with Thor, Thor had 4 films where they played it serious or as serious as the MCU plays things so shifting him to almost a parody is risky, MOS suffered from this, everyone loved the grittiness of the Dark Knight trilogy so DC decided to go darker with MOS but MOS was divisive, plus it underwhelmed in regards to how well TDK films did, which means copying what someone else does doesn't translate for all brands, with Thor they took the risk and it paid off for them, though personally I felt they went too far and Ragnarok imo is a great stand alone CBM but as part of their cinematic universe I very much disliked it.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Feb 10, 2018 14:44:00 GMT
How much “better” can they get? Nearly every one has been a critical and commercial success. If you hate them, then by definition, you’re a hater. And what’s all this complaining about comedy in comic book superhero movies? “I want them to take chances by making their movies more like LOTR or Logan or The Dark Knight.” ... because copying highly successful movies is so risky! ![](https://s26.postimg.org/480s321zt/eyes.gif)
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 10, 2018 15:10:02 GMT
What kind of chance would you like to see them make? MCU could have taken Thor 3 far more seriously and made it more like LOTR as it should be based, on the story arc. Spiderman Homecoming should have been more like the Raimi movies in tone and feel than a Disney channel production Did you ever read the Thor comics? His first ever story was about him fighting space aliens. You're probably complaining they didn't cast a 30 year old as teen Peter and have him do Teen stuff like the original comics did instead of the lazy way out that Raimi did.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 10, 2018 15:10:32 GMT
How about make a film thats on the same level of quality as Logan or Dark Knight for starters. But we know Disney dont have the guts to make an adult & mature CBM. You mean films that only did well because a cast member died or they killed off the Hero at the end?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 10, 2018 15:12:56 GMT
Ragnarok is a deconstruction of Thor in previous movies, everything you know about him from his style and personality is destroyed and made a joke out of. So character development is bad and Thor should never change, got it. There was no risk there. Jackman said it was his last time so they decided to go for broke because they had nothing left to lose on his character. They probably wouldn't let his character dominate the MCU X-Men much at all, to make up for how badly they treated the rest of the X-Men in the FoX films.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Feb 10, 2018 15:17:38 GMT
I think the statement, and those agreeing with it, should be closer to "Wanting Marvel Films to Be More Like The Films I Personally Prefer Doesn't Make Us Haters"
You want one franchise to change it's successful commercial and critical "formula" to be more like films the respective studio (DC) and franchise (X-Men) have only managed once themsleves
Just because some films have been great being "adult & mature", doesn't mean it's going to work for all CBMs (look at the DCEU)
And as for risks...Iron Man, Guardians, Ant-Man, hiring Taika Waititi are just some a few they have taken.
Why change a franchise that has satisfied millions to make a minority of CBM fans happy?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 10, 2018 15:20:28 GMT
I'm fine with cookie cutter movies if they're good.
I'd rather see that than see a film that takes chances but sucks.
Or in other words, there's not a correlation in my opinion between taking chances (versus being cookie cutter) and quality.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 10, 2018 15:22:55 GMT
How about make a film thats on the same level of quality as Logan or Dark Knight for starters. But we know Disney dont have the guts to make an adult & mature CBM. I need to watch it again, but personally I didn't really like The Dark Knight the one time I watched it. I rated it a 5/10. "Adult and mature" isn't what I'm looking for from films, aside from enjoying increased sex, violence, and general irreverence and risqueness in the vein of, say, "Happy". I don't need that stuff from films--it's not as if I won't enjoy something if it doesn't have sex, graphic violence, etc., but I enjoy it. What I'm not a fan of is realism, especially when it's drama-oriented.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Feb 10, 2018 16:13:04 GMT
How about make a film thats on the same level of quality as Logan or Dark Knight for starters. But we know Disney dont have the guts to make an adult & mature CBM. I need to watch it again, but personally I didn't really like The Dark Knight the one time I watched it. I rated it a 5/10. "Adult and mature" isn't what I'm looking for from films, aside from enjoying increased sex, violence, and general irreverence and risqueness in the vein of, say, "Happy". I don't need that stuff from films--it's not as if I won't enjoy something if it doesn't have sex, graphic violence, etc., but I enjoy it. What I'm not a fan of is realism, especially when it's drama-oriented. I think its a little overrated as well but i can appreciate the effort put into it from a narrative and character heavy point of view. It doesnt follow the typical superhero cliches with a cookie cutter villain or a CGI heavy 3rd act.
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Feb 10, 2018 16:28:26 GMT
I don't care much about Marvel movies, they are obviously meant for younger audiences and thus kept simplistic and formulaic. To each his own.
What I strongly disapprove of is that due to recent transactional events even adult-oriented, serious movies such as Logan will be incorporated into the MCU formula and not happen anymore.
This is a considerable artist loss.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 10, 2018 16:30:56 GMT
I need to watch it again, but personally I didn't really like The Dark Knight the one time I watched it. I rated it a 5/10. "Adult and mature" isn't what I'm looking for from films, aside from enjoying increased sex, violence, and general irreverence and risqueness in the vein of, say, "Happy". I don't need that stuff from films--it's not as if I won't enjoy something if it doesn't have sex, graphic violence, etc., but I enjoy it. What I'm not a fan of is realism, especially when it's drama-oriented. I think its a little overrated as well but i can appreciate the effort put into it from a narrative and character heavy point of view. It doesnt follow the typical superhero cliches with a cookie cutter villain or a CGI heavy 3rd act. It's very difficult for me to detail what I didn't like about it at this point, since I only watched it that one time nine years ago, and I've literally seen thousands of films since then. I kind of remember not liking Bale's performance that much, and especially not liking Ledger's performance. And probably because it was so character-heavy, not liking a performance is a big problem. I would suspect that maybe some deferrals to realism was part of the problem for me, but I'd really need to watch it again to know. I'd rewatch with an open mind--maybe I'll like it this time. Who knows. I haven't even seen the third Nolan Batman film yet because I was so disappointed with The Dark Knight, so I need to watch that too. The Dark Knight is the only Batman film I've seen that I disliked, and yes, I've seen both Batman & Robin and the Adam West film (and series).
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Feb 10, 2018 16:35:56 GMT
All I want from Marvel Studios is this:
A hardcore R rated Punisher movie that uses a controversial story, like The Slavers, and is unapologetic with it's violence.
Just do that with one character, no need to change the other film's. Just give me that, an awesome bloody balls to the wall Punisher film where he kills rapist and pedophiles.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 10, 2018 16:58:05 GMT
I don't care much about Marvel movies, they are obviously meant for younger audiences and thus kept simplistic and formulaic. You act like the DC movies and FoX-Men movies aren't formulaic. Everything has a formula. Logan was fairly predictable, all it offered was blood and gore. And killing off Logan and Xavier.
|
|