Marvel's Movie/TV Universe v2 (SPOILERS)

[Lonk]

 

[MirrorMask]

Better late than never, I saw Spider-Man - Far from home. Yet another hit!

Very enjoyable and balanced between the action and the funny parts (how I laughed when Peter accidentally called the drone strike on his own tourbus), and it was also a cool tour around three towns I visited. I know next to nothing of Spider-Man's mythology aside the villains shown in the previous movies so I didn't catch at first what was the deal with Mysterio, but I figured out that if the conflict was done halfway through the movie, there had to be something up.

It's also interesting to see how the mid-credit scene will influence the next movie. Liked how it basically ended the same as the first one  (but the after-credits scene was a bit lame and gratuitous)

[bosk1]

I liked it a lot too.  It wasn't spectacular.  But it didn't need to be.  It did everything it needed to, and did it well.  And it really wrapped up the Peter/Tony arc in a very satisfying way.

[H2]

All the Mysterio fights were awesome. The last twist (with the gunshot) definitely got me, and was an amazing moment for this incarnation of Spidey.

Also the endgame reference with the "hammer" and "shield".

[Ninjabait]

I started watching Runaways last night, got about halfway through the season. It's pretty good tbh. It's not Daredevil level quality, but it's like watching the better episodes of the CBS DC shows for an entire season. The music's pretty lit. Main problem with it is that the dialog sounds like it was written by someone who has never been around teenagers. I've never met a single person who talks like the kids in the show, but that's a common problem with TV and I'm willing to overlook it.

It's around the level of quality as the 2nd/3rd Iron Man movies, Cap 1, or Captain Marvel imo. Not really earth-shatteringly great, but still thoroughly enjoyable.

I'll probably start on Cloak and Dagger after I finish this. iirc after that all I'll have left to watch are the second half of Agent Carter S2, Punisher S2, and JJ S3. And Hulk and Inhumans, but I'm not losing any sleep having not seen those lol

[Lonk]

I have not seen Runaways yet, and honestly I am not planning to.

I have been watching Agents of Shield lately. I am up to the last few episodes of season 4. It is enjoyable. A lot better than the Netflix shows. I just have an issue with the lazy writing (why does everything needs to be a plot twist?).

[Orbert]

The plot twist is their thing.  The series goes on and every season it gets more and more insane, but you just go with it because as crazy as it gets, it still somehow makes sense.  I don't see the writing as lazy; in fact, I think it's pretty good and it keeps getting better.  These last few seasons have been completely nuts, but tons of fun.  I've been with AoS since the pilot, and will definitely be with it til the end.

[H2]

AoS has stayed at roughly the same quality or has improved as the seasons have gone on. Working through S6 and it's just...insane...

[Dream Team]

One of the VERY few things that bother me about the MCU is that it seems the screenwriters did not consult astronomers/physicists/etc when trying to convey the scope of galaxies/the universe and being consistent about it. Let me explain.

Example 1: in Infinity War, Strange's assistant says the infinity stones were "scattered throughout the virgin universe" - yet they all ended up in a relatively small portion of 1 galaxy amongst billions of galaxies?!? Would have made much more sense for them to explain how they got scattered throughout one galaxy.

Example 2: in Endgame, Danvers says "there are a lot of planets in the universe and they didn't have you guys (Avengers)". Again, would have made much more sense to confine her travels to just within the Milky Way galaxy and its presumed millions of planets. For one thing, intergalactic travel is a whole different ballgame than interstellar travel within one galaxy. Unless she was using portals and wormholes exclusively, there's no way her statement makes sense. Which leads to . . .

Example 3: from Endgame again, she says "you might not see me for a long time". Yeah but . . . she obviously can travel much faster than the speed of light, and could presumably be back on earth any time she wanted depending on how fast she traveled. That scene depicts the passage of time at super-light speeds as concurrent with normal earth time passage which again is totally against our understanding of that based on Einsteinian theory. One day at super-light speed does not equal one day on earth. This is proven when she rescues Stark, she is able to whisk him back to earth almost instantaneously judging from his log entries about the amount of days elapsed since Thanos' snap and the Avengers saying the same amount of time had passed on earth (about 3 weeks).

You sciencey types, please chime in and either confirm or correct me on these points. Again I love these movies immensely but I feel like when they went to outer space they kind of lost a logical grasp of the space/time continuum a little bit.

[bosk1]

Dude...have you even SEEN Hot Tub Time Machine?

[jingle.boy]

Well, in the comics, Titan is a moon of Saturn.  So let's go with that.  Also, I thought that the Kree did have wormhole technology for space travel - wasn't that shown at the beginning of Ms Marvel?

But yeah... I think we need to suspend believe on every and anything related to space travel in any movie - except flicks like Interstellar and Ad Astra that try to explain it the way actual physics might.

[Orbert]

Well, in the comics, Titan is a moon of Saturn.  So let's go with that.

Titan is a moon of Saturn.  I mean, in reality as well as the comics.  Otherwise I'm fine with everything you said.  I think to the average viewer, "the galaxy" and "the universe" might technically be different but are essentially interchangeable because they're "everything out there, so vast and huge that you can't imagine it, so don't even try".

Dream Team is right; just saying "galaxy" instead of "universe" those few times would actually make a lot more sense, but hey, it's not just Hollywood, it's Hollywood based on comic books.  That's like two degrees of Suspend Your Disbelief right there, not to mention all the other stuff.

[Adami]

First off, having watched Ad Astra, but not knowing much about astrophysics, I get the feeling that it does NOT have any sense of accuracy to it.



Now, Dream Team, while the stuff you mentioned doesn't bug me, it did remind me of a typical sci-fi mistake that always bugs me.

Calling things solar systems or suns that are not in our solar system. Sol is the god damn name. There's literally 1 sun and 1 solar system. Beyond that, there are stars and star systems who may have their own names.

So any time I'm watching any sci-fi thing and they say something like "It's entered the Telaxian solar system but their twin suns are going to explode!" I get annoyed.

[Adami]

Ant-Man 3 is a go. Peyton Reed returning to direct.








Cool.






Let’s hope they put as much thought into the story as they do into the action and humor this time.

[H2]

Just wanted to share something that you guys will understand. I'm in academia (humanities). I'm friends with a lot of philosophers on facebook. I can't tell you how many "the Marvel movies are not real art" rants I've seen. "It's all cheap thrills and explosions." "Our culture needs to get back to The Good." Etc. It drives me crazy. Granted, these folks tend to be myopic moralistic 'old souls'. Holy hannah, though.

[Orbert]

Did someone create it for someone's enjoyment, be their own or someone else's?  Then it's art.

It may not be within any particular person's "standards", but those standards are 100% subjective.  The fact that it was created by someone and others enjoy it is all that matters.

[Zook]

I could smear my own shit all over the wall, and it would still be art. If paint splotches can be in a museum, surely someone will enjoy my shit wall.

[Orbert]

Exactly.

[hefdaddy42]

Just wanted to share something that you guys will understand. I'm in academia (humanities). I'm friends with a lot of philosophers on facebook. I can't tell you how many "the Marvel movies are not real art" rants I've seen. "It's all cheap thrills and explosions." "Our culture needs to get back to The Good." Etc. It drives me crazy. Granted, these folks tend to be myopic moralistic 'old souls'. Holy hannah, though.

Yeah, that's where Martin Scorsese is coming from.

I disagree with him, too.

[The Walrus]

Scorcese says there's nothing at risk in Marvel/comic films and he's flat out wrong about that, too. He says it's all just variations on a theme, which is ironic considering this man is arguably most well known because of his tendency to release fairly similar mobster films that even use the same actors in some cases. It's almost as if he's never heard of the 'seven basic plots.' In short he sounds like a grumpy old man who just doesn't like superheroes. He should just stick to talking about his upcoming umpteenth mobster flick with De Niro and Pesci once again

[Lonk]

I agree with you guys, except with the idea of what art is.

[Zantera]

I think the Marty situation is 2 different types of arguments that were kinda mixed into one confusing rant, the first point being that because of superhero movies owning the market it makes original content harder to get out there (which I do think comes with some salt about Irishman getting a very LIMITED cinematic release before being dumped on Netflix) and the other point is more of an opinion that superhero movie are just dumb schlock entertainment that requires no brain to understand and have zero depth to them.

Now I kinda agree with his first point a bit but it's hard to really blame Disney or the other big companies because it's a big trend right now and while they make these movies, the fact remains that the audience want these movies so naturally they are trying to cash in. I do fear that at some point in the future there will only be giant cinemaplexes showing 8 screenings of Black Panther 3, 4 screenings of the new Pixar movie and that 'indie' movies are entirely relegated to direct-to-streaming, so I can understand his fear, but I think bashing these movies is where he comes off as a bit clueless and not really well informed. It's a big genre and you have movies like Logan and Joker that are a lot closer to 'indie films' than they are to the big spectacle superhero blow-up action movies like Avengers for example. Just blatantly dismissing a whole genre seems a bit weird to me.

In the end I think as with other types of movies whether it's horror movies, comedies, action movies or dramas, there will be some amazing ones that transcend the genre they are and just become 'great movies' and there will also be garbage ones and everything in between.

[hefdaddy42]

Yeah, he seems to be singling out Marvel as a genre of films that he doesn't think are art.

But the overwhelming majority of films that are produced are genre films of one kind or another.  Such as, for example, mob movies.

[ariich]

Now I kinda agree with his first point a bit but it's hard to really blame Disney or the other big companies because it's a big trend right now and while they make these movies, the fact remains that the audience want these movies so naturally they are trying to cash in.

I also only agree a bit, and the reason is that Scorcese and others who make this argument assume that someone going to see a Marvel movie is doing so instead of going to see what he calls an "art" movie. And I'm sure there's a bit of that, which is why I agree a bit. But I'm not convinced about how much that happens.

Take me as an example. I have streaming services and watch most movies and TV through that. Occasionally I might buy something on DVD/Bluray. I almost never go to the cinema - the cost and the time commitment aren't a priority when I have all these other avenues. When I go and see Marvel in theatres, that's not in competition with other theatrical releases, it's in competition with streaming something at home, or doing something else entirely with my time. What the Marvel movies are doing is actually (occasionally) getting me out to the cinema again and reminding me of what an enjoyable experience it can be.

[Zantera]

I also only agree a bit, and the reason is that Scorcese and others who make this argument assume that someone going to see a Marvel movie is doing so instead of going to see what he calls an "art" movie. And I'm sure there's a bit of that, which is why I agree a bit. But I'm not convinced about how much that happens.

This is a great argument that I also have thought about but kinda forgot to expand on in my original post. The big blockbuster movies - in this current time - the superhero movies have a massive appeal to people in all ages and all demographics and in the cinema you will see a grandma taking her grandchild, you will see a group of middle aged men, you will see teenagers and everything else. If for example Joker wasn't showing in the cinema, there's no reason to believe those people would watch The Lighthouse instead - because a black and white weird movie starring only 2 actors is not for everyone.

As long as there can be a balance and we still get 'indie films' in cinemas too, I'm happy.

[Orbert]

Scorcese and Coppola and those guys put a lot of effort into creating what they believe to be a higher form of art, and are bummed when the new Avengers movie takes in 10 times as much money at the box office.  To me it's kinda like prog bands with killer chops and amazing epic tunes watching some auto-tuned teenager filling stadiums, while they play to half-filled clubs.  Too bad!  That's the nature of art.

Sure, I'd like to see great artists make money and get their due.  I wouldn't deny them that.  But there's an argument that "true artists" do exactly what they want and don't give a damn how popular it is; so if you're jealous of someone else's success, that's not the artist in you feeling it, it's the capitalist.  Marty and Francis will just have to be happy with the critical acclaim and all those Oscars in the trophy case.

[gmillerdrake]

creating ............. a higher form of art

This is also a double edged sword so to speak. In my eyes there are a lot of 'fans' of certain franchises.....take Star Wars for example......that get all huffy and puffy when these latest movies aren't hitting certain points or seem too 'simple' as if they are supposed to reach some higher form of art rather than just being what they are....entertaining stories. I for one am not looking for 'Godfather' level acting/writing when it comes to the latest installment of SW or Marvel. Just want to 'see' a spectacle with some nice progression.

[lordxizor]

I for one am not looking for 'Godfather' level acting/writing when it comes to the latest installment of SW or Marvel. Just want to 'see' a spectacle with some nice progression.

This is true for me for the most part too, but it is pretty awesome when a blockbuster movie also has pretty heavy artistic chops as well. Doesn't happen often.

[gmillerdrake]

I for one am not looking for 'Godfather' level acting/writing when it comes to the latest installment of SW or Marvel. Just want to 'see' a spectacle with some nice progression.

This is true for me for the most part too, but it is pretty awesome when a blockbuster movie also has pretty heavy artistic chops as well. Doesn't happen often.

Totally agree. If your big blockbuster happens to have more substance than normal it's certainly a plus. I'm just not heading into those expecting them to. Like with the anticipated AVATAR sequels....I'm not expecting 'Apocolypse Now' level stuff. I'm expecting a visual spectacle....some cool action sequences....and a story that moves along but isn't looking to re-imagine anything.

Honestly, I think 'The Last Jedi' is the best SW film when looking at adding that extra 'artistic chop' to the story when looking at the movie as a whole. I 'get' the knocks against it.....I'm not saying this to drum up or rehash why people think it sucks.....I just thought that Rian Johnson gave it more of a 'real' movie feel with some of the undertones and things he explored than any of the other SW movies had done. I thought there was more going on there than surface level...which was cool. 

[Adami]

While I totally respect you guys just wanting a spectacle, I would hate for that to become the standards of the film makers, you know?

I'd hate it to become "Well....let's just give them lots of pretty stuff to look at, no one cares about the other stuff anyway"

I want them to try their best. I want them to put art into it, put themselves into it, put passion into it. Not just hit a bare minimum "lots of pretty stuff" quota and move on to the next one.

Luckily, for the most part, I feel like Marvel has not been a "let's just do spectacle and make our money" company. Even if they don't always succeed, with a few exceptions, there seems to be a strong desire for great character work, story work, emotional arcs, and so forth. So I'm cool with Marvel in that sense.

DC on the other hand? Ehhhhhh

Star Wars recently? Ehhhhh

Transformers? Best not talked about (Except for Bumblebee)

Actually, Transformers is a good example. It is 100% spectacle and nothing else, to the detriment of everything it COULD be. Just because something isn't Godfather or Apocalypse Now, doesn't mean it has to be beautiful garbage. I do still expect well written and well directed movies with strong characters and some kind of mythos to it. You know? If you're kid can't write Shakespeare, you don't settle for F papers, you strive for the best you can do. Most film makers simply aren't capable of Scorsese or Coppola level film making, no problem, but be the best film makers, directors, writers, actors, producers, whatever that you CAN be.

[gmillerdrake]

While I totally respect you guys just wanting a spectacle, I would hate for that to become the standards of the film makers, you know?

I'm not saying that's all I would want from these types of films. As you said.....Transformers is the glaring example. Real 'pretty' but that's it. I think Marvel has done a good job of finding a happy medium between the glitz and glamour of the spectacle and still developing characters. And, I fall on the side of the recent SW films have done just the same. I just think SW in particular is held to an impossible standard thanks to 30+ years of that franchise being romanticized in fans minds into something it probably never was in the first place.

I think the next 'level' of movie making so to speak is going to be when you find a way to combine the 'spectacle' with an amazing script/acting performance/character development etc etc.

[hefdaddy42]

Honestly, I think 'The Last Jedi' is the best SW film when looking at adding that extra 'artistic chop' to the story when looking at the movie as a whole.

I agree with you.

[faizoff]

Yup put me in the pile of those who absolutely LOVED The Last Jedi, I do admit it isn't without issues but whatever issues are there doesn't detract from the overall enjoyment of the movie for me.

Since this is a Marvel thread. I checked out the deleted scenes of Endgame with commentary on Disney+ I believe they are all different than the ones on the Blu-ray. One in particular with Tony Stark and the snap was really intriguing.

[Zook]

So, the female power scene in Endgame never bothered me. It's a bit silly that the female heroes kind of all just gravitate to that spot instantly (we aren't shown just how big the battlefield is, but it looks pretty big) but if I had one gripe in Endgame, and this includes the female power scene, it's that the heroes' masks are constantly being removed. This happened a lot in Sam Raimi's Spider-man trilogy. Spider-man kept taking his mask off for no reason, but in the final battle in Endgame, they were doing the same thing. Most of the time it was completely unnecessary. I can understand if people aren't familiar with Rescue, like myself, but she does it again when the women group up. Same with The Wasp. Did Black Panther need to remove his mask to tell Hawkeye to give him the gauntlet? You're in the middle of a battlefield. Why do you keep removing your protective headgear? Some exceptions, but it's still annoying. I don't expect Peter to reconnect with Tony while wearing his mask, or Star Lord with Gamora, but after so many scenes of the heroes removing their masks, it just drives me nuts.

[gzarruk]

Maybe just to save a few bucks on CGI?