Movies The Movie Thread! - Continuation - Part 1

[Styx]

@Jammin

I can name a few movies that had it and good humor, such as the Toby MaGuire Spider-man films and the first two Iron Man films. The second Captain America even had good storytelling with solid character development. Marvel movies like Thor and GoTG aren't plot driven or character driven, they aren't supposed to be and everyone knows it. That was some of the biggest complaints people had with Thor. It was that it was just too focused on making you laugh instead of getting us into the characters and existing story.

And yes the second movie is about finding his father. That's "story", true enough, but the problem is that the exposition of the characters and the story were just poorly written in favor for making people laugh every few seconds. This is the way the movies were built because there is not much substance beneath the "story". The incluing is just so shallow.

I don't usually agree with critics—most of the time they're absolutely stupid in their complaints—but they were right about this film. The narrative was lost. And honestly I really don't know how else to explain why it felt weak in the story beyond pointing out that there is very little of it and it makes up maybe 20% of the movie once we're through with all of the humor/pointless humor scenes and the forced character interactions that are, almost entirely, focused on jokes or making fun of each other. You can count on one hand how many times they had meaningful discussions with each other or real development but you can spend 40+ minutes watching them hurl jokes at each other, the plot or at the enemies. What do you really know about them [the characters] beyond the obvious big pointers of the film? You know Star-Lord didn't know who his father was and that his mother died. You know Rocket is a raccoon experimented on and he feels bad about people pointing it out, but can you tell me anymore than that? How much were you really shown about the characters against how much you listened to concerning their jokes or the overall humor of the film?

Not everything has to be serious. I know a lot of people just want some action and humor to rewind, but I just don't like comedy driven action films, most of the time at least (I liked Ant-Man but I knew what that was going in), because I like to feel connected to the world and the characters.

 

[Jammin]

So it sounds to me like you had hoped for something more dramatic. That's a perfectly fair thing to want.

While there are moments of GotG 2 that had drama which worked for me and it sounds like they didn't for you. That is a criticism I may not agree with but I do totally understand.

The part I still don't understand is what you wanted from the characters. Most characters have their own emotional journey through the course of the movie.

Spoiler: Guardains of the Galaxy 2 spoilers

For Peter it's his desire to have a dad that loves him. When he realize who his real dad was and bonus points for having Yondu pass on music to him the way Peter's mother did in the last movie.

For Rocket it was fear of abandonment. How he pushed people away because too show how desperately afraid he was to trust them. One Yondu getting through to him became a big emotional payoff for him and Yondu.

For Yondu it was finding the courage to admit what Peter really means to him and a quest for personal redemption.

For Gomorrah it was guilt and emotional insecurity. Her coming to terms with her relationship to her sister and her building attachment to Peter.

The whole thing was light and fun but the character depth was there. And it ultimately all pulls together into one theme of "Family being the people who love you. Not just those who are related to you.". Which really worked for me, obviously.

I just don't know what more you could ask for from an ensemble space adventure.

 

[Styx]

It isn't even about that. It didn't have to be this ultra depressing, drama movie you might see on the Hallmark channel, the writing itself was just done shallowly. You are right though, and I admitted it a few times. This kind of space adventure humor drive just isn't my thing. I prefer stuff with more substance underneath it which so far the series hasn't provided for me.

 

[Riku]

Which is weird, because in still my opinion GofG (and to lesser effect GotG2) have surprisingly lot of substance for Marvel films. It is just really underneath the styli shed 80s visuals.

 

[Styx]

Most Marvel movies are about humor these days so they're about the same concerning substance. The exception has been Captain America, which mostly concentrates on the story and characters. Doctor Strange tried not to focus too much on humor, too. Not that they are bad movies of course.

 

[Riku]

Captain America on the other hand, while being good, are essentially action spy films. Winter Soldier could have as well been a James Bond film. I just don't see it being any more substanceful, just because the main hero is plausibly the gloomiest of current Marvel roster.

 

[Styx]

Captain America on the other hand, while being good, are essentially action spy films. Winter Soldier could have as well been a James Bond film. I just don't see it being any more substanceful, just because the main hero is plausibly the gloomiest of current Marvel roster.

I don't think anyone understands what I mean when I say "substance". The movie could be about a purple rock from Mars for all I care. If it was well written all around, I'd like it. :P

The reason the Captain America movies have more "substance" (and FYI I don't like those movies) is because the exposition of the story and characters were handled very well. It was even out over introducing us to Steve Rodgers, getting us in his head and therefore understanding him more, making us laugh (sometimes) and taking us smoothly through the well written storyline throughout the entire movie. It didn't forget itself behind the humor or by incluing too much or at the worst time. It being a spy movie with a gloomy lead is not the reason why it has good quality writing all around and others do not. Iron Man was insanely humorous and light (for the first one at least) and it was still well written for the story and the characters involved. It was solidly constructed from start to finish.

 

[Riku]

Guardians of the Galaxy is a story of a man, who never knew his father and lost his mother early. This horrible feeling of being completely alone in the galaxy, is played up in a humorous way by making it very literal. He wasn't able to accept her mom dying and tried to even deny that and show her his anger from leaving him, by refusing her last touch, an act that scarred him with regret forever. We are introduced to the older young man, who acts very carelessly, has a lot of casual sex and affairs, and disrespects authority of all kinds (governmental and foster parent). He acts all cool and carefree, but as viewers we can see that he isn't really a bad person and is actually a rather depressed one. He has built a barrier around himself, distancing himself from forming any meaningful and staying relationships. Then he meets Gamorra, and rest of the Guardians, and slowly opens up. They all open up for each other, as each of them has more or less suffered from the loss of family. Gamora was taken young to a new "family", were showing sentimentality would be deathly. Rocket was alone from the beginning, he was created rather than born - for nothing but experimenting. Drax lost his wife. Groot didn't really lose anyone, but he is the "hero" of the film, who guides the characters to their right directions and in the end the family and loss themes of the film are played up by his sacrifice for his new family. There are more important things in life than money, sex and "being cool", Star-Lord comes to accept that he loves and need to be loved, by his new dysfunctional family of outlaws.

That's pretty much as much substance any Marvel hero really has.

I understand that GotG is not for anyone, and I still don't think it is really spectacular a script, but imho saying that "it lacks substance and is just jokes and is poorly constructed" is simply not true. It is very carefully crafted script. It has the essential tools of scripting a story; the plot points, the character arcs, the character building scenes, the character types and functions and everything. All those storytelling tools and elements used well to tell a story and present a theme and key message.

In general, while pretty basic, most Marvel films are well scripted and constructed, and that's why they have been so successful. There are exceptions of course (Thor films, Iron Man 2 notably). While the basic principles of telling and constructing a story are pretty much the same, what varies is the style.

 

[Styx]

I don't think throwing in a few tidbits about the characters between a thousand and one jokes or humorous scenes is good story telling nor do I think it makes "substance". It is about how you write it and how you expose it to the audience/readers, which I and many others believe GotG handles very poorly compared to how it handles its humor.

I suppose this is where opinions clash though. I know I'm not the only one who has problems with the movies for those very same reasons and I know there are people who love them just for the way that they are.

(just want to say that comic version Star-Lord has far more to him than movie Star-Lord by the way. The movie versions of most of these characters lack a lot of depth to story and to the characters. GotG is not the only one.)

 

[Riku]

It is just not tidbits though. Every gag, every joke, is written placed so, that it actually tells something about the character and their mental state and attitude. It's not "just jokes", it's jokes utilized to deepen the characters and progress the story.

--- Double Post Merged, May 15, 2017, Original Post Date: May 15, 2017 ---

And I'm sure he is much deeper in the comics. Most of the characters are. They've had thousands of pages to build and develope. Film scripts have roughly 120 pages and lot of that goes in to description of action and some extent surroundings. In a big a story of big ensemble cast, that's quite little time for one character. Maybe that's why Iron Man 1 is still on of the, or may be even the best Iron Man movie. It focuses really only on Tony Stark.

 

[FetherMan]

Alien Covenant

I got to see this today and I think the movie is pretty good, considering that I've learn that both this film and "Prometheus" are about more than just Xenmorphs and even, The Engineers. By the end of "Covenant", in my opinion these back stories to the original "Alien" is more about David. I say that because of the way both prequels so far, have been designed and promoted to the audience. I enjoyed "Covenant", it was entertaining and the end leaves a door opening for another film (possibly two) that could explore David further.

For example, "Prometheus" was originally suppose to be a whole different movie all together and even included scenarios from "Covenant" that were cut so this new film could be made. David is an android that becomes "free" after Weyland's death and was created to "think" for himself in all aspects like a human. And David expresses that clearly in "Prometheus" and it goes further in the new film. Much like the original "Alien" film set up Ellen Ripley to head up three more films, I think, Prometheus is doing the exact same thing or following the same formula with David.

Overall, the film is good in that aspect, but I think they way it's being promoted to audiences is going to hurt it greatly and make people "rant" over and over about pointless "issues" and "problems" they have with movies instead of just getting to the jest of whether you enjoyed the film or not.

 

[Jammin]

As somebody who didn't like Prometheus at all. And is not into the shock value gore stuff. Do you think there is any chance I'd enjoy this movie?

To explain where I'm coming from a bit here. I love Aliens and liked Alien. Read a whole bunch of Alien, Predator, and Alien VS Predator novels too back in the day. I may even have an Aliens Colonial Marines comic book collection in a box somewhere(I'm honestly not sure). But right now I'm finding it hard to convince myself that I want to go see this movie. This whole prequel re-writing the canon thing is something I'm not into.

What I really wanted was a Colonial Marines: Herk Mondo movie. And in the extremely likely event somebody has no idea who that is...

...this image pretty much says it all.​

 

[xi0]

As somebody who didn't like Prometheus at all.

Maybe we already had this conversation, but I'm curious why that is? I know it had generally mixed reviews but I found myself enjoying it for the most part.

 

[Jammin]

Maybe we already had this conversation, but I'm curious why that is? I know it had generally mixed reviews but I found myself enjoying it for the most part.

Not to sound too harsh but I thought it was just a substandard Sci-Fi horror movie.

My main issue with it was that it was that basically abandoned the core idea of the original Alien series. Which was the concept that what if we aren't alone in the universe and what's out there is predatory and dangerous in favor of a more cosmic Lovecraftain style. Where the search of answers to big philosophical questions leads to terrifying places. It fails at that. In my opinion, completely. Partly because it was so convoluted that it never sufficiently explains anything. And in Lovecraftian horror it's the realizations not the monsters that are scary. Without those all you create is boredom.

All that was really left without that were the underdeveloped horror aspects. The shock value stuff and characters constantly doing stupid horror movie crap, that only horror movie characters do (winning dawrin awards all over the place). But that stuff only works in context of a fast paced horror movie. Prometheus was a sluggishly paced 2 hours.

The result was a movie that, I thought, was worse than just a regular run of the mill Sci-Fi horror movie. Like Pitch Black for example.

 

[Riku]

Yeah, I also kinda hated Prometeus. It tried to be more philosophical and thoughtful, but all those aspects of the film did not really work. Nothing of that was sufficiently explained and the horribly stupid and annoying characters made all that feel very pretentious. I mean come one, the mapper is the first one to split from the group and get lost? Just how incompetent of a mapper did Weitan-Yutani (the most powerful and wealthy corporation of earth) hire for this voyage? Or if a tower-like building is falling, why would you run away on line with the direction the falling structure, why not turn left/right to make your chances better?

It wasn't even that impressive on the horror, design and effects side of things. It had a few positive tidbits though. I did enjoy Fassbenders android character and as far as horrifying horror sequences go, having to perform the cesarean section on yourself alone in space because alien parasite baby, was some sort of genius and was indeed a pretty damn intense scene. One great scene isn't enough to carry a film unfortunately.

--- Double Post Merged, May 21, 2017, Original Post Date: May 21, 2017 ---

Oh, and this coming from someone who has an Alien/Predator collection pack, absolutely loves Alien, Aliens and appreciates some parts of Alien 3 (especially after dwelling into its production unfortunate script history) and even kinda likes Alien Resurrection too. And I absolutely love the Alien design, the visual world created by H.R. Giger. I really would like to like Prometeus, but I just don't.

--- Double Post Merged, May 21, 2017 ---

So yeah, I'm interested in Covenant, but after Prometeus I'm not sure if I want to see it. Some part of me is really evil and wishes, that it tanks in the box office, so the studios drop Ridley Scotts planned litany of Alien films, and gives that Neil Blomkamps idea a chance. That concept art he shared looked awesome, and even if Elysium and Chappie did not quite deliver like District 9, he is clearly a man of great vision.

 

[Styx]

I really liked Prometheus, but then again, I like all of the Alien movies that have been created so far so maybe I'm just biased. haha I've heard good things about Covenant though, particularly that it attempts to return to the old roots of the franchise (horror and shocks). The only thing I'm not sure of is the series starting to focus on David. I liked his character a lot, but I don't know if it is wise to make him the focal point for the series.

 

[Jammin]

So yeah, I'm interested in Covenant, but after Prometeus I'm not sure if I want to see it. Some part of me is really evil and wishes, that it tanks in the box office, so the studios drop Ridley Scotts planned litany of Alien films, and gives that Neil Blomkamps idea a chance. That concept art he shared looked awesome, and even if Elysium and Chappie did not quite deliver like District 9, he is clearly a man of great vision.

I hope it succeeds just because I don't want to see the franchise die.

But at the same time I'm not optimistic that Riddly Scott is the guy to take the series to where it needs to be. Alien was a good movie but it was a creature feature. James Cameron's Aliens was what really got people interested in the lore. And all respect to Riddly Scott, he's not James Cameron. He's not even 1/4th of James Cameron.

 

[Wowzers]

Just saw Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales. Meh.
I seriously was feeling bored at various times in that movie. It wasn't seriously bad, but... I was feeling that if I wanted to watch PotC I could watch an earlier version on Netflix and enjoy it more. This is one time that I totally side with the reviewer's rating on Rotten Tomatoes rather than the audience rating.
Well, this week was a bit of a write-off... but next week is Wonder Woman! I'm looking forward to that.

 

[FetherMan]

I hope it succeeds just because I don't want to see the franchise die.

But at the same time I'm not optimistic that Riddly Scott is the guy to take the series to where it needs to be. Alien was a good movie but it was a creature feature. James Cameron's Aliens was what really got people interested in the lore. And all respect to Riddly Scott, he's not James Cameron. He's not even 1/4th of James Cameron.

Disagree with Cameron being better director than Scott. At least, Scott can show a variety of different genre in his works. I like Cameron too, eventhough I personally think he's last great film was "True Lies". The only thing I really liked about "Titanic" was Billy Zane's character, one of the best villains on screen and "Avatar" was visual porn fest and nothing more. And surprisingly for that film, Cameron is usually good at writing original scripts for his movies or other ideas that are relative with audiences.

Ridley Scott has touched upon all forms of films, so I can't agree with you on that. Cameron isn't even close to Spielberg, Scorsese or Howard.

 

[Jammin]

Disagree with Cameron being better director than Scott. At least, Scott can show a variety of different genre in his works. I like Cameron too, eventhough I personally think he's last great film was "True Lies". The only thing I really liked about "Titanic" was Billy Zane's character, one of the best villains on screen and "Avatar" was visual porn fest and nothing more. And surprisingly for that film, Cameron is usually good at writing original scripts for his movies or other ideas that are relative with audiences.

Ridley Scott has touched upon all forms of films, so I can't agree with you on that. Cameron isn't even close to Spielberg, Scorsese or Howard.

Well I didn't say he was as good a director as Spielberg and Scorsese. I do think he's better than Riddly Scott though.

Riddly Scott is a good director. When he gets a good script more often than not he makes good movies. The Martian was a good adaptation. The book was better but the adaptation was good. Alien, Blade Runner and a lot of other things he's directed were good too. But you give him a bad story he's going to give you a bad movie. Exodus: Gods and Kings for example.

James Cameron is a writer/director. He not only directed Aliens, Terminator, The Abyss, Titanic, and Avatar(which was Sci-Fi "Dances with Wolves" and I liked it) he wrote them. James Cameron is the complete creative package. The movies he's involved with are created and shaping almost completely by him. So his movies are as good as they are entirely because of him. And almost all his movies are at least good.

---------------------------------------------------------------

My point here isn't necessarily that you need James Cameron to make a good Alien movie or even a writer/director. My point is that Riddley Scott was never responsible for how great the Alien franchise was. Having Riddly Scott be in charge of the franchise is a problem because he doesn't actually know what a great Alien movie should look like or how to get there. Riddley Scott had nothing to do with writing in the original Alien. He just made a creature feature and it was pretty great. But I don't think anybody loved it for the directing. When Cameron came along with Aliens and created the concept of Colonial Marines. He turned it into a full blow Sci-Fi action/horror franchise. I think the Alien franchise needs somebody to do that again.

One of the problems with Alien: Covenant was that Scott had it written by Jack Paglen(Transcendence) and Michael Green(Green Lantern). That's obviously not the class of writer you need to make the Alien franchise what it was in the 90s. To make the Alien franchise what it once was you need somebody at the wheel that knows what they are doing from a creative standpoint. But as long as Scott's playing creative lead we're going to keep getting crap like this because he doesn't know how to reach that perfect blend of horror and sci-fi action that Cameron found with Aliens.

I'm sure somewhere out there is a great Sci-Fi novelist that's just dying to be that person to do that for him. Alien type books are not at all rare. Pair somebody like that up with a competent screenwriter and you've got something Riddly Scott can work with. The ones that come to mind for me are people like like Dan Abnett, Michael A. Stackpole, and Timothy Zahn but I'm sure there other even better people out there.

The problem is that I don't know if Riddly Scott realizes his limits enough to actually do that.