Irontruth, I'm not sure if you're arguing points from a different site or post but either you didn't read my thoughts/review of the movie or you're choosing to interpret things in a way that I didn't write them.
1. I never said anything about the "time spent" on Carol/Fury/Maria. I wasn't smoking anything. I actually complimented the chemistry between the characters. I said that there was a lack of tension & threat -- none of the characters were at risk. If you misconstrued that they 'didn't spend enough time on them', maybe check the ventilation in your zone.
2. Carol's role in Avengers:Endgame is immaterial to the merits of the Captain Marvel movie being able to stand on its own. This isn't Part 1 or Part 2 of a Hobbit trilogy or Harry Potter movie. It's not Avengers: Captain Marvel. The movie needs to stand on its own, period. As I stated, if this is the 2nd movie made for the MCU, it's good. If it's the 21st movie made for the MCU, it's far from their best showing.
3. Power Level - part 1. I did complain that Carol's power curve went beyond exponential in the film. Basically, it turned into almost a straight line upwards. If Carol has to be ultra-powerful to appear in Avengers: Endgame, it would have been better had she been introduced as part of the Endgame story ala Black Panther in CA: The Winter Soldier and then have her stand-alone movie tell her origin later.
4. Power Level - part 2. First, this movie isn't here to put Captain Marvel on a power level comparable to Thor, it's her origin story. It's to provide the first entry of a female-led MCU movie. (FWIW, I've been rooting for a Black Widow movie since Iron Man 2 and I would literally throw money at the screen to get a Scarlet Witch film.) Second, Thor didn't achieve his current power level in his first appearance and in a matter of minutes of 'world time'. Not minutes in screen time, literally within minutes of events taking placing in the context of the story.
5. My complaint about villains is directly related to the lack of threat posed. I expect the hero to win the day in a superhero movie. I also expect there to be a challenge that test the hero to overcome. We didn't get that.
If you loved the movie, great. Good for you. I stand by every point of praise and criticism I gave the movie and I cited examples for why I felt the way that I did. Let's agree to disagree.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
cqc fight scenes (the unfortunate tendency in some MArvel movies of being filmed too close to the action and wanting to move the camera around all the time to prevent you from getting a good look at things).
This isn't just the MCU. American fight choreography has always been kinda bad. Prior to the 90's, it just lacked all sorts of technical proficiency. A few good starts in the late 80's and 90's elevated it briefly, but then the Bourne Identity was made. Parts of it are actually decent, but it also presented people with a fast-paced frenetic style, and that style makes it easy to cover up poor fight scenes.
There's also a lazy technique of filming with 2 cameras, it's something that's used to help catch errors, or ensure that it's being framed well, but directors have started to just use it for cutaways (before this second cameras film was actually rarely used). If you watch the Black Widow interrogation scene in the first Avengers it's pretty obvious.
But you find all these sins in most movies. The only movies off the top of my head that give you consistent wide shots of action (recently) are Mad Max: Fury Road and the John Wick movies.
Yeah. Honestly, I haven't found the Marvel movies that bad, but maybe I'm just jaded.
I'm no fight scene conossieur, and while I can appreciate something like John Woo, Hollywood movie fights didn't bother me until the early 00's (maybe late 90s, decades start to blur) when the frenetic heavily cut style got so common. Sloppy fight scenes I can live with. This approach just grates on me.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of Carol’s challenges were in her mind, which is hard to portray in an action flick.
The biggest problem with every single bad review of Captain Marvel coming from a man is that none of them seem to comprehend a narrative that isn’t meant for them.
They see Carol finally breaking free from being gaslighted by the Kree as “emotionally underwhelming,” never realizing that a climactic, emotional showdown with her abuser would be giving him exactly what he wants. Being in control of her emotions? Choosing not to react to a provocation? That’s strength most male comic fans don’t understand. They see masculine-coded strength as the only kind of valid strength. Carol not being angry and putting Yon-Rogg down in a shonen-esque battle doesn’t make sense to them because it’s not what they would have done.
They see a woman struggling to work through lies she’d been told as “bad narrative structure,” when in reality the movie was never about building Carol up from nothing, but about her realizing her true potential through seeing past those lies. Carol’s character arc parallels many women attaining social consciousness, throwing off patriarchal lies they’d been conditioned to accept about who they are and what they can do. Her strength isn’t about attaining power, but about embracing her true potential that had been deliberately hidden from her.
They see Carol’s emotions not lining up with the lies her abusers told her about being too emoional as “bad writing” or “bad acting,” never realizing that that was exactly the point. They only understand defiance as impassioned, outward battles of will and pride, not understanding that quiet, steadfast refusal to bend to others’ designs of who you should be is strength too.
Brie Larson was absolutely right. Carol’s story is not for men. And nothing proves that more than all the fanboys who didn’t understand it throwing fits on the internet.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of Carol’s challenges were in her mind, which is hard to portray in an action flick....The biggest problem with every single bad review of Captain Marvel coming from a man is that none of them seem to comprehend a narrative that isn’t meant for them.
They see Carol finally breaking free from being gaslighted by the Kree as “emotionally underwhelming,” never realizing that a climactic, emotional showdown with her abuser would be giving him exactly what he wants. Being in control of her emotions? Choosing not to react to a provocation? That’s strength most male comic fans don’t understand. They see masculine-coded strength as the only kind of valid strength. Carol not being angry and putting Yon-Rogg down in a shonen-esque battle doesn’t make sense to them because it’s not what they would have done.
They see a woman struggling to work through lies she’d been told as “bad narrative structure,” when in reality the movie was never about building Carol up from nothing, but about her realizing her true potential through seeing past those lies. Carol’s character arc parallels many women attaining social consciousness, throwing off patriarchal lies they’d been conditioned to accept about who they are and what they can do. Her strength isn’t about attaining power, but about embracing her true potential that had been deliberately hidden from her.
They see Carol’s emotions not lining up with the lies her abusers told her about being too emoional as “bad writing” or “bad acting,” never realizing that that was exactly the point. They only understand defiance as impassioned, outward battles of will and pride, not understanding that quiet, steadfast refusal to bend to others’ designs of who you should be is strength too.
Brie Larson was absolutely right. Carol’s story is not for men. And nothing proves that more than all the
So...there's a problem with the road you're headed down. I got the fact that Carol's challenges were "in her mind", ala the memory loss. But that internal struggle never really put her or anyone she cared about at risk. This, combined with no physical threat, added up to no real tension in the film.
I also didn't criticize Larson at all. In fact, I cited her performance as one of the highlights of the film.
As to the rant you posted to back up your point... complimenting Larson for portraying Carol Danvers/Capt. Marvel well, giving kudos for portraying Carol's confidence with a quiet cool in contrast to Stark or Thor's egos, highlighting the chemistry she had with the cast she had to interact with, and laying my criticism on the directors, writers, and the wasted potential of the Skrull threat, the typical Sam Jackson we got instead of Nick Fury, the eye loss played for a laugh... none of that is valid because A) I'm a guy, and B) the movie 'wasn't made for me'?!? I mean, you didn't come right out and say that, but I can only conclude that's what you mean if you're linking this "rebuttal" of criticism of the movie to me via your earlier post.
Other than saying the only real challenge she had to overcome was memory loss, I never said she lacked heroism. I certainly never said here anything about her emotions being invalid. I criticized the 90's setting because I believed the sexism she encountered in the military could have happened in 2019 as easily as it happened in the 1990s and the 90s setting didn't meaningfully contribute to the film.
If any of those valid criticisms of this movie can't be adequately defended (and since this is all opinion, you wouldn't think that would be that hard to do but apparently, it is), then sure, throw them into the "men can't speak" sewer. Unfortunately, that charge is the steaming pile of excrement that deserves to be dismissed.
Wonder Woman was a great movie about an empowered woman. Wonder Woman was also a great superhero flick with threat and tension for Diana and other characters. Wonder Woman dealt with the topics of sexism and the horrors of war. I frickin' loved it.
Captain Marvel was a decent, but flawed film. But don't take my word for it (I'm a man, after all). My wife liked it but didn't think it was as good as most MCU films. Also, in her own words, "it was no Wonder Woman" and she's eagerly awaiting the Black Widow movie. But I suppose the movie wasn't made for her, either.
I mean, Disney & Marvel should really put that info into the trailers, movie posters, comics, etc. "This media is not intended for the following genders and ethnicities...". That sounds like a very inclusive approach and a great business strategy.
I guess diversity is great unless it doesn't align with the proper 'mindset' of the 'people for whom it's intended'. And for those idiots that actually ARE looking for shallow or sexist reasons to tear down the film, by trying to lump people with valid criticisms in with them you're actually giving them ammunition.
And if, by some chance, you "didn't mean anything by it", you shouldn't have tagged that quote in the first place. It has no bearing on anything I posted in my thoughts/review of the movie. If you read my thoughts/review and equated it to the things in the quote you cited, then the problem lies with you rather than me.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The flashbacks to all the times Carol fell when younger and the finale showing her getting back on her feet was actually the only bit of the movie that made me like the character as anything more than a generic cocky OP MC.
I thought the 'gets back up again' montage was a bit much, at the time, perhaps because I had a certain Chumbawumba song stuck in my head during that scene, but it was actually a neat way to highlight that she's fought for everything in her life. She wasn't born with great power or some chosen destiny or a famous / special heritage, and she fell down *a lot* on the way, but they can't be called 'failures' because she always got back up and eventually overcame whatever challenge she was struggling with.
And the scene where she just shoots Yon-Rogg was great, because she's refusing to play his game, by his rules, and cutting the Gordian knot that he's set before her (a fistfight game rigged to give him the advantage, due to his height, reach, weight, etc., all this time, so that it was never truly fair).
If I had a quibble, it would be that we didn't get to see enough of Korath or Ronan. Both of those actors are, IMO, too good to be used so sparingly, and while Ronan got a fair amount of showtime in the first Guardians movie, Korath particularly could have used a few good moments here, IMO. The Minerva character also was intriguing, and got insufficient development. I kind of wanted to see her shoot a plane or attack chopper out of the sky or something equally badass.
Well, that and Coulson being in it at all. I can't stand that guy. :)
cqc fight scenes (the unfortunate tendency in some MArvel movies of being filmed too close to the action and wanting to move the camera around all the time to prevent you from getting a good look at things).
This isn't just the MCU. American fight choreography has always been kinda bad. Prior to the 90's, it just lacked all sorts of technical proficiency. A few good starts in the late 80's and 90's elevated it briefly, but then the Bourne Identity was made. Parts of it are actually decent, but it also presented people with a fast-paced frenetic style, and that style makes it easy to cover up poor fight scenes.
There's also a lazy technique of filming with 2 cameras, it's something that's used to help catch errors, or ensure that it's being framed well, but directors have started to just use it for cutaways (before this second cameras film was actually rarely used). If you watch the Black Widow interrogation scene in the first Avengers it's pretty obvious.
I know. And it's not like all the cqc action in the Marvel movies is bad. just enough of it and (seemingly) it's getting worse as time goes on.
The DCU has managed to have good fight/action scenes in pretty much everything they've dpme. Say what you will about the movies otherwise, the action has always been very good. Snyder, whatever faults he may have, knows how to do superhero action, and the others they have hired for the other movies have done a good job as well.
But you find all these sins in most movies. The only movies off the top of my head that give you consistent wide shots of action (recently) are Mad Max: Fury Road and the John Wick movies.MMFR is one of my favorite action movies in forever. John Wick has good action but suffers in everything else.
Also Atomic Blonde, by the action choreographer of John Wick and starring Charlize Theron, has some great fights. Very good, underrated movie.
In regards to JW.... meh. I don't need every movie to be Citizen Kane. John Wick (the first) was a super fun action movie. It did not have much dramatic depth, but it was extremely genre aware, beautifully shot, and the action was fantastic. It was one of a handful of movies that benefited from a collective viewing experience (ie, being in a full theater), because a couple of lines of dialogue land so much harder with an audience reaction (Get Out was another example of this recently... to me at least).
If you haven't seen JW2, I recommend it if you're a gamer. The action is still great, but it also adds wonderful world-building. It's a master class on how adopting a specific style and turning it up heavily does a great job of evoking a sense of place and culture.
The flashbacks to all the times Carol fell when younger and the finale showing her getting back on her feet was actually the only bit of the movie that made me like the character as anything more than a generic cocky OP MC.I thought the 'gets back up again' montage was a bit much, at the time, perhaps because I had a certain Chumbawumba song stuck in my head during that scene, but it was actually a neat way to highlight that she's fought for everything in her life. She wasn't born with great power or some chosen destiny or a famous / special heritage, and she fell down *a lot* on the way, but they can't be called 'failures' because she always got back up and eventually overcame whatever challenge she was struggling with.
And the scene where she just shoots Yon-Rogg was great, because she's refusing to play his game, by his rules, and cutting the Gordian knot that he's set before her (a fistfight game rigged to give him the advantage, due to his height, reach, weight, etc., all this time, so that it was never truly fair).
If I had a quibble, it would be that we didn't get to see enough of Korath or Ronan. Both of those actors are, IMO, too good to be used so sparingly, and while Ronan got a fair amount of showtime in the first Guardians movie, Korath particularly could have used a few good moments here, IMO. The Minerva character also was intriguing, and got insufficient development. I kind of wanted to see her shoot a plane or attack chopper out of the sky or something equally badass.
Well, that and Coulson being in it at all. I can't stand that guy. :)
I always knew I loved you.
All of Carol’s challenges were in her mind, which is hard to portray in an action flick....The biggest problem with every single bad review of Captain Marvel coming from a man is that none of them seem to comprehend a narrative that isn’t meant for them.
They see Carol finally breaking free from being gaslighted by the Kree as “emotionally underwhelming,” never realizing that a climactic, emotional showdown with her abuser would be giving him exactly what he wants. Being in control of her emotions? Choosing not to react to a provocation? That’s strength most male comic fans don’t understand. They see masculine-coded strength as the only kind of valid strength. Carol not being angry and putting Yon-Rogg down in a shonen-esque battle doesn’t make sense to them because it’s not what they would have done.
They see a woman struggling to work through lies she’d been told as “bad narrative structure,” when in reality the movie was never about building Carol up from nothing, but about her realizing her true potential through seeing past those lies. Carol’s character arc parallels many women attaining social consciousness, throwing off patriarchal lies they’d been conditioned to accept about who they are and what they can do. Her strength isn’t about attaining power, but about embracing her true potential that had been deliberately hidden from her.
They see Carol’s emotions not lining up with the lies her abusers told her about being too emoional as “bad writing” or “bad acting,” never realizing that that was exactly the point. They only understand defiance as impassioned, outward battles of will and pride, not understanding that quiet, steadfast refusal to bend to others’ designs of who you should be is strength too.
Brie Larson was absolutely right. Carol’s story is not for men. And nothing proves that more than all the
interesting...
...All of Carol’s challenges were in her mind, which is hard to portray in an action flick.
The biggest problem with every single bad review of Captain Marvel coming from a man is that none of them seem to comprehend a narrative that isn’t meant for them.
They see Carol finally breaking free from being gaslighted by the Kree as “emotionally underwhelming,” never realizing that a climactic, emotional showdown with her abuser would be giving him exactly what he wants. Being in control of her emotions? Choosing not to react to a provocation? That’s strength most male comic fans don’t understand. They see masculine-coded strength as the only kind of valid strength. Carol not being angry and putting Yon-Rogg down in a shonen-esque battle doesn’t make sense to them because it’s not what they would have done.
They see a woman struggling to work through lies she’d been told as “bad narrative structure,” when in reality the movie was never about building Carol up from nothing, but about her realizing her true potential through seeing past those lies. Carol’s character arc parallels many women attaining social consciousness, throwing off patriarchal lies they’d been conditioned to accept about who they are and what they can do. Her strength isn’t about attaining power, but about embracing her true potential that had been deliberately hidden from her.
They see Carol’s emotions not lining up with the lies her abusers told her about being too emoional as “bad writing” or “bad acting,” never realizing that that was exactly the point. They only understand defiance as impassioned, outward battles of will and pride, not understanding that quiet, steadfast refusal to bend to others’ designs of who you should be is strength too.
Brie Larson was absolutely right. Carol’s story is not for men. And nothing
...there's a problem with the road you're headed down. I got the fact that Carol's challenges were "in her mind", ala the memory loss. But that internal struggle never really put her or anyone she cared about at risk. This, combined with no physical threat, added up to no real tension in the film.
I also didn't criticize Larson at all. In fact, I cited her performance as one of the highlights of the film.
As to the rant you posted to back up your point... complimenting Larson for portraying Carol Danvers/Capt. Marvel well, giving kudos for portraying Carol's confidence with a quiet cool in contrast to Stark or Thor's egos, highlighting the chemistry she had with the cast she had to interact with, and laying my criticism on the directors, writers, and the wasted potential of the Skrull threat, the typical Sam Jackson we got instead of Nick Fury, the eye loss played for a laugh... none of that is valid because A) I'm a guy, and B) the movie 'wasn't made for me'?!? I mean, you didn't come right out and say that, but I can only conclude that's what you mean if you're linking this "rebuttal" of criticism of the movie to me via your earlier post.
Other than saying the only real challenge she had to overcome was memory loss, I never said she lacked heroism. I certainly never said here anything about her emotions being invalid. I criticized the 90's setting because I believed the sexism she encountered in the military could have happened in 2019 as easily as it happened in the 1990s and the 90s setting didn't meaningfully contribute to the film.
If any of those valid criticisms of this movie can't be adequately defended (and since this is all opinion, you wouldn't think that would be that hard to do but apparently, it is), then sure, throw them into the "men can't speak" sewer. Unfortunately, that charge is the steaming pile of excrement that deserves to be dismissed.
Wonder Woman was a great movie about an empowered woman. Wonder Woman was also a great superhero flick with threat and tension for Diana and other characters. Wonder Woman dealt with the topics of sexism and the horrors of war. I frickin' loved it.
Captain Marvel was a decent, but flawed film. But don't take my word for it (I'm a man, after all). My wife liked it but didn't think it was as good as most MCU films. Also, in her own words, "it was no Wonder Woman" and she's eagerly awaiting the Black Widow movie. But I suppose the movie wasn't made for her, either.
I mean, Disney & Marvel should really put that info into the trailers, movie posters, comics, etc. "This media is not intended for the following genders and ethnicities...". That sounds like a very inclusive approach and a great business strategy.
I guess diversity is great unless it doesn't align with the proper 'mindset' of the 'people for whom it's intended'. And for those idiots that actually ARE looking for shallow or sexist reasons to tear down the film, by trying to lump people with valid criticisms in with them you're actually giving them ammunition.
And if, by some chance, you "didn't mean anything by it", you shouldn't have tagged that quote in the first place. It has no bearing on anything I posted in my thoughts/review of the movie. If you read my thoughts/review and equated it to the things in the quote you cited, then the problem lies with you rather than me.
Also interesting, for other reasons.
|
There is a noticeable lack of tension in the film. At NO TIME did I fear for the characters in this film. The prequel structure of the film works against it in this regard.Going to pull that out of the spoiler tag - I don't think it's particularly spoilery since we all know it's a prequel.
From my perspective, this is something that usually doesn't bother me in a superhero genre movie or comic, because there's usually no reason to fear for most of the principal characters in the genre - superheroes survive.
Knowing the history of both the Kree and the Skrulls, most of the suspense happened at the beginning. I didn't know how many of the party would survive. The rest of the suspense was built into watching Carol trying to prevent what she thought was a Skrull invasion looking for a WMD. The whole movie was suspenseful until the Skrull reveal.
*Glances up*
My one note about the discussion on gender roles and points of view and such is that this is also a superhero film, and more specifically, one dealing with a character who is consistently described as one of the most cosmically powerful around. I don't mind emotional growth or development, but if you're going to tell me someone is particularly powerful in an explosive superhero setting where they will interact with other explosive superhero characters, show me challenges worthy of that great power and of the potential they didn't realize was hidden.
I fully believe it's possible to have exciting action sequences and good emotional development/social commentary/etc, in part because I think it would have helped drive home how much potential the character had been taught to look away from. (This is, after all, a genre movie. And not a standalone film - it's part of a broader universe that has certain expectations.) As it is, I still don't have a good sense for Danvers' potential - she barely struggled, and when she's tossing people around about as easily both before and after she learns to start believing in herself... well, not much has changed. The movie didn't tell me that her inner strength was good because there was never really any doubt about that - maybe this is just me being a guy, but I feel like there needs to be some kind of challenge to use as a metric for the character's physical/magical/emotional/determination-al/whatever-al strength.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, suddenly this got active!
While this is likely matter of interpretation--I really don't understand BPorter's or similar complaints that the characters and/or Carol had nothing at risk. Carol had her entire identity at risk. She begins the film having "lost" herself (amnesia) and in various ways as she tries to assert or learn who she is, she is challenged by both friends and enemies; she struggles at length (at least that's the way I saw it, in her performance and the dialogue and the flashbacks and so on) with conflicting images of who she believes she was and is.
ETA:
in part because I think it would have helped drive home how much potential the character had been taught to look away from.
I thought personally that was very evident from most of her interactions with Yon-Rogg.
Several things happen in the movie of course that completely up-end her idea of who she is and she has to start over and rebuild herself from there. She is shaken several times throughout--yes, she often acts cocky and shrugging things off but there are several key moments she is seriously shaken or distraught or frightened, and it's amply evident in her performance (IMO; she doesn't express fear by whimpering and shaking; she expresses fear the way a soldier who is trying to suppress it does, but to me she seemed terrified at several points). And I really felt like (without spoiling too much) in what was the emotional climax for me, there was a point where she could have been defeated, her identity wiped, and more or less destroyed. And while I knew she'd survive in the sense that I knew she'd be in Endgame, I really was worried for her, I really did feel suspense in wondering what she would get out of it.
To me, the suspense of "how much does she really come to know herself and does she trust herself" is far greater than, "can she beat the big bads?" I saw loads of character development and performance there. I saw loads of personal stakes. That others didn't... well, I don't think there's a right or way to view it; it probably depends a lot on why you were watching and what details you paid attention to and/or cared about.
As for people being at risk....
Examples (noninclusive) of physical risk:
- Vers singlehandedly being taken down and captured by Talos at the beginning of the movie
- Vers having to escape from the Skrull (she struggled, and her big victory moment was mitigated by the fact that she so lost control she nearly destroyed herself and the Skrulls along with the ship
- Fury in the car with the Skrull
- Carol being captured by Starforce and prepared for interrogation (she was hurt and put down real quick)
- Maria Rambeau vs Minn-Erva piloting (I was REALLY worried for Maria, and boy did she whup ass as a pilot!)
Examples (noninclusive) of emotional risk:
- Carol, basically the entire f@*+ing movie, and if you don't see it, I don't think I can help
- Carol and Maria's whole initial encounter--Maria could have rejected her entirely; Carol could have rejected Maria and Monica; that scene where Maria's like "what was hard was my friend being dead..." OMFG--that could have gone so many ways and the payoff was amazing. That whole friendship, oh my god. But I digress.
- Carol versus Supreme Intelligence. Which goes to what I was saying above... I really felt like, even if confident the movie was going to end well ultimately, she was really at risk of REALLY getting broken by the SI. And she almost was. That moment, the "getting up" moment so many people seem to write off... OMFG that was the WHOLE POINT. Because at the moment, that's when Carol realizes who she is. Who she really is. That she's the chick who keeps getting up. That was the piece she was missing. And then she blows the inhibitor, OMG sooooo cooooooool. But she COULD have failed to have that, to trust in that, to realize she could get up.... those, to me, were MASSIVE stakes. Again YMMV. All the explody bits she causes afterward? That's just icing on the cake of that moment of victory.
- Maria trying to decide to help Carol or stay with her daughter, knowing there could be dire consequences either way.
As for Fury, I think that's another YMMV thing. I loved seeing young, low-level agent Fury. He was honestly, exactly what I expected, exactly how I imagined he was going to be. I felt like he did some great spy stuff, offered some good insights, and shouldered seeing some really impossible shit he had never seen before amazingly, unflappably well (within reason), which is again, exactly what I expected of him. I knew he wasn't going to be as jaded because of course why would he be? I have mixed feelings about what happens to him WRT his injury but I don't care that much that I feel like it wrecks anything about his character.
Ironically, one of my biggest worries/concerns about Endgame is I feel like in the end there is very little emotionally at stake (same for IW before it--GREAT spectacle, but did I learn anything new about anyone I didn't know before except Thanos himself and maybe Gamora?). I know there's gonna be cool battles and neat SFX; I know people might even die. But the thing they are fighting for, is almost certain to be reversed. While I want to know how they accomplish it, I feel like all the stakes get undone when the reset button is pushed, and all the grief is for nothing because it will have been forgotten and the characters ergo won't grow, won't become new and better people for it. I am well aware others see that idea dramatically differently as well. I hope VERY much I am wrong.
A lot of this is very much perspective driven, I'll warrant, and I'm not so much trying to convince anyone as offer my POV as an alternative perspective.
ETA: moreover, I'll add, that while I am being vague in part to avoid some spoilers, I also feel like trying to explain the emotional beats I saw in this film is like trying to explain what "green" looks like to a color blind person. And not that it is a failed way of seeing, but that just the way we experience the spectrum of what's before us is different.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I want to know how they accomplish it, I feel like all the stakes get undone when the reset button is pushed, and all the grief is for nothing because it will have been forgotten and the characters ergo won't grow, won't become new and better people for it. I am well aware others see that idea dramatically differently as well. I hope VERY much I am wrong.
I think they could make it very emotional if the dusted characters remember the feeling, or even worse have been in a limbo for years. Might be too big a thing for the movies to handle, but imagine the kind of villains you could build out of that going forward, as well as what the heroes would have to work through.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So...there's a problem with the road you're headed down. I got the fact that Carol's challenges were "in her mind", ala the memory loss. But that internal struggle never really put her or anyone she cared about at risk. This, combined with no physical threat, added up to no real tension in the film.
I also didn't criticize Larson at all. In fact, I cited her performance as one of the highlights of the film.
As to the rant you posted to back up your point... complimenting Larson for portraying Carol Danvers/Capt. Marvel well, giving kudos for portraying Carol's confidence with a quiet cool in contrast to Stark or Thor's egos, highlighting the chemistry she had with the cast she had to interact with, and laying my criticism on the directors, writers, and the wasted potential of the Skrull threat, the typical Sam Jackson we got instead of Nick Fury, the eye loss played for a laugh... none of that is valid because A) I'm a guy, and B) the movie 'wasn't made for me'?!? I mean, you didn't come right out and say that, but I can only conclude that's what you mean if you're linking this "rebuttal" of criticism of the movie to me via your earlier post....snip
Frankly, I think you're actually proving TriOmegaZero's point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I havent seen the movie yet,but walking away from a fight always takes more chutzpah than walking towards one.
That said, depending on how it is done, I may have questions as to why Carol wasnt *immediately* blasted in the back, possibly lethally so.
Frankly, I think you're actually proving TriOmegaZero's point.
The point that he clarified wasn't directed at me? Sure, dude. Helluva a ball of twisted logic you've got there.
Show me how my praises and criticisms of the movie actually align with the insinuations the "movie wasn't for men" blogger makes. The things she cites in 'all the negative reviews by men' aren't the issues I had with the movie. At all.
I have zero issue with people disagreeing with my criticisms of the movie. If someone came out of the theater thinking it's the greatest superhero movie ever made, I'm glad they liked it.
I have a big issue with people assigning motives to me for having any criticisms of the film, especially given that most of my issues have to do with Fury's portrayal and the challenges facing the good guys being so easily overcome. I find such insinuations especially disingenuous given that I praised Bree Larson's portrayal of Danvers/Marvel and the character's relationship with Maria.
I wasn't going to say it.
...but yet you did.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, and I am really, really sick of this (usually American?) thing of telling people to not think but go with their feelings. I truly hate this cliché and every time it gets trotted out my enjoyment of a work takes a serious hit.
The message isn't that she is told TO think, it is that she is told NOT to feel, and that her emotions hold her back. And you have to bear in mind that in reality, Yon-Rogg is telling her to avoid her own emotions not because they are limiting her, but because he realizes her emotions could trigger her memories' return and he wants to stop that from happening, which is not a good motivation. She needs to be able to experience emotion--as well as think--to be able to recover her sense of self.
Only thinking without feeling, or only feeling without thinking, are both foolish extremes to go to (for human beings, at least).
That's actually part of the feminist message of the movie. Feminism is, IMO at its purest, the move the emphasize not just that all genders are equal, but that feminine qualities should be considered as valuable as masculine values. That's why it's "feminism," IMO, not "equalitarianism" or whatever. What our (Western/American/Hollywood?) society considers as feminine values--for example, being full-spectrum emotional, expressive, compassionate, cooperative, etc.--is often considered inferior (save in very specific spheres like family support) to what we consider as masculine values--for example, rationalized ways of thinking, only showing "rough" emotions like anger and otherwise being stoic, aggressiveness, competitiveness, ambitiousness, etc. Both values can be extremely important to have--to be at our healthiest, we need to be willing to experience our breadth of emotion while also examine things logically; we can be both compassionate but speak our own needs (transforming aggressiveness to assertiveness but not passivity), we need to strike a balance between ambition to grow and learning to be happy with what we've got. Notably, suicide rates are high among men in part because they are, as men, encouraged to suppress their feelings and discouraged from seeking help when they are overwhelmed (while women are taught to behave inversely); if more men were encouraged to value their "feminine" sides as much as their "masculine," these rates would probably go down. And so when Carol, who has a lot of really positive masculine traits (competitiveness, courage), also embraces her emotions and connection to/affection for others, i.e., her feminine traits, she becomes her most powerful self. But this never means she stopped thinking. It isn't either/or.
I guess another way of putting it, is it's about being perfectly balanced. As all things should be. ;)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is one of my few happy distractions from stress right now, can we please not argue like this in here?
Gotta agree - lots of people liked the movie, while some others (for whatever reasons) didn’t. Let’s just accept that people have different opinions and move on ...
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the reason the movie resonated so well with me is Carol's emotional journey plugged into key moments in my own life's journey, especially 1) the gas-lighting and b) having to plow forward in my self-education (professionally and personally) through all the stumbles (and falls) because I had to figure out so many things completely on my own. Plus, she defuses situations with her snarky humor, and she tends to be impulsive & quick-tempered. Hell, she's even learned to walk leading with her shoulders instead of her hips.
I've never claimed it was a perfect movie, but it clicked in to me like it was made specifically for me. And yeah, I can understand that others may not have that same resonance just because they walked a different path or just had somewhat different experiences than me. And that's perfectly OK.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I alone in suspecting that Goose is influencing Fury's attitudes towards it?
It seems grossly out-of-character from a dyed-in-the-wool SHIELD professional to get all caught up with a cuddly cat during a life-or-death mission in enemy territory, or to keep the flerken in his office, uncaged, after he knows how dangerous it is and how it contains the glowing cube thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if you're alone in it, but I didn't suspect it. I just thought Fury really liked cats, and kept it close after it a)saved them from the Kree, b)knew he needed to keep it close because it wasn't giving up the Tesseract willingly.
Mind, I am also familiar with Goose's counterpart in the comics, Chewie, who has no mind control powers I am aware of, nor has it been particularly nefarious, so I am biased (and possibly even misdirected!).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if you're alone in it, but I didn't suspect it. I just thought Fury really liked cats, and kept it close after it a)saved them from the Kree, b)knew he needed to keep it close because it wasn't giving up the Tesseract willingly.
Mind, I am also familiar with Goose's counterpart in the comics, Chewie, who has no mind control powers I am aware of, nor has it been particularly nefarious, so I am biased (and possibly even misdirected!).
Also Goose was able to detect the skulls when they were pretending to be the kree...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a normal cat can rub against you, and then smell the pheremones he left on you later, I am going to speculate that a flerken can do the same thing. In other words, Goose recognized the Skrull because they had interacted, and he recognized his own scent.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When it comes out on digital/ blu ray, someone should edit the song with that clip.
I thought the 'gets back up again' montage was a bit much, at the time, perhaps because I had a certain Chumbawumba song stuck in my head during that scene
FFft, like fans need to wait. (This was just made with the trailer, mind; I'm sure the longform will come when you say.)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Man all these people hating on Coulson. :P
Son of coul is awesome.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would totally watch Marvel's Son of Coul.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And the scene where she just shoots Yon-Rogg was great
One of the only scenes that both had some emotional impact for me and that wasn't ruined by the trailers giving it away.
I was cringing in dread of her actually accepting his stupid challenge because Hollywood.
Nope.
I enjoyed that bit.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely a great scene, carries off well from the beats they build up with both her and him and him on his own.
On the subject of Coulson, hating him is sort of like hating a puppy. I mean I'm not a dog person, but puppies are still adorable and deserving of love. Coulson's not my favorite by a longshot but I still kind of want to pat him on the head and tell him he's been a good boy.
Tangent: Brie Larson gets interviewed while playing with puppies
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Skrulls have been made into ordinary sentient beings who can be (and were) morally complex, much like humans (who have in real life still committed worse atrocities than many fictional races, and yet we still tend to think of us as the "good guys" because we're, well, us). I think for a world like the contemporary Marvel universe, that's for the better. Kevin Feige has noted in interviews that because maybe you saw some maybe-good Skrulls in this one movie, that doesn't mean all Skrulls are going to be like that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot can change in the passing decades. There may be resistance cells that are less noble. With Captain Marvel taking on the Kree, they may grow to be more militant about infiltrating planets to take control for themselves. But then, it's not like we have any real world examples of militant extremists seizing control of a larger movement, right?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am going to go into spoilers just in case anyone is reading this who hasn't seen the movie yet (even though we've been already spoiling stuff, I feel safer to address specific scenes and characters and the like...
On my second viewing, I saw a LOT more shades of gray in the Skrulls, and especially in Talos. And I don't think it's subtle or more deceptive, I think just on the first viewing, as my mind was trying to keep up with the details, by the time the twist happened, I just accepted it as I was trying to focus on the moment to moment stuff.
The Skrulls' whole setup and takedown of Carol at the beginning endangered a lot of innocents (the natives on that planet). They torture Carol. And even when they see her strange memories and realize she may herself be a victim of the Kree, they still treat her as an expendable source of information (imagine if they maybe had tried to react to her differently post mind-probe she might not have immediately been so violent). They fight her, she fights them, they flee and try to leave her on the exploding ship--all's fair in war, mind, but the point is... Talos doesn't think of trying to reach out to Carol and convince her until all other options have failed.
And even there--the way they hold Monica hostage? F+**ing CREEPY. Yes, pragmatically speaking, a good idea, and completely understandable, but NOT what I consider an action taken by "good" people.
Some of their ruthlessness is also seen aboard Mar-Vell's ship, and that scene where Talos tells his wife to hide his daughter's eyes while he kills (and the daughter pulls away to look anyway) is fascinating and complex.
I think the Skrulls were what they were--a group of people desperate to survive by any means necessary. They were desperate because of being oppressed by an even worse, oppressive government. But I do not see any black/white the Kree did a bad thing so ergo the Skrulls are good.
Carol is also inclined to believe them and side with them as it becomes increasingly obvious that the Kree mindf!++ed her. Not because they appear to be misunderstood paragons of virtue. Yes, she feels badly once she sees the state of the refugees and her heart reaches out to the normals. Maybe even she needs a reminder that Talos still effectively held a gun to Monica's head to force them to talk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Skrulls subverted expectations, but I kind of wish they'd left the Skrulls closer to baddies. They make good bad guys and leaving them as a complete innocent victims seems to waste that potential.
It's a good move though if they want to use them again in later movies. The less cartoonish they can be with the villains the better. It also perfectly sets up another character to seem like they're evil, cause they refuse to trust skrulls, then it turns out there's an actual skrull villain.
#notallskrulls