I mean we already have Agatha coming back...
I mean sure...
Any amount of words.
I post what I feel and thus I use that. It's an answer, not a g@$%&&n purity thing I thought.
A-zombie,
Interesting.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And, of course, more Trevor Slattery and Morris. Those two were a high point of the movie for me.** spoiler omitted **
I loved that part, and also how the comedy bits were kept to the more comedic characters, as they did in the First Avenger (with Steve generally being the straight man, while General What's-His-Name or Howard Stark delivered the snark). It makes it easier to take Shang seriously as a kung-fu badass if he's not delivering Star-Lord-level quips and pop culture references, but to keep that to other characters he can play off of.
Agreed Set. Shang-Chi is mostly just the straight man living in a quip filled world. I mean it's not like we expect him to do quips the same way Spidey does.
I guess for me, I'm fine with the way he is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The flaw in the character for me was the lack of internal conflict. It was pretty cut and dry the path he was going to take within the narrative of the movie. There wasn't any tension in his choices.
At the same time, Simu Liu is so damn charismatic, that I enjoy watching him.
Also, I love the subtle reference of the guy assuming he's Korean.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The flaw in the character for me was the lack of internal conflict. It was pretty cut and dry the path he was going to take within the narrative of the movie. There wasn't any tension in his choices.
That's an interesting point, but with the possible exception of very early Iron Man, I struggle to think of Marvel heroes where we are supposed to be unsure of what path the hero is going to take. Not Steve Rogers, not Black Panther, not even seemingly tricksy and treacherous Black Widow. Maaaybe some of the Guardians but their schtick is that they are a bit ethically crooked. Not even Captain Marvel... I mean, she has some internal conflict and struggle as she tries to learn who she is and determine what the truth is, but I don't think for a minute anyone thought she was going to do anything other than fight the Kree in the end.
Which is to say you're not wrong, just that this is pretty par for the course for Marvel.
I think part of the issue is that most of the "difficult choices" he has made relate to what Shang Chi did in his past rather than over the course of the movie, and what he chooses to tell both Katy and his sister. There is some tension there, but it is how he reconciles with his past and makes amends with Katy and his sister more than what he chooses to do in the future.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Black Panther had the conflict of what was best for his people vs the whole world, and a decent amount of the plot was about how he was going to walk that line.
Iron Man 3 had good internal conflict.
Thor's dealt with some decent inner turmoil as well, especially in Ragnarok and it's aftermath.
Avengers 1 had internal group conflict.
These are all superhero movies, so the ending is rarely in doubt, I would agree.
In the end, Shang-Chi probably sits in the top half of the MCU for me, but probably close to the middle. This is very much my tendency to pick apart and analyze and not me disliking at all :D
*notes that this is kind of par for the course when it comes to Iron's take on Marvel movies*
But seriously, Iron man 3 had good internal conflict??! Since when?? Also not to hone too fine a point on it, DQ, but I honestly DIDN'T think Carol would go against the Kree since initially it seemed the Skrulls were the bad guys. (Not to say they CAN'T be...but comic history and the trailer...)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tony's arc in IM3 is him confronting his PTSD. I would classify mental illness as pretty much fitting nearly any definition of internal you might care to propose.
Yeah, I like analyzing the movies after the fact. When I'm watching them directly, I'm a good audience member and just experience them. I let myself get caught up in the cheesy emotions and everything.
I mean I guess...but not sure that was my takeaway for a conflict so much as it was something he was dealing with while still pretending he was okay. I mean we all do that. Does that mean I get my own movie?
Also I understand the need and the desire...but I guess after re-reading so much and watching and re-watching stuff...not sure I can feel like I can be objective enough to validate the way you decide to analyze stuff.
I enjoyed the movie up until they got to... I forget the name of the magical "just better than you" land they wind up in.
And I agree with DeathQuaker's earlier characterization of "Jackie Chan in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." That part was lots of fun. But then the power level shot through the roof and I felt it was like watching Batman suddenly outrun the Flash.
I enjoyed the movie overall, but I'm glad I saw it at home rather than going to the theater for it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only part of Shang-Chi I enjoyed was the fight scene on the bus. Everything was by-the-book, with no surprises or twists. We know from the beginning that his Mother is really dead, and his Father is both wrong and evil. The comedy falls flat, and the long car advertisements are annoying. This might be my least favorite marvel movie, although I haven't seen Eternals yet.
I mean I guess...but not sure that was my takeaway for a conflict so much as it was something he was dealing with while still pretending he was okay. I mean we all do that. Does that mean I get my own movie?
Also I understand the need and the desire...but I guess after re-reading so much and watching and re-watching stuff...not sure I can feel like I can be objective enough to validate the way you decide to analyze stuff.
None of it is objective. It's all subjective. I can only present how I see these things.
Because of this, conversations about the plot of the movie will typically not resolve. I have my opinion, and you have your opinion. My opinion does not make yours wrong or vice versa. We can both be right, because from our individual perspectives, both opinions are true. It might be that I see something new after you express your opinion, and so my opinion might shift, but it is unlikely I will abandon it wholesale. I'm fine with the lack of resolution though. I neither need to convince, nor be convinced.
Unlike a discussion about math, physics, or history. There we have facts, and while interpretation can still pay a role, the number of things that can be true is limited. How gravity works cannot be "true for me".
Thanks for the link Iron. And yes, we can both be right and/or wrong. It's fine. Also I'm pretty sure gravity works the same for all of us unless it's Magento.
Graviton would out gravity that guy up and down.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also I'm pretty sure gravity works the same for all of us unless it's Magento.
I'm pretty sure that analogy fails BIG TIME in the context of super hero movies (or action adventure movies in general, for that matter). In super hero movies, gravity is a VERY inconstant force, acting differently from moment to moment and from character to character :-) :-)
As, for that matter, are almost all physics :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paul, no I'm pretty sure if Captain America falls of the top of a building and there's no one to catch him, he in traction for months.
Tristan,
Not sure about that considering Magneto managed to ALMOST keep two planets from colliding. Graviton hasn't done that, that I'm aware of.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And Mags power has swung much lower at times. Comics powers are like the deflector dish of the Enterprise-D, they fit the needs of the story.
|
|
I mean, he canonically has a shield that absorbs impacts, so it's all about how he lands - which gives them license for anything between rolls up and starts fighting and injured and needs rescuing depending on the needs of the plot. (Theoretically up to just dead on impact, but the plot never needs that.)
1) Uh, so your answer to "superhero movies ignore gravity" is "superhero movies ignore momentum and/or conservation of energy" ? Uh, ok I guess.
2) I was replying to somebody who said that Captain America would be in traction if he fell off a building.
To be clear, I'm not particularly ragging on the superhere genre. Just pointing out that using it to try and draw a contrast between the real, external world and the internal world or using it as a place where one can rely on ANY physics is a rather silly exercise. In superhero movies (and to a slightly lesser extent horror, action adventure, science fiction, fantasy, etc) reality is incredibly inconsistent and continually bends to the needs of plot and Kewl.
I'm not saying you're wrong about some times the physics of stuff in comic books (and of course comic book movies and TV shows) can be wonky to put it mildly. But if Cap doesn't have his vibranium shield to help him absorb that kind of impact (which it does frequently) then yes he's going to be very badly hurt.
Bjorn,
I don't count BW movie as anything rational considering the other stuff that happens.
Tristan,
Maybe it does, but I've yet to see where in a fight, Magneto lose to Graviton.
Can't even make an off-handed joking comment without having to defend it. Okay I'll just go through 44 years worth of appearances (by the way have you seen all of their appearances together) to see if g beat m anytime.
Just take will the fun out of interneting why don't ya Thomas?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That example of the jump out of the plane to board the Lemurian Star? The shield remained on his back the entire time, the impact was taken by his feet. It took getting beaten up, stabbed and shot multiple times by a similarly super powered individual and falling out of an exploding airship to put Cap in the hospital.
This happened in the same movie that dropped a 30+ story building onto the powerless Brock Rumlow, for him to pop back up in another movie a year later. These movies don’t care about realistic physics so let’s not pretend for a second that they do.
Alright, Dirtypool makes a good point about Rumlow surviving a building dropping on him...
And yes I take fun out of the internet all the time.
Wasn't there a scene in one of the Avengers/Captain America movies where he dived out of a plane onto a ship without taking any harm, let alone traction for months?Paul, no I'm pretty sure if Captain America falls of the top of a building and there's no one to catch him, he in traction for months.
Captain America's resilience (along with most members of the Avengers) seems to vary from movie to movie and even from scene to scene.
In Captain America: The Winter Soldier, when he jumps from the Triskelion he does it onto his shield, and the shield absorbs the impact of the fall. Later he falls, half-conscious from a helicarrier without protection and literally does end up in traction at the end of the film. So there is evidence that yes, if Captain America falls from a great height, he will be severely injured.
BUT, as others mention: yes, he seems to fall/jump from a great height in other films, not landing on his shield, and seems fine. (Perhaps the difference is that he was able somehow to control his fall? Yes, that's a stretch.) So again--it seems to depend on the needs of the plot at the moment unfortunately. There just isn't a consistent measure for his abilities.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm beginning to suspect these films may not be realistic.
I’d double back to point out that the jump from the Triskelion elevator, the fall from the Insight Helicarrier and the jump from the Quinjet to board the Lemurian Star all happen in the same film and each jump/fall is handled differently than the last.
Real world physics is applied in these films only when it is narratively interesting to do so.
|
|
I've long held the (heretical, I know) opinion that a great many movies and shows would be improved if they statted out the characters. Either using some system or just text "Stronger than a locomotive. Faster than a speeding bullet. Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" would be quite sufficient.
Most of the time things would be improved (or, at the very least, not made worse) by more consistency and its just pure laziness on the part of the writers to make things as inconsistent as they do.
I still remember the old TV show Land of the Giants that was TOTALLY inconsistent as to how big the characters were. One week, they were menaced by a wasp. The next week, a rat of the same size relative to the characters.
One thing that Cats (the musical, NOT the movie) did wonderfully was to make the entire set the correct scale (or near enough).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It always amazes me when so many superhero and other genre tv shows don't keep a series bible that helps writers track key abilities. I mean, Jem and the Holograms had a series bible that outlined the range and relative size and effectiveness of the holograms Jem's earrings could project (mind the head writer and bible creator Christy Marx did note not everyone made use of it, unfortunately). You'd think that a Marvel movie would be above the standard of a 1980s half-hour long toy commercial. Though maybe they also have a character bible that they then ignore in favor of rule of cool.
Statted heroes is not something I want in a movie. In an RPG sure, not sure about movies. Also even Superman changes up his things more often than people might think.
DQ,
Thanks for at least the support even though dirtypool makes a good critique.
Presuming that there isn’t a series or franchise bible is a bit of a leap considering most ongoing productions generate them whether they adhere to it strictly or not.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Statted heroes is not something I want in a movie. In an RPG sure, not sure about movies. Also even Superman changes up his things more often than people might think.
I don't think whole stats are necessary but I think pauljathome has a point when noting it's a good idea to not just record, but consistently pay attention to, general parameters for powers. Like "can lift a car" versus "can lift a helicarrier" or "can run 60 MPH, but only if a na-na-na-na sound effect plays."
I will say sometimes when I've dabbled with genre fiction writing I do use RPGs to stat characters. I won't necessarily cleave to the letter of it, but codifying key skills and abilities is a good way to ensure you're being consistent when writing your character, especially during action scenes. I don't think everyone should do it, but personally I've found it helpful.
Mind you at the end of the day I understand folks are going to adhere to whatever looks cool on camera most of all. But I appreciate consistency when it happens.
Sure, but the example we’ve been using for a day or so now isn’t an inconsistency with a power, or a failure to keep general parameters straight.
One was a controlled jump, the other a leap from a building onto the ground where it is assumed but not in any way stated that he survived because of his shield and the third is a fall after having the crap kicked out of him and having been shot.
Those are in fact unique situations.
Understood, DQ. And you're right. It's like comparing Quicksilver (who's fast) to Barry Allen or insert other Flash that basically breaks the laws of physics.