View Single Post
Old 05-11-2011, 10:38 PM   #271
kedrell
PopularisCulturaFanaticus
 
kedrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern California
Posts: 18,103
Default Re: Is Thor the best Marvel Studios movie so far?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DACrowe View Post
In a nutshell though, you were saying that SM2 and X2 were not as entertaining to you 2-3 years later after multiple viewings, no?
No, I was describing how the general tone of everyone around here changed in that time. I was never enamoured with them to the extent that most seemed to be initially around here. Did I like them more upon first viewing? Yes, but with each that was the best reaction they ever got out of me. Repeat viewings did nothing but lessen them for me(as opposed to the MCU films and a few rare others which got better and more enjoyable as I saw them more).

Quote:
The point still stands that movies meant for quick consumption (like superhero films) are not going to hold up over intense scrutiny and years of viewing. You may prefer the MCU films, but they lose their luster too. IM1 in many ways is just following the formula of SM1 which followed the formula of STM. It's a vicious cycle.
If executed with excellence I'd say they CAN hold up and the truly good ones do just that. And the MCU films may indeed lose their luster in time(and as better iterations supplant them) but I for one haven't seen it yet. There are a few non-MCU superhero films that I'd say also have achieved this(at least for me). I don't count any of the Raimi or Singer superhero films among them though.

Quote:
Also, I'm not dissing all MCU films. I like IM1 and Thor and I appreciate what they're trying to do by making one connected movie universe. But there is a degree of franchise control to these films where they always have to be hyping and marketing the next one a year or two down the line, and also a sense that the directors are being restricted from leaving any sense of auteur stamp. It limits them creatively, in my opinion.
Firstly, auteur's have largely been responsible for the crappiest one's we've ever gotten. They have a tendancy to think they're smarter than the material and that it's fine to change things based on their own sensibilities. That's not to say they all were like that, but I'd say the lion's share were.

I virtually never go see a superhero movie because I'm a fan of the director. I either am interested in the property enough to check it out or I'm not. But then I have never claimed to be a film fan. I'm just a fan of this genre in film. 99.9% of films that make it to the Oscars I couldn't be bothered to even care about, much less watch(even if they were free). So that's where I'm coming from.

But back to creative limitation, it really only seems to be this way with the films leading up to the Avengers(which is by no means the end of the road for any of them). I think afterward such concerns will disipate even though the MCU will still be chugging along. It actually will end up allowing even greater creative possibilities in the long run(creative freedom such as the early comics writers had to pick from a large universe of possibilities in telling their stories).

And even with all these pre-Avengers films so far I'd say that the trade off in constraints has been good for the films as it has kept the filmmakers focused and not prone to going off into unnecessary and useless tangents that they otherwise might have played around with. But then, I don't trust auteurs to put the properties they've been made stewards of ahead of their own artsy-fartsy egos.

__________________
Apparently freedom costs more than $1.05
kedrell is offline   Reply With Quote