OFFICIAL: Best CBM of 2014 thread (so far)

[Human Torch]

Having watched DOFP for the first time since the theater,yesterday.I'm pretty confident in my vote for it as best picture this year.I take nothing away from Cap 2 though.Another Great film.

The only thing I disliked was the implication that Raven is going to be responsible somehow for what happens to Wolverine.

 

[Heretic]

I know I'm in the minority, but lord...the more time that is put between me and my viewing of Days of Future Past, the more I dislike it.

 

[The Joker]

DOFP gets better and better with each viewing for me. But then so does Cap 2 and GOTG. But DOFP gives me the most joy, and ticked more of the right boxes for me.

 

[DA_Champion]

I don't relate to being able to enjoy a movie on 10 watches.

 

[The Joker]

If a movie is good and enjoyable then replay value should be a factor in it.

 

[DA_Champion]

I know, but for me re-watch value means being able to watch it two or three times within the span of two or three years.

 

[Lorus]

It´s a formula because those are elements that Marvel makes sure they have in all their movies. Those are also elements that make a huge difference in the way the movies are received.

The combination of great looking actors + well established comic book characters + tons action and visual effects + Simple narrative + humour and characters acting very casual is actually something that wasn´t being really fully explored before Marvel came into the game. So, in a way, it´s their formula. Their way of doing things. They know it works, so they apply it to all their movies.

It’s not a formula because you can’t take those generalised statements about what Marvel films are and then turn them into a film. The reason why is that all these qualities you picked out, which don’t even apply to every Marvel film anyway, are just comments about the film’s texture, not its content. Films are exercises in storytelling, not tone or form, and considering that your formula doesn’t account for any storytelling technique, I fail to see how it could be very useful.

Also, how can you honestly say that ‘nobody was fully exploring the concept of good looking actors, action and humour’ before Marvel? That’s blatantly not true. Blockbusters have existed for going on forty years, probably longer in some form or another. It’s true that these days, blockbusters tend to take the form of comic book adaptations, but the characters are hardly universal draws (GOTG anyone?) and the blockbusters of old made just as much money as the ones today.

It´s boring and predictable because, if you remove all the "distractions", all those Marvel movies boil down to the same: Simplistic storylines with simplistic resolutions and massive amounts of action convering up the lack of a more elaborated and carefully developed plot. Sure, i can´t predict everything that happens in these movies, but all their unpredictable moments fail to change the predictable direction of the story and its characters.

Quite frankly, it’s pretty surprising that you can stand the Nolan batfilms given your hatred of ‘predictable’ endings like Batman beats the bad guys in an action scene. Sure they all have a few complications along the way, but are they all not just ‘distractions’ as you put it? What makes those films so different to you?

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

People keep saying this but look at Iron Man 3. That movie was all Shane Black, and plenty of fans complained about that. Can't win or lose sometimes. I don't see how with IM3, Cap 2 and GOTG that people can use that argument like it effects every film. 3 of their past 4 films clearly had heavy input from the Directors. Or how TDW was the movie that taught them anything about giving directors more creative control when it's in the middle of IM3 and WS. Some get the power and some don't.

Was Green Lantern really given more freedom then IM3, IM, The Avengers, GOTG, Winter Soldier and GOTG? And if so how was that a good thing?

I wouldnt say IM3 was all Shane Black, not at all, I'd say it was more Marvel than anythng, Shane Black has crass and crude humour in his movies, there was barely any of that in IM3, it was the same stuff as in the previous movies, i.e, a couple of crass and crude moments here and there.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Having watched DOFP for the first time since the theater,yesterday.I'm pretty confident in my vote for it as best picture this year.I take nothing away from Cap 2 though.Another Great film.

The only thing I disliked was the implication that Raven is going to be responsible somehow for what happens to Wolverine.

That wasnt the implication at all, she spent the whole movie stopping experiments on mutants and wanting to kill Trask for the experiments he already had done. The implication at the end was that she was STOPPING what was going to happen to Wolverine by impersonating Stryker. Wolverine will now get his adamantium a different way in the next movie.

DOFP gets better and better with each viewing for me. But then so does Cap 2 and GOTG. But DOFP gives me the most joy, and ticked more of the right boxes for me.

Agreed, after a couple of re-watches though, I find myself having little want to watch TWS again. Were as with GOTG and DOFP I cant stop watching them. I just find DOFP the better movie out of the two, though only slightly.

 

[Erzengel]

I still haven't bought DOFP. Already have TWS and GOTG. Saw TWS at least 4-5 times. GOTG twice. DOFP 1 and a half. Caught the end of it on a cruise.

 

[Victarion]

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, then Guardians of the Galaxy. Those are the only ones I saw this year.

 

[The Endless]

I wouldnt say IM3 was all Shane Black, not at all, I'd say it was more Marvel than anythng, Shane Black has crass and crude humour in his movies, there was barely any of that in IM3, it was the same stuff as in the previous movies, i.e, a couple of crass and crude moments here and there.

The structure of the plot, the dialogue and the way the film was directed was pure Shane Black. Plus it was set during Christmas.

Crass and crude humour aren't the distinctive marks of Shane Black's style.

 

[Killer]

It’s not a formula because you can’t take those generalised statements about what Marvel films are and then turn them into a film. The reason why is that all these qualities you picked out, which don’t even apply to every Marvel film anyway, are just comments about the film’s texture, not its content. Films are exercises in storytelling, not tone or form, and considering that your formula doesn’t account for any storytelling technique, I fail to see how it could be very useful.

Also, how can you honestly say that ‘nobody was fully exploring the concept of good looking actors, action and humour’ before Marvel? That’s blatantly not true. Blockbusters have existed for going on forty years, probably longer in some form or another. It’s true that these days, blockbusters tend to take the form of comic book adaptations, but the characters are hardly universal draws (GOTG anyone?) and the blockbusters of old made just as much money as the ones today.

Nobody was really exploring the concept of doing all those things with popular comic book super heroes.

You can call it whatever you want. If you don´t wanna call it formula, call it anything else you want. But the fact is that almost all Marvel films share very similar elements, that happen to be very audience-friendly.

You have a great looking super-hero, cracking jokes, acting very casual, and that´s something that attracts people. Especially those who aren´t too into the SH genre. I know plenty of people, especially girls who don´t like action or super heroes but love Iron Man because he is funny and charming and the movies have a plenty of comedic moments mixed with action scenes. This formula appeals to all kinds of audiences. It´s light, it´s simple, it´s funny, it´s full of amazing looking men and women, feels very juvinile and doesn´t create much controversy.

You don´t wanna call it formula, fine. But i go watch a Marvel movie and i know exactly what to expect. And i feel that all those elements have been placed in the movie in a very strategic way.

Quite frankly, it’s pretty surprising that you can stand the Nolan batfilms given your hatred of ‘predictable’ endings like Batman beats the bad guys in an action scene. Sure they all have a few complications along the way, but are they all not just ‘distractions’ as you put it? What makes those films so different to you?

Batman Begins is quite simple, but TDK has a very unusual ending, where things don´t end up exactly well for the hero and for those he tries to protect. TDKR is also original in the sense that 1) I imagined everything and couldn´t predict what really ended up happening 2) It offers me a big mix of emotions. We´ve the shock of his death, the relieve of him being alive and happy and the surprise of Blake taking his place. It´s a very dynamic type of ending that feels very different from most SH movies. Oh, and it´s powerful. It´s one of the strongest points of the film, instead of one of the weakest, like what happens in most films.

 

[Lorus]

I wouldnt say IM3 was all Shane Black, not at all, I'd say it was more Marvel than anythng, Shane Black has crass and crude humour in his movies, there was barely any of that in IM3, it was the same stuff as in the previous movies, i.e, a couple of crass and crude moments here and there.

So, the only thing that defines Shane Black as a creative is crude jokes? Crude jokes which you admitted were in the movie? Obviously it's not going to be quite as crass as his other projects because the audience is different. However, IM3 is chock full of other tropes that define a lot of Black's work including: Christmas setting, noir styled bookend narration, atypically characterised henchman with quirky talents, story takes the form of a mystery, general anarchic glee at turning genre tropes on their head (the Mandarin twist, Tony's attitude toward Harley) and all those are just off the top of my head.

I really don't see how anyone could justify saying IM3 doesn't feel like a Shane Black film. You only have to watch one of Favreau's IM films and then Black's back to back and the difference is night and day.

 

[Human Torch]

That wasnt the implication at all, she spent the whole movie stopping experiments on mutants and wanting to kill Trask for the experiments he already had done. The implication at the end was that she was STOPPING what was going to happen to Wolverine by impersonating Stryker. Wolverine will now get his adamantium a different way in the next movie.

Oh yeah,I get that.I'm just saying his original origin was more compelling than whatever they plan to do now.I could've done without it.But it is what it is.

 

[Lorus]

Nobody was really exploring the concept of doing all those things with popular comic book super heroes.

You can call it whatever you want. If you don´t wanna call it formula, call it anything else you want. But the fact is that almost all Marvel films share very similar elements, that happen to be very audience-friendly.

You have a great looking super-hero, cracking jokes, acting very casual, and that´s something that attracts people. Especially those who aren´t too into the SH genre. I know plenty of people, especially girls who don´t like action or super heroes but love Iron Man because he is funny and charming and the movies have a plenty of comedic moments mixed with action scenes. This formula appeals to all kinds of audiences. It´s light, it´s simple, it´s funny, it´s full of amazing looking men and women, feels very juvinile and doesn´t create much controversy.

You don´t wanna call it formula, fine. But i go watch a Marvel movie and i know exactly what to expect. And i feel that all those elements have been placed in the movie in a very strategic way.



Batman Begins is quite simple, but TDK has a very unusual ending, where things don´t end up exactly well for the hero and for those he tries to protect. TDKR is also original in the sense that 1) I imagined everything and couldn´t predict what really ended up happening 2) It offers me a big mix of emotions. We´ve the shock of his death, the relieve of him being alive and happy and the surprise of Blake taking his place. It´s a very dynamic type of ending that feels very different from most SH movies. Oh, and it´s powerful. It´s one of the strongest points of the film, instead of one of the weakest, like what happens in most films.

Well, it's certainly true that Marvel films appeal to audiences beyond comic book fans (the horror!). That's about as far as I can go when it comes to addressing your points though because they're all so vague as to be meaningless. Yes, there are jokes. Yes, there are action scenes. Yes, the actors are good looking. All these things are in Marvel movies (and the Dark Knight trilogy and the Star Wars films and Lord of the Rings and...)

You clearly have a preference for a certain tone and aesthetic, which is fine and completely your perogative, but your criticisms of the Marvel films aren't particularly compelling. It doesn't seem like you're using the same measuring stick for the Nolan films as you are with Marvels. For example, if 'things don't go exactly well for the hero' is enough to make an ending compelling then you should find something to like in Thor and Captain America. If fake out deaths are your thing, then man oh man can Marvel deliver there!

I doubt we're going to see eye to eye but I think I understand where you're coming from at least.

 

[Heretic]

Personally, I think that Mystique is working with Apocalypse and that both she and Wolverine will start the next film as Horsemen.

By the way...if that is the case, then why did she wuss out in the end of DoFP? Then again...the plot of that movie was basically "lets nag Mystique until she caves in" so maybe she just wanted to get done with the plot and move on.

 

[Killer]

Well, it's certainly true that Marvel films appeal to audiences beyond comic book fans (the horror!). That's about as far as I can go when it comes to addressing your points though because they're all so vague as to be meaningless. Yes, there are jokes. Yes, there are action scenes. Yes, the actors are good looking. All these things are in Marvel movies (and the Dark Knight trilogy and the Star Wars films and Lord of the Rings and...)

You clearly have a preference for a certain tone and aesthetic, which is fine and completely your perogative, but your criticisms of the Marvel films aren't particularly compelling. It doesn't seem like you're using the same measuring stick for the Nolan films as you are with Marvels. For example, if 'things don't go exactly well for the hero' is enough to make an ending compelling then you should find something to like in Thor and Captain America. If fake out deaths are your thing, then man oh man can Marvel deliver there!

I doubt we're going to see eye to eye but I think I understand where you're coming from at least.

You´re putting words in my mouth. I never said that an unhappy ending was enough to make an ending compelling. You´re saying that, not me.

I simply think Marvel´s endings are weak sauce. They lack the intensity i get from TDK trilogy. They feel like something i can easily forget. And i have.

They lack the complexity and intensity of TDK and TDKR´s endings. The mixture of emotions, the bittersweetness, its powerful philosophical nature, the editing, the music, the acting...i mean, everything. They just feel bigger and better. They feel like very carefully well crafted endings, and they´re unusual and memorable because of that.

 

[Snow Queen]

After watching Days of Future Past again yesterday, my vote remains with it.
1. X-Men: Days of Future Past - 9.5/10
2. Captain America: The Winter Soldier - 9/10
3. Snowpiercer - 8.3/10
4. The Amazing Spider-man 2 - 8/10
5. Guardians of the Galaxy - 7/10
6. Edge of Tomorrow - 5/10
7. 300: Rise of an Empire - 3.5/10
8. Transformers: Age of Extinction - 3/10
9. Sin City: A Dame to Kill For - 2/10
10. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - 2/10

 

[CB Fan]

I know I'm in the minority, but lord...the more time that is put between me and my viewing of Days of Future Past, the more I dislike it.

I didn't dislike the film but I'm not crazy about it either, its good for what it is but it didn't wow me. Perhaps it's because it uses the same theme that we've gotten from at least three or four other X-Men films and then there's the worn out magneto goes rogue at the end twist that we've already seen in X2 and First Class. The film was good but Ive already watched GoTG more than it and I've had DOFP longer. Apocalypse is a chance to switch things up and I cant wait to see it.

 

[BoredGuy]

Now that I own all of them, I rewatch Cap about every 2 weeks, GOTG will probably be about the same (though I've watched it 3 times already), and I've only watched DOFP once more since it was released. When they put out a director's cut with Wolverine doing something useful (**cough**fightasentinel**cough**) instead of just nagging Xavier for 2 hours, I'll consider raising my rating for it, lol

 

[Drz]

When they put out a director's cut with Wolverine doing something useful (**cough**fightasentinel**cough**) instead of just nagging Xavier for 2 hours, I'll consider raising my rating for it, lol

Personally i loved the fact the time traveler was left out from the most important fight, since it was about Xavier and Magneto, Wolverine was like a guide, not a savior.

 

[CB Fan]

Without his adamantium he wasn't gonna do much anyway. I would have liked to see Wolverine, Storm, and Magneto fighting some sentinels and just barely winning before getting the call from Kitty and sending Logan back in time.

 

[Lantern Venom]

TMNT wasn't the best of the year for sure. I don't mean to imply that I didn't like it, but it validated itself with the personalities of the Turtles. The villains and climax were too thin for me to put the film on par with DOFP, TWS, TASM2, and GOTG.

 

[BoredGuy]

Personally i loved the fact the time traveler was left out from the most important fight, since it was about Xavier and Magneto, Wolverine was like a guide, not a savior.

Oh I agree completely that Wolverine didn't need to be in the final fight, and am glad he wasn't the savior of all
But you don't put Sentinels and Wolverine in a movie together and NOT have them fight unless you really f***ing hate your fanbase.
You. just. don't.


and also, it occurs to me, Logan never even popped his claws in the future, did he?
for all that speculation of "how Logan got his metal back after The Wolverine", it was moot, apparently
He might still have the bone, for all we know (although with JLaw-stique screwing continuity up, who knows if he ever had it)

(edit: Nevermind the last bit, I forgot he popped them and stabbed Kitty, though it was tough to see in that brief flash if they were metal)