Superhero Cinematic Civil War - Part 57

Status
Not open for further replies.
Black Panther was PG-13. What superhero movie over the last decade had heavier themes then Black Panther?
You’re correct that BP managed to tell that type of story while managing to work as a family friendly PG-13 film and I’m not saying having an R-rating automatically means you’re mature and I’m not saying can’t tell a mature story with a PG-13 rating but I think an R-rating simply allows for more opportunities to tell darker stories, more experimental, stories in a way that doesn’t sanitize them down to appeal to a four quadrant audience everytime.

There’s room for superhero cinema for all kinds of stories, and ratings. In comics, you have Vertigo and Marvel Max existing along with the regular mainstream stuff that gets into some touchy stuff and doesn’t shy away from rather nasty depictions of certain things. I like PG-13 superhero flicks but I don’t mind seeing something that’s a little more experimental with the genre. That’s sort of what I’m getting at. Making an R-rated mid-budget Joker film that looked and felt like it could be a 70’s crime drama felt refreshing to me and wasn’t anything I’ve seen in the genre before.
 
I don't think Gal Gadot is that good of an actress, but I will say, while Criminal wasn't very good, she did show some decent acting in it.

Wonder Woman she gets by more on her looks and screen presence than her flat line delivery though.
 
I mean other than BvS, Wonder Woman, and FF I haven't seen anything with her in it. So my scope is limited. I would like to see her in a lead in like a drama or somethign
 
Again...there are plenty of examples that proves that it doesn't matter. So no you're not right. Channing Tatum early in his career was seen as horrible and he kept getting roles. And that's just one example

Another thing to note: Chris Evans barely had any non MCU jobs post Cap through Endgame. Even less if you look for starring/marquee roles. Doesn't mean he's a bad actor.

Just because one actor brings enough to the table to get shots despite not being a good actor doesn't mean all bad actors do. Gal doesn't.

Chris Evans has had a plan of wanting to direct so he's taken that route outside the MCU. Not comparable to Gadot.
 
Just because one actor brings enough to the table to get shots despite not being a good actor doesn't mean all bad actors do. Gal doesn't.

Chris Evans has had a plan of wanting to direct so he's taken that route outside the MCU. Not comparable to Gadot.
I never said all bad actors do.

What I'm saying is that being bad in a successful movie hasn't stopped a lot more actors, directors, etc. from getting huge opportunities.
The general consensus is that Gadot is a good actress at least as Wondy. I disagree but I acknowledge the general consensus. So the whole "she's a bad actress" doesn't even hold that much water when a lot of people like her main performance

Like, come on...this isn't new. Hollywood throws money behind plenty of people who make bad movies and are bad in them as long as the movies keep making money
 
The bolded, just seems like a personal thing rather than any constructive opinion of the movie. It reads like you're just upset at Todd Phillips.

And your 2nd point I don't get at all. It's like asking, after Black Panther why is it that most people got out of Killmonger is to dress like him or in Scarface people take away "Say hello to my lil friend!" Tons of people miss the point of tons of movies, books, characters, etc.

And so people commit violent acts daily. That's nothing new. So why is it Joker that people are taking a stand on? People have been violent drug dealers for years and we still praise something like Breaking Bad (that routinely showed how badass Walt was). People have been white collar criminals for years, but we still praised Wolf of Wall Street. I don't get why Joker is where people are drawing a line in the sand. It reminds me when Let's Be Cops came out and some reviewers were saying things like: "Man, with the way cops are acting this movie showings cops act responsible is dangerous"
Should we just not have movies anymore with villain protagonists or that try and make a villain look cool? Or even "heroes" like Batman should be pushed to the side because it shows overzealous people upholding the law through brute force?
Oh, I don't like Todd Phillips. I don't like Tarantino either, but I do love his movies. Well, most of them. The issue is he has been asked what the movie is about, and he runs from it. Because answering it would be an issue imo. One of the reasons I went to go see it, was because I was curious to watch a review of the film from someone on YT, but I didn't want it to influence my take on the film. Because while I did not like the idea of this movie, I did love the first trailer a lot. Still do. Also how those that made it talk about it, is important with how hard they have been trying to push Joker as art. They want to say it has a message, but won't tell us what that message is. So it's harmless entertainment, but it isn't, because it's art.

I do agree that people take stuff out of context all the time, but this is different imo. Becuase I think they are taking it in context, or at least context WB is fine with them taking it in, because it made them so much money. I think it matters what the movie itself tells you. And I think both Black Panther and Joker have very different messages. Killmonger is a black militant response to systemic racism, the American war machine, and the othering of people not considered "black enough" in the black community. The other is a really angry middle age white gentleman, who thinks the system is completely against, and the movie says it is. Both very wrong imo, but Black Panther tells you why Killmonger is doing what he is doing, while at the same time telling you there is no justification for his actions. Not even that pure gutteral response you get for what happened to him, can possibly justify his actions. Especially with T'Challa's right there to make it clear. Joker doesn't do that with Arthur. If anything, it justifies his actions imo. And to me that is important. One movie is telling you the baddie is wrong even with his theoretical justification, the other is glorifying the very image of terrorism in North America today.

Are you asking why people in general do it, or me? Because I hate that stuff and talk about it. I know, because I have read the responses to it. I would point out that Wolf did get backlash, that I thought was rather unjustified. I still remember seeing it in theaters and the entire theater reacting to Leo punching Robbie. It is legitimately the biggest gasp I can remember in a theater, and it put into perspective for everyone just who Jordan was. The movie does that over its whole run time, but I also don't think a lot of people got it outside of that one big visceral moment.

As to Joker. Well we are kind of living in a very specific place and time, and I can understand why it is resonating how it is for a lot of people. With the unmasking of white nationalism and the incel community in general. Some stuff has happened over the last decade that might just make it all really gross for some people. Like me! That being said, I also think it is just a really bad movie. A really pretty one though.
 
I never said all bad actors do.

What I'm saying is that being bad in a successful movie hasn't stopped a lot more actors, directors, etc. from getting huge opportunities.
The general consensus is that Gadot is a good actress at least as Wondy. I disagree but I acknowledge the general consensus. So the whole "she's a bad actress" doesn't even hold that much water when a lot of people like her main performance

Like, come on...this isn't new. Hollywood throws money behind plenty of people who make bad movies and are bad in them as long as the movies keep making money

It is? Because I didn't think most people had that great an opinion of her acting abilities, even if they like her as WW.
 
Evidently it hasn't compensated for it so I'm right. Why hire an actress that constantly sounds like she's reading lines when there are other hot rising actresses that can act?
Because she is actress, not an actor.
 
Oh, I don't like Todd Phillips. I don't like Tarantino either, but I do love his movies. Well, most of them. The issue is he has been asked what the movie is about, and he runs from it. Because answering it would be an issue imo. One of the reasons I went to go see it, was because I was curious to watch a review of the film from someone on YT, but I didn't want it to influence my take on the film. Because while I did not like the idea of this movie, I did love the first trailer a lot. Still do. Also how those that made it talk about it, is important with how hard they have been trying to push Joker as art. They want to say it has a message, but won't tell us what that message is. So it's harmless entertainment, but it isn't, because it's art.

I do agree that people take stuff out of context all the time, but this is different imo. Becuase I think they are taking it in context, or at least context WB is fine with them taking it in, because it made them so much money. I think it matters what the movie itself tells you. And I think both Black Panther and Joker have very different messages. Killmonger is a black militant response to systemic racism, the American war machine, and the othering of people not considered "black enough" in the black community. The other is a really angry middle age white gentleman, who thinks the system is completely against, and the movie says it is. Both very wrong imo, but Black Panther tells you why Killmonger is doing what he is doing, while at the same time telling you there is no justification for his actions. Not even that pure gutteral response you get for what happened to him, can possibly justify his actions. Especially with T'Challa's right there to make it clear. Joker doesn't do that with Arthur. If anything, it justifies his actions imo. And to me that is important. One movie is telling you the baddie is wrong even with his theoretical justification, the other is glorifying the very image of terrorism in North America today.

Are you asking why people in general do it, or me? Because I hate that stuff and talk about it. I know, because I have read the responses to it. I would point out that Wolf did get backlash, that I thought was rather unjustified. I still remember seeing it in theaters and the entire theater reacting to Leo punching Robbie. It is legitimately the biggest gasp I can remember in a theater, and it put into perspective for everyone just who Jordan was. The movie does that over its whole run time, but I also don't think a lot of people got it outside of that one big visceral moment.

As to Joker. Well we are kind of living in a very specific place and time, and I can understand why it is resonating how it is for a lot of people. With the unmasking of white nationalism and the incel community in general. Some stuff has happened over the last decade that might just make it all really gross for some people. Like me! That being said, I also think it is just a really bad movie. A really pretty one though.

Yea....I don't see Joker as glorifying Arthur at all. Actually I think Killmonger is portrayed, not as being right, but as more sympathetic than Arthur is.
 
It is? Because I didn't think most people had that great an opinion of her acting abilities, even if they like her as WW.
Classic right actress, right role, even if you don't think she can act all that well.

You know what is crazy? I think she looks stiff in the new trailer, and yet I am not worried. I felt the same about the first film's trailers as well, but she as gold in it imo.
 
Just because one actor brings enough to the table to get shots despite not being a good actor doesn't mean all bad actors do. Gal doesn't.

Chris Evans has had a plan of wanting to direct so he's taken that route outside the MCU. Not comparable to Gadot.
You may find this comparison rather blasphemous but Gadot kind of reminds of Arnold Schwartznegger . I don’t think Arnold is a good actor either but he’s got great presence especially in Terminator(a role he was born to play). I often find his line delivery to be kind of flat and uninspired but he makes up for it with his charisma which I also think Gadot has in spades.

Which is why Brie Larson may be a much better actress than Gadot but Gadot just shines as WW more than Larson ever has as Captain Marvel(either in her solo movie or Endgame).
 
Last edited:
Because she is actress, not an actor.

That's one part of it. Fewer roles to fight for, and other rising female action stars around that actually can act. She can't even go outside of her accent, and she's no Arnold.
 
Yea....I don't see Joker as glorifying Arthur at all. Actually I think Killmonger is portrayed, not as being right, but as more sympathetic than Arthur is.
Okay, I am thinking of how to put this.

Erik is more sympathetic. He actually went through some ****, and it has helped shape him into Killmonger. But the movie doesn't justify his actions, which allows me to sympathize with him.

Arthur is such an obvious example of a person that most people would agree to send to death row and yet... the movie sympathizes with him. He plays out like right wing radio. He lives the conspiracy theory, he lives the witch hunt people claim is happening. He lives in the world where the most put upon member of society is that lonely white dude. And then shows him as the guy who lets someone live because they were nice to him. See, he's not that bad of a guy, and well look at the ending. It shows that what he did got him what he wanted.
 
That's one part of it. Fewer roles to fight for, and other rising female action stars around that actually can act. She can't even go outside of her accent, and she's no Arnold.
Well that, and she isn't a white guy who can continually fail up in Hollywood.
 
I feel like you may be conflating how the movie views Arthur with how Arthur views himself in his own head.
 
I never said all bad actors do.

What I'm saying is that being bad in a successful movie hasn't stopped a lot more actors, directors, etc. from getting huge opportunities.
The general consensus is that Gadot is a good actress at least as Wondy. I disagree but I acknowledge the general consensus. So the whole "she's a bad actress" doesn't even hold that much water when a lot of people like her main performance

Like, come on...this isn't new. Hollywood throws money behind plenty of people who make bad movies and are bad in them as long as the movies keep making money

My point is that you can't just take an arbitrary actor and compare since they aren't equal. Each case is different.

I think people that actually work in movies see that she's worse than just your standard mediocre actor. She can't even sound natural in her own accent and I don't think she can even do a role without it, which limits what she can do even more. As I said in my other post, she isn't Arnold.

I'm not surprised that she hasn't gotten many roles. She's not just a bad actress, she's also unusually limited. I'm still fully convinced that WW would have been better with a good actress in the role. It's not even funny how much more Chris Hemsworth brings to Thor, and he isn't having great success outside Marvel either.
 
It is? Because I didn't think most people had that great an opinion of her acting abilities, even if they like her as WW.
From what I've seen people generally think shes a good actress. At least as Wonder Woman,
 
My point is that you can't just take an arbitrary actor and compare since they aren't equal. Each case is different.

I think people that actually work in movies see that she's worse than just your standard mediocre actor. She can't even sound natural in her own accent and I don't think she can even do a role without it, which limits what she can do even more. As I said in my other post, she isn't Arnold.

I'm not surprised that she hasn't gotten many roles. She's not just a bad actress, she's also unusually limited.
She can't sound 100% natural in her own accent? You mean while speaking English? Of course not. Most can't who don't speak English as a first language. That includes that vast majority of actors and actresses. Marion Colllitard is a fantastic actress, her attempts to speak English don't come off natural at all.

See, you are mistaking Gal with actors, and that is a mistake imo. She's a movie star, which should bank her roles on that alone.
 
I feel like you may be conflating how the movie views Arthur with how Arthur views himself in his own head.
Where does the movie counter this? Genuine question. When is it telling us Arthur is wrong? When does it not try to justify his actions by having him "wronged" by the person he is violent with? Does he not get what he wants in the end?
 
From what I've seen people generally think shes a good actress. At least as Wonder Woman,
See, I don't think most people care whether is a good actress or not. People like her as Wonder Woman and thus just like seeing her in stuff. Movie star.
 
I feel like you may be conflating how the movie views Arthur with how Arthur views himself in his own head.
Yeah I've said my piece on this.
If someone thinks that the movie glorifies Arthur, when it clearly doesn't, then so be it.

Maybe we should only make movies where no protagonist does anything wrong. Because there are plenty of works of art that show the protagonist getting anyway for being an ******** or downright evil
 
Where does the movie counter this? Genuine question. When is it telling us Arthur is wrong? When does it not try to justify his actions by having him "wronged" by the person he is violent with? Does he not get what he wants in the end?

Just because Arthur in his own mind has been "wronged" by Murray Franklin doesn't mean the movie thinks it's warranted when he shoots him in the head in the end. To any reasonable person watching, Arthur is the psycho. Murray even calls him out on all his self-pity before he kills him.
 
She can't sound 100% natural in her own accent? You mean while speaking English? Of course not. Most can't who don't speak English as a first language. That includes that vast majority of actors and actresses. Marion Colllitard is a fantastic actress, her attempts to speak English don't come off natural at all.

See, you are mistaking Gal with actors, and that is a mistake imo. She's a movie star, which should bank her roles on that alone.

Of course you can sound natural with an accent. She does when she's being herself in interviews, but she frequently sounds like she's reading lines when she is in movies because she's a terrible actress. I can't remember the last time I saw anyone be as horribly bad in a line as she is with her "Kal-El, no" line.

As said, I don't think she's the Arnold type. I don't even think the Arnold type is likely to work today. We have actually good actors taking those roles now. But with enough of an "it factor" it still might.
 
Probably the closest we have today to an "Arnold type" is Dwayne Johnson.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,554
Messages
21,759,204
Members
45,594
Latest member
evilAIS
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"