In Discussion About Comic Book Films...

Tools    





Can we have your liver then?
I'm normally with you on talking but I'm totally cool with people losing it over genuinely cool things, especially ones the filmmakers are expecting to garner a reaction, because they usually buffer the events and dialogue accordingly a bit. In those moments I think it's akin to people laughing at punchlines in a comedy.



Was gonna delete my comment im just being a grouch i bet people where cheering in star wars back in the day



I'm glad you posted those audience reactions, though. I'm not going to say being popular or engendering intense fandom is ipso fact proof that something is worthwhile...but it's hard to deny that something special happened here, even while lots of valid criticisms remain valid (and while long-term concerns about the impact of the MCU on cinema as a whole can be valid).

The more people like a thing, and the more genuine joy they show in it, the higher my threshold for dismissing it, personally. And in this case I don't have to, because I was pretty enthused with the best the MCU has to offer, too, even though the worst of it is pretty forgettable.
Agreed. I live in a predominantly black neighborhood and when I saw Infinity War (or maybe Endgame) there was a group of children, ages 8-12 or so, in front of me. Whenever anything related to Wakanda came on screen the kids would start bouncing up and down in their seats and clapping. You'd have to be one grouchy SOB to not think that was pretty cool. I'm not even the most fervent defender of these movies, but that's one of my favorite theater experiences of the past few years.

Yes, those kids are probably going to spend lots of money on Marvel merch now. Would you like to see some pics of my childhood Christmas tree, buried in Star Wars toys? Who am I to throw stones?
__________________
Captain's Log
My Collection



It's funny you guys say that, because I almost edited my post right after posting to add a line about Star Wars, and how in a couple generations the MCU criticism is probably gonna sound a lot like older generations not really "getting" Star Wars back in the day.

Doesn't mean it's wrong, but that's the kind of cultural impact we're talking about.



I'm glad you posted those audience reactions, though. I'm not going to say being popular or engendering intense fandom is ipso fact proof that something is worthwhile...but it's hard to deny that something special happened here, even while lots of valid criticisms remain valid (and while long-term concerns about the impact of the MCU on cinema as a whole can be valid).

The more people like a thing, and the more genuine joy they show in it, the higher my threshold for dismissing it, personally. And in this case I don't have to, because I was pretty enthused with the best the MCU has to offer, too, even though the worst of it is pretty forgettable.
Ang Lee, Tim Burton, Sam Raimi, Guillermo Del Toro, Christopher Nolan and to a lesser degree Brian Singer, Jon Favreau, James Gunn and Richard Donner all seem good or great director with some vision and not just something made to sell toys.

The fact it engages people prove it's a vocal minority of the so-called haters are just a very, very vocal minority since the films are acclaimed and liked and they earn a lot,

For example The Dark Knight is widely seen to be the best or one of the best film in the decade (and genre) and was nominated for various academy awards. It's liked by both audience and moviegoers and also entered in the national film registry;

http://theyshootpictures.com/gf1000_all1000films.htm
https://www.thegreatestfilms.com/Fil...he-Dark-Knight
https://www.empireonline.com/movies/...best-movies-2/
https://www.timeout.com/newyork/movi...es-of-all-time
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?g...rt=user_rating

https://batman-on-film.com/12460/the...film-registry/


https://www.metacritic.com/feature/f...-of-the-decade
https://www.theguardian.com/film/201...e-21st-century
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/...greatest-films
https://www.theyshootpictures.com/21...ilms150-51.htm
https://www.empireonline.com/movies/...ntury-page-10/

Might be an example that CBMs can be taken seriously



Can we have your liver then?

For example The Dark Knight is widely seen to be the best or one of the best film in the decade (and genre) and was nominated for various academy awards. It's liked by both audience and moviegoers and also entered in the national film registry;


The dark knight was meh IMO Sam raimi ALL DAY !! Spider man 2 is regarded as the best.



Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
If weekend movie goers' cinematic Overton window is so shifted that they think Christopher Nolan is one of the greats and The Dark Knight is one of the films of the decade, they will undeniably find most superhero films passable to good.

Most modern superhero films cater to the general audience and the general audience's layman taste is not refined at best and simply abhorrent at worst. It's no wonder most serious cinephiles find contemporary superhero films abhorrent and intolerable because superhero films totally are awful when compared to some of the best films ever made, entertainment or art cinema alike. There's a point to be made about making a better and worse version of the same film and the few superhero films that can be considered good, but the overall consensus seems to be that the superhero genre is eating its own tail, lacks creativity, and dumps cookie-cutter mediocrity into the throats of the populace. Mainstream entertainment has been deteriorating in quality for decades now. Case in point: compare the HK cinema of the 70s to the 90s with whatever is happening now. Yes, the industry's dying, and with it the quality of filmmaking. HK was reclaimed by China. Hollywood was reclaimed by the taste of the cinematically uneducated rabble.
__________________
心在你身邊 就算隱形亦有一天遇見



False. TDK is a masterpiece and still the best film of the genre.

Also, Spider-Man 2 is regarded as one of the best, not the best (and Nolan beats Raimi all day in overall quality)..


https://www.gamesradar.com/best-superhero-movies/
https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/be...s-of-all-time/
https://superheroes.theringer.com/
https://www.businessinsider.com/50-b...nd-more-2018-3
https://www.cinemablend.com/new/30-B...ed-128797.html
https://manofmany.com/entertainment/...es-of-all-time
https://www.filmsranked.com/superhero-films/
https://screencrush.com/batman-89-comic/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_AjuTLBgqiM

There are others.

If weekend movie goers' cinematic Overton window is so shifted that they think Christopher Nolan is one of the greats and The Dark Knight is one of the films of the decade, they will undeniably find most superhero films passable to good.
I'm sorry, but that's a proven fact from specialized critic, and not just one or two sites or magazine but 5 or 10+ of them. Which competence do you have to dismantle an impersonal consensus made by people with a qualification? I'm asking that.

While Nolan might be not one of the all-time greats, he's a great director who's recently been producing great films, one of the best of the decades..

https://www.metacritic.com/feature/b...ors-since-2000
https://www.theyshootpictures.com/21...0directors.htm
http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/01...-of-the-2010s/
https://closeupculture.com/2019/12/1...-of-the-2010s/
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-a7566781.html

Note: this is called pleading your thesis with autorithy resources, if you don't like the movie much, it's fine, but there are dozens of reasons why the film is acclaimed.



Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
Not that your sources are bad, but generally speaking, most of the so-called "professional" film critics are inept film studies graduates who can't tell true masterpieces from well-meaning albeit mediocre messes of general audience pleasers. That being said, great film critics still exist, most of them half-amateur. I've seen so many of the so-called film critics projecting total bull and so many amateurs proving their mastery of the subject.

Regardless of how qualified critics are, if somebody claims Christopher Nolan or James Gunn a great director, or The Dark Knight or Spiderman great films, I will be taking all their opinions with a grain of salt from now on.



I detest this garbage.

These are bought, sold, over-marketed, "franchise"-films. I find them horrendously constructed, (in terms of dialectics specifically, most of the time these films opt for heavy uses on diegetics, granted, but in the dialect elements of the diegetics I don't see these films/sequences becoming something "larger" than the sum their own parts)... instead it's a lot of "flash, bang, boom," all in the name of making a quick buck... which, (at least for now anyway), appears to be working... but they milk this "buck" to make "more bucks..." yay Das Kapital! Even before you watch the movie your being "primed" out of your wallet. Then buy! Buy, buy, you fools! Buy that: "The Iron Man Toothpaste, but don't forget he needs the Avengers Toothbrush." And wear the shirt that is your favorite superhero... not that it really makes you happy... it makes me, a producer of this tripe, happy because you, the consumer, are marketing me, the producer, my product.

... anyway, this stuff and things like it drive me up a wall...

Anyone in my boat or care to debate this?

EDIT: (As per Yoda's request to clarify)

I don't "like" comic book films, yes. But I made this thread when I was in a bad way. Please forgive me and take this topic as you will. Thank you.
Try;
Road to Perdition, A History of Violence, Watchmen, Oldboy, Lady Snowblood, V for Vendetta, Sin-City, Conan the Barbarian, Dredd and Kick-Ass.



Most modern superhero films cater to the general audience and the general audience's layman taste is not refined at best and simply abhorrent at worst. It's no wonder most serious cinephiles find contemporary superhero films abhorrent and intolerable...
I mean, is this true?
Some of my favorite films I saw in the last year or so were The Passion Of Joan Of Arc, Cleo From 5 To 7, Throne Of Blood, Last Year At Marienbad, The General... oh, and Avengers: Endgame.
I must be a layman and not a "serious cinephile".



Can we have your liver then?
False. TDK is a masterpiece and still the best film of the genre.

I just didnt see what others were seeing i was just being childish btw no need to bring out your references.



Not that your sources are bad, but generally speaking, most of the so-called "professional" film critics are inept film studies graduates who can't tell true masterpieces from well-meaning albeit mediocre messes of general audience pleasers. That being said, great film critics still exist, most of them half-amateur. I've seen so many of the so-called film critics projecting total bull and so many amateurs proving their mastery of the subject.

Regardless of how qualified critics are, if somebody claims Christopher Nolan or James Gunn a great director, or The Dark Knight or Spiderman great films, I will be taking all their opinions with a grain of salt from now on.
It's not a matter of being arrogant but a simply observation. Unfortunately, you are only using your preconceived notion and personal bias here, because as i proved Nolan ranks well in both all time and best of decade list and has a handful of films listed in those same "best of decade list".

So, what competence do you have to say critics are inept? When you're a spectator (with all respect) with no qualification? Your thesis is incorrect since you are generalizing over critics just because you don't like something subjectively.

"Projecting" ? That's a point of view, and amateurs? Do you realize none of that matters because there's no way to prove it?

The evidence is quite conclusive. So if anything you're the pretentious one with an unpopular and wrong opinion that i've debunked.

TDK being considered great by both critics and moviegoers is a fact, the same way it's a fact that it is atleast one of the best film of the decade.

Saying it sucks or doesn't deserve to be here is a subjective opinion which has nothing to hold up except words which is argumentum = you can't prove it.



It can't be proved either way, though. And its greatness--which I happen to agree with, uh-oh, guess I get that grain of salt!--is not a fact just because most people like it.

The discussion will be a lot more productive if we dispel with the notion that this can be demonstrated with critical response, or that opinions can be dismissed for being subjective. They all are. Good discussions happen when we delve into the basis for that subjectivity.



It can't be proved either way, though. And its greatness--which I happen to agree with, uh-oh, guess I get that grain of salt!--is not a fact just because most people like it.

The discussion will be a lot more productive if we dispel with the notion that this can be demonstrated with critical response, or that opinions can be dismissed for being subjective. They all are. Good discussions happen when we delve into the basis for that subjectivity.
I'll word it better: If he simply said "I don't like it much" then no problem. Because personal preference is subjective.

But if someone says "I don't take them seriously if they think it's great" then i I disagree with that. Or if he denigrates the opinion of people qualified to do it, i simply posted something to back up my thesis (which is not an opinion).

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-dark-knight-2008

^ especially when I made an example of the most acclaimed and best film in the genre.



It's a subtle difference in phrasing, I guess: you can point out that if someone doesn't take people seriously for thinking TDK is great, that they have to dismiss a lot of knowledgeable and respected people and critics. But if they're willing to do that, you're ultimately at an impasse. And unfortunately I can tell you from experience Minio is definitely willing to do that.



That exactly. Also since he only nominated Nolan and Gunn (and not Del Toro or Donner or Burton) i posted that, since great director is a fair take.

I don't think i have anything else to say in the discussion, I simply disagree with how people act (one of my favorite genres, always liked them a lot and read a lot of comics).



minds his own damn business
Critics are human. An illustrating example would be when Roger Ebert initially panned Unforgiven, and then admitted that due to various preoccupations in his life at the moment (like his wedding) he failed to give the film a dedicated viewing. I think this happens a lot, but most critics, especially professionals, are usually unwilling to admit it.


One of the major problems of the Tomatometer is that some people see numbers=math=science. It is not hard science. It is an abstract convenience grafted onto a subjective consensus. And, no, consensus does not make something objective. There are numerous examples in film history where the contemporary critical consensus has proven irrelevent, whether overpraised films become forgotten or ignored gems become rediscovered. It happens all the time. And personally my favorite films are pretty contentious.
__________________



And personally my favorite films are pretty contentious.

Any film that really burrows itself deep into an eccentric/controversial/unexpected take is, by its very nature, going to divide audiences. It's going to make reaching that coveted 90% Tomatometer almost completely out of reach (not coveted by me, by the way, just coveted by those who I suppose like big numbers)


So if we are going to raise this Tomatometer to having any kind of absolute value at all, a film as a general rule will have to ruffle as few feathers as possible. And that sounds like an absolutely god awful recipe for interesting works of art.



This, of course, doesn't mean those that appeal to a lot of people can't be valuable films. But, it should be just as obvious, this means those that don't score so highly shouldn't be disqualified. As you said, Not Science.



In short, the Tomatometer is probably one of that worst metrics to live by. It gives a short hand opinion as to what most people 'might like'. It has nothing to do with locating films that push cinematic envelopes, or even those that might enlighten us through the most standard of techniques. It often feels like it's for people who don't have enough time in their life for too many movies, and so want to take as few risks as possible with what they watch. And I don't generally listen to any of those people's opinions.


Also, I'm proud of the fact that my longest paragraph begins my saying 'in short'. Good job at being succinct crumbsroom. Good job.



minds his own damn business
Conan the Barbarian
This is a great example, besides from being a wonderful film, in that it expresses the exact kind of mythic qualities that comic books are underrated at conveying.