I think Comicbookgirl19 said it best: "The most interesting thing about her is when Rogue took her powers".

The movie is basically Iron Man 3. Very basic in its style and plot, very comedy-driven, but also tries to subvert expectations, but doesn't do a great job at it.

Batman's Batman wrote: ↑

March 9th, 2019, 10:26 am

The movie is basically Iron Man 3. Very basic in its style and plot, very comedy-driven, but also tries to subvert expectations, but doesn't do a great job at it.

Iron Man 3? Bad sign

Unfortunately, I have to agree with a lot of the criticism about the movie. I really wanted to love it, but I just couldn't. I merely like it. The movie starts pretty weak and the first act feels a bit messy, but it gets better with time and it has great pacing, so atleast I was never bored. The script is the movie's biggest problem for sure. As Vader previously said, it's undercooked. Which is a shame, because the acting and character dynamics were quite good. I really like Larson in the role as well as Jackson and Mendelsohn. The humor was mostly good enough as well, and I adored Goose, but it was strangely lacking in 'humor quantity' in my eyes. My theatre was barely laughing, mostly in the 3rd act.
However, the visuals were bland a lot of the time and sometimes even murky (especially in action scenes), although some scenes (farmhouse) were georgeous on occasion. CGI was mostly great, especially the deaging technology. The 3D was as distracting as always though, a shame I can't watch it in 2D anytime soon.
So to finish my rambling, in my book it's Marvel's weakest outing in years. Is it bad? Of course not, I still feel it was worth my time, considering I was never bored. It's just a bit disappointing. I'm hoping for better directing and especially better writing with her other movies and for Endgame utilising the character better.
Looking forward to other opinions.

Batman's Batman wrote: ↑

March 9th, 2019, 10:26 am

subvert expectations

so this is just a term we use in film discussion now isn't it

mchekhov 2: Chek Harder wrote: ↑

March 9th, 2019, 3:13 pm

Batman's Batman wrote: ↑

March 9th, 2019, 10:26 am

subvert expectations

so this is just a term we use in film discussion now isn't it

let's subvert the term itself then

exvert subpectations


that's my contribution for the week

It’s one of the weirder criticisms I tend to see, esp if it’s left unexplained at all, and is just thrown as a fancy phrase that’s supposed to count as something profound. Like whose expectations was this movie supposed to subvert? Yours individually? The audience’s? Like what exactly are we talking about here.


Idk... I liked it. I think it’s a huge plus the film started on its lowest point, so going forward it never really goes downhill lol. It’s very enjoyable, the humor was never lost on me, and the 90s references and song choices didn’t annoy me (something, I actually expected to happen at some point). I don’t see what’s wrong with a simple and “basic” plot either. I guess what confused me about Brie Larson was me struggling (sometimes) to tell whether her occasionally awkward mannerisms and line deliveries were supposed to complement the character, or whether she herself did struggle a bit to find herself fully comfortable in the role. Don’t think she was necessarily miscast, because she looks like she could pull it off. But I also doubt it was the lack of talent, because Larson is a gifted actress. I think the writing did her a bit dirty so instead of helping the audience “understand” her identity issues, it sort of reinforces our initial impression of her just being “bland”. I absolutely loved SLJ in this, which is like, so shocking. And Ben Men was a super pleasant surprise. But the biggest star of the film is Goose and nobody is going to be able to convince me otherwise.

Overall... not my favorite MCU, but definitely not the worst either. It serves as a decent origin story, and I think Larson will grow into the role more in the future. I’m overall glad it’s a movie we have, and I actually have found myself to be more supportive of it because of the backlash.

Kinda a hodgepodge that is a non-starter on a script level - a basic need for an origin story is that the character develop. Even in The Bourne Identity Jason grows even as he pieces together his past, so he makes active moral decisions in the end. The choices this film makes prevents us from having that opportunity. Larson does what she can, admirable work and hopefully later instalments give her more opportunity to show off her chops.

I dislike the Brodification of Nick Fury, it feels lazy even though Jackson is a lot of fun with this version of the character. The whole damn show is stolen by Mendelsohn however, who is finally able to do what he should have done in previous franchise roles and play it as the laconic bloke that he is in many of the pre-Animal Kingdom roles. Thank God for that.

Boden and Fleck's hand is barely seen, could have been anyone helming it really apart from a few scenes which have the buttoned-down quality of, at the very least Half Nelson, the underlit design and photography is lame and a worse offence than Solo. It might have been nice to have a film set in the 90s look like the 90s but hey-ho. As a dissenting voice I was actually enjoying exploring the more serious side of the cosmic part of the Marvel universe early on, and thought the callback to the GotG location cards was neat.

i'm surprised you say she doesn't develop since it mirrors Cap's arc in First Avenger pretty literally, which you love (I do not)


-Vader

Vader182 wrote: ↑

March 10th, 2019, 5:28 am

i'm surprised you say she doesn't develop since it mirrors Cap's arc in First Avenger pretty literally, which you love (I do not)


-Vader

Cap has an ethical standpoint that the development of superpowers allows him to act on. He is a fixed point but his ability to affect change is not.

Carol is gifted with immense power from the start. Since that's the case you have to make the discovery interesting and complex, which the script fails to do.