FilmBuff's Replies

Kind of a stupid video, isn't it? The point being made is that showings on a Tuesday night at 9pm are nearly sold out, but not quite. The first one had a dozen unsold seats, another had 6... what's the point? Even hugely successful films like Captain Marvel don't sell out every showing in every theater, every night.' Then again, you're the loony who thinks Marvel spent $700 million advertising Black Panther, so... She destroyed Thanos' ship and she helped keep the gauntlet away from Thanos long enough for Iron Man to get to it. Seemed about right for a non-Avenger, no? There wasn't much of a build-up, but that's beside the point. She seemed to matter as much as any of the other heroes who came in for the final battle. They each played a part, though hers was a bit more impressive because of the scope of her powers. What more did you want from a non-Avenger in the final Avengers movie? You know, you're right... a purple-skinned Titan shows up on earth wearing a gauntlet forged in the heart of a star by a 20-foot-tall dwarf, collects 6 magic gems, and snaps his fingers instantly erasing half of all life in the universe, but a team of super-powered humans team up with a talking raccoon to travel through time via the quantum realm to acquire their own set of magic gems, which are used in a gauntlet of their own forging, by a brilliant scientist who was turned into a 10-foot-tall green rage monster by gamma radiation, to bring trillions upon trillions of lifeforms who've been dead for 5 years back to life-- I'm good with that. But you're totally right, how silly to believe that the green rage monster could specify that they come back to life in a safe place. No, his request/wish was to bring back everyone that was snapped away in a way that ensured their safety. The Russos specified this, but even if they didn't, it's obvious-- it isn't as if the heroes didn't also consider this. When Hulk performed his snap, he brought everyone back, and anyone who would be endangered by returning was returned somewhere safe. It's a small role, but my favorite of all the films he was in is the Blues Brothers, and he has enough of a presence that I think it counts. He was great in Brewster's Millions, as well. And I suppose Planes, Trains, and Automobiles comes in third. That was actually addressed-- when Hulk undid Thanos' snap, he made sure that everyone was returned safely, so no one would materialize inside of another person or a wall or in the air, etc. Here in California we all wore shorts, just about year round. I don't know what it was like in Indiana, but I can't imagine kids not wearing shorts in those hot summers there. I'll add-- I'm a longtime, huge fan of Sam Raimi. Long before he directed Spider-Man I was a fan of his, and I was excited when I heard he was tasked with the project. The Evil Dead films were favorites of mine, the Quick and the Dead may be the most underrated Western ever filmed, A Simple Plan, For Love of the Game... both great movies, Drag Me to Hell is a masterpiece of horror filmmaking... and I don't hate his Spider-Man films. In any event, it's been a fun discussion. :) I wouldn't really categorize Superman with the Raimi films. It was a product of its times, and definitely had as much adult appeal as kid appeal. I was speaking mostly about the Spider-Man films, but I can see that the way I worded the previous post made it seem I was lumping them together. I'm not saying the Raimi films are bad, or entirely without merit. They have some nice scenes, some fun lines, but as a whole they aren't to be taken seriously. There are simply too many moments of unintentional comedy, mixed in with slapstick and simple comedy, and the moments that try to be emotional come off as maudlin and schmaltzy. Likewise, the MCU films aren't perfect. I'd certainly consider Kat Dennings moments in the Thor films to be quite clever-- she offers a lot of quick bits of wry humor that are easy to miss if you aren't paying attention-- and she's one of the highlights of the film. I'm not sure what your issue was with Thor's reaction to Hulk walking around nude. Hemsworth played that off rather nicely, I thought, and the moment never stooped to any sort of juvenile bathroom humor, even though it could very easily have missed the mark. In all honesty, we can go back and forth about this all day and never come to any resolution. I am curious about something-- if you were to create a short list of what you consider to be masterpieces of comedy, what would you include? I suspect we may simply have very different tastes in humor. I'd offer Monty Python, Fawlty Towers, Buster Keaton, Arrested Development, Quentin Tarantino, the Coen Brothers, Wes Anderson, the Marx Brothers, The Office... those all come to mind as examples/purveyors of what strikes me as comedy with a deeper level of humor than that of, say, Saturday Night Live, Judd Apatow, the Three Stooges, and so forth. When I watch the old Superman films, or Raimi's Spider-Man films, they are openly corny. They're aimed at kids, unabashedly so. While that isn't a bad thing, it makes it hard for an adult to enjoy them in any deep way. They're formulaic, predictable, goofy movies for children. The MCU films are aimed at adults. Take Thor: Ragnarok, for example. It has a subtle, intellectual wit about it that will go right over the head of a child, but one that adults can appreciate. The MCU films never, in my recollection, dip into the goofy, cheesy territory that Raimi's films did. As I've said before, this is not a knock on Raimi or his films. They are what they are, and they are great for what they are. What they aren't, however, are clever films with a sly wit. They are from the lineage of The Three Stooges' humor, and Flash Gordon's action. The MCU is from the Monty Python, Arrested Development school of humor. p.s. I recommend seeing Far From Home in a theater. It has some pretty neat effects that I think will be lost on a TV screen. Oh, that guy. He was being awfully abrasive, but I did not intend to insult him. Or you. I definitely think the Raimi Spider-Man films are aimed squarely at children, but that doesn't mean adults can't enjoy them. Plenty of kids films are also fun for adults. That said, I think one of the main reasons that the MCU films have found unprecedented success is that they've flipped that formula. They make films for adults that children can also enjoy. Did I insult someone? Also, when did I say I'm above insulting someone? But really, who did I insult here? Andrew Garfield was 31 when he played Peter Parker, a high school sophomore. 26 year-old Emma Stone played his high school sophomore girlfriend. Stranger Things cast kids to play the younger kids, but Steve and Nancy are in their 20s, playing 18 year-olds. I think it's still quite common. I see you have it all figured out. What a blessing to have you in the world, telling us how others think. Wouldn't the defense be: 1. It received near unanimous praise from critics, as well as being a massive success with audiences. 2. It became a cultural phenomenon, bringing joy to fans beyond what a film normally can do. 3. It transcended its genre in that it brought large numbers of people who would never see a superhero film into theaters. 4. It's the sort of epic spectacle film that the Oscars love. 5. It was the first mainstream, aimed at all audiences, film to feature a majority black cast. 6. It was the most successful film, to that point, in a string of 18 successful films, and the nomination in some ways was an acknowledgement for what Marvel had done over the past decade. It's more accurate to say we have different standards, though I imagine someone as tactless and unenlightened as you seem to be won't understand that. I just responded to the original post, but it seems you're making a point similar to his. Am I mistaken? Is Elizabeth Anweis not playing Batwoman? She looks nothing like a man at all. What is your problem with her being chosen for the role? Edit-- looks like the actress listed here as if she is the lead is not playing Batwoman. Ruby Rose, another actress I've never heard of, is. As with Anweis, Rose looks nothing like a man. She's slim, feminine, quite attractive. I can't imagine anyone seeing her and thinking she's male! I see the actress playing Batwoman is Elizabeth Anweis. I'm not familiar with her, but a Google search shows me a woman who looks nothing "like a dude" whatsoever. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand your problem with the casting. Edit-- looks like the actress listed here as if she is the lead is not playing Batwoman. Ruby Rose, another actress I've never heard of, is. As with Anweis, Rose looks nothing like a man. She's slim, feminine, quite attractive. I can't imagine anyone seeing her and thinking she's male!