Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 1st, 2015)

[Josette]

As much as I enjoyed Nolan's Bat films and a few of the X-Men movies, I actually feel like they can be overly pretentious and melodramatic in ways that are too heavy handed and feel artificial.

The characters of the Batman series didn't really invest me overall, most felt more like chess pieces moving across the storyline board than characters to me. Over the years, I've come to feel Batman Begins is the best because of its singular focus on Bruce Wayne and what drives him to become Batman. The story is there with the Nolan movies, but the characters less so. And I'm a character first kinda girl. Which is why I didn't retain interest in that series. The characters couldn't keep me.

X-Men's had some strong movies and strong characters that have gotten me invested, but sometimes Singer relies too much on what feels like melodrama and overwrought speeches for emotion.

To use an example, many raved about how much more emotional DOFP was to TWS, but I think Cap's simple line to Bucky "I'm with you to the end of the line" was so much more effective and truly moving because of how much more REAL it felt. Like something two real life bros, BFFs who'd been to hell and back would say to each other. While Charles' speechifying to Mystique trying to get her to change her mind felt colder, and more artificial to me. And the meeting of the two Charles' was SO overwrought I almost couldn't take it seriously. Sometimes reigning it in a little yields a better, more sincere result, IMO.

The MCU's strong point is in its characters. And there have been a lot of moments in the MCU films that have moved me. The end of GOTG with Quill reading that letter from his mother and the audience finds out that's where "Star Lord" comes from....it's so simple, but so effective. GOTG - a movie filled with humor also had some of the most emotional moments. Humor and a lighter tone does not = / lack of emotion or drama. It also does not mean characters lack depth or evolution. I've seen plenty of it in the MCU's films.

 

[YoNoSe]

It's science.

 

[LexiKon318]

As much as I enjoyed Nolan's Bat films and a few of the X-Men movies, I actually feel like they can be overly pretentious and melodramatic in ways that are too heavy handed and feel artificial.

The characters of the Batman series didn't really invest me overall, most felt more like chess pieces moving across the storyline board than characters to me. Over the years, I've come to feel Batman Begins is the best because of its singular focus on Bruce Wayne and what drives him to become Batman. The story is there with the Nolan movies, but the characters less so. And I'm a character first kinda girl. Which is why I didn't retain interest in that series. The characters couldn't keep me.

The MCU's strong point is in its characters. And there have been a lot of moments in the MCU films that have moved me. The end of GOTG with Quill reading that letter from his mother and the audience finds out that's where "Star Lord" comes from....it's so simple, but so effective. GOTG - a movie filled with humor also had some of the most emotional moments. Humor and a lighter tone does not = / lack of emotion or drama. It also does not mean characters lack depth or evolution. I've seen plenty of it in the MCU's films.

Just reminded me how misty-eyed I get whenever I see the part near the end when Gamora tells Quill to take her hand and he sees his mother.

Marvel movies are just so re-watchable for me. I haven't fully watched The Dark Knight since I've seen it in theaters. And you're right about Batman Begins being the best of the trilogy.

But overall, the Nolan movies do seem a bit too pretentious to me.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

As much as I enjoyed Nolan's Bat films and a few of the X-Men movies, I actually feel like they can be overly pretentious and melodramatic in ways that are too heavy handed and feel artificial.

The characters of the Batman series didn't really invest me overall, most felt more like chess pieces moving across the storyline board than characters to me. Over the years, I've come to feel Batman Begins is the best because of its singular focus on Bruce Wayne and what drives him to become Batman. The story is there with the Nolan movies, but the characters less so. And I'm a character first kinda girl. Which is why I didn't retain interest in that series. The characters couldn't keep me.

X-Men's had some strong movies and strong characters that have gotten me invested, but sometimes Singer relies too much on what feels like melodrama and overwrought speeches for emotion.

To use an example, many raved about how much more emotional DOFP was to TWS, but I think Cap's simple line to Bucky "I'm with you to the end of the line" was so much more effective and truly moving because of how much more REAL it felt. Like something two real life bros, BFFs who'd been to hell and back would say to each other. While Charles' speechifying to Mystique trying to get her to change her mind felt colder, and more artificial to me. And the meeting of the two Charles' was SO overwrought I almost couldn't take it seriously. Sometimes reigning it in a little yields a better, more sincere result, IMO.

The MCU's strong point is in its characters. And there have been a lot of moments in the MCU films that have moved me. The end of GOTG with Quill reading that letter from his mother and the audience finds out that's where "Star Lord" comes from....it's so simple, but so effective. GOTG - a movie filled with humor also had some of the most emotional moments. Humor and a lighter tone does not = / lack of emotion or drama. It also does not mean characters lack depth or evolution. I've seen plenty of it in the MCU's films.

You're a girl? Never mind...I agree with some of your points. Even though I thought Capt America: The first Avengers was a mediocre film, I really liked the last scene of that film, when Steve Rogers says, "I had a date." It's so sad, but then the credits music ruins that moment

 

[pturtle]

As much as I enjoyed Nolan's Bat films and a few of the X-Men movies, I actually feel like they can be overly pretentious and melodramatic in ways that are too heavy handed and feel artificial.

The characters of the Batman series didn't really invest me overall, most felt more like chess pieces moving across the storyline board than characters to me. Over the years, I've come to feel Batman Begins is the best because of its singular focus on Bruce Wayne and what drives him to become Batman. The story is there with the Nolan movies, but the characters less so. And I'm a character first kinda girl. Which is why I didn't retain interest in that series. The characters couldn't keep me.

X-Men's had some strong movies and strong characters that have gotten me invested, but sometimes Singer relies too much on what feels like melodrama and overwrought speeches for emotion.

To use an example, many raved about how much more emotional DOFP was to TWS, but I think Cap's simple line to Bucky "I'm with you to the end of the line" was so much more effective and truly moving because of how much more REAL it felt. Like something two real life bros, BFFs who'd been to hell and back would say to each other. While Charles' speechifying to Mystique trying to get her to change her mind felt colder, and more artificial to me. And the meeting of the two Charles' was SO overwrought I almost couldn't take it seriously. Sometimes reigning it in a little yields a better, more sincere result, IMO.

The MCU's strong point is in its characters. And there have been a lot of moments in the MCU films that have moved me. The end of GOTG with Quill reading that letter from his mother and the audience finds out that's where "Star Lord" comes from....it's so simple, but so effective. GOTG - a movie filled with humor also had some of the most emotional moments. Humor and a lighter tone does not = / lack of emotion or drama. It also does not mean characters lack depth or evolution. I've seen plenty of it in the MCU's films.

It's funny, that line felt very fake and cheesy to me, but I actually liked it, it seemed like something Steve Rogers would say, but that's because he doesn't feel like a real person to me at all, so it works. I think the dialogue and character interactions are actually the strong points of the X films, Erik and Charles arguing on the plane was more engaging than most of the action in these superhero movies.

I'll have to disagree with you as well regarding the TDK characters not feeling real, sure sometimes the dialogue can be a bit heavy handed and Shakespearean at times to get their point across, but for the most part, they came off a lot more real to me. On the flip side, in the MCU a lot of the dialogue feels unnatural and artificial due to wisecracks being made during serious moments. I don't recall any jokes being made by heroes in any of the good X films or Nolan flicks when an important character dies. IM3 and AOU both had that, which really took me out of those movies.

 

[karamazov80]

I'm not sure any comic book film I've seen has felt particularly "real" to me. . .Ghost World maybe, if that counts.

Erik and Charles arguing on the plane was more engaging than most of the action in these superhero movies.

I loved when Nick Fury showed up there to stop Magneto's evil plot with the snakes.

 

[pturtle]

 

[chewblacca]

On the whole marvel characters are more fun to see on the screen the dialogue is fun and interesting. DC characters are plain by comparison. I guess that's why villains and the Joker particularly and such big characters in the DC movies because their actions are unpredictable.

 

[karamazov80]

Well in fairness to DC, their films haven't really done justice to the less straight-laced characters so far. Plastic Man, Booster Gold, Changeling, Guy Gardner, or a variety of others could be great if done well. But if the Snyder-verse is dictating the rules of the game, they'll probably all be depressing, sad *******s, when the only depressing, sad ******* is supposed to be Batman!

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Well in fairness to DC, their films haven't really done justice to the less straight-laced characters so far. Plastic Man, Booster Gold, Changeling, Guy Gardner, or a variety of others could be great if done well. But if the Snyder-verse is dictating the rules of the game, they'll probably all be depressing, sad *******s, when the only depressing, sad ******* is supposed to be Batman!

I could see Cyborg as a sad and depressing guy. It would make sense. I would, if I was him

 

[karamazov80]

That would also be reasonably appropriate for the character as Wolfman wrote him. And Raven, of course.

 

[PopCultKid]

In comparison to all, on the surface there appears to be more complexity to Ledger's Joker and what makes Wayne Batman, but I have to agree with a lot of what Josette and YoNoSe said in regard to the Nolan/Snyder-verse being deeper than the MCU. I think a lot of the perception of depth behind the Bat-flicks is illusion created by their tone and delivery (and of course a fantastic performance by Ledger). When you strip all of these movies down to bare basics, they're all built on nearly the same fundamentals. It's mostly tone and delivery that sets them apart.

But aside from just nerding out, I think you CAN dig deeper into a lot of the MCU on a somewhat intellectual level. Just as a recent example, you can definitely get into some depth when analyzing Ultron's self conflict with his hate for humanity while inherently having human traits.

Some said that he cared for the twins, and while that may be true it was in the most conflicted and twisted way. Ultron was just being cunning and puppeteering them. His need for companionship is more self-serving and confused than it is human and natural. He did show concern that Wanda would die but I feel that's part of his conflict because there's no way to have Wanda (or anyone) survive if the goal is to have a world where "after the dust clears only metal will be living". Contradictory to that, you can't have much companionship when you're all that's left.

When you put it all under the microscope, I'd say that's "deeper" than a guy who is an agent of chaos, wants to watch the world burn and "just does things"


(for the record I love Begins & TDK)

I'm still wondering how learning how to be afraid makes you jump higher.

We can agree to disagree.

Wait, I thought that freeing your mind makes you jump higher?

 

[chewblacca]

Yeah, but you can't have a whole universe of depressing characters. Who would pay to see that?

 

[cilantropants]

I just told my girl what I was about to post and she just smacked me and made me mop the floor and do the dishes

See, in a just world you'd have done those things on your own.

 

[YoNoSe]

Wait, I thought that freeing your mind makes you jump higher?

I think if Laurence Fishburne yelled at me I would jump pretty high.

 

[YoNoSe]

Yeah, but you can't have a whole universe of depressing characters. Who would pay to see that?

Zack Snyder aims to answer that question.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

In comparison to all, on the surface there appears to be more complexity to Ledger's Joker and what makes Wayne Batman, but I have to agree with a lot of what Josette and YoNoSe said in regard to the Nolan/Snyder-verse being deeper than the MCU. I think a lot of the perception of depth behind the Bat-flicks is illusion created by their tone and delivery (and of course a fantastic performance by Ledger). When you strip all of these movies down to bare basics, they're all built on nearly the same fundamentals. It's mostly tone and delivery that sets them apart.

But aside from just nerding out, I think you CAN dig deeper into a lot of the MCU on a somewhat intellectual level. Just as a recent example, you can definitely get into some depth when analyzing Ultron's self conflict with his hate for humanity while inherently having human traits.

Some said that he cared for the twins, and while that may be true it was in the most conflicted and twisted way. Ultron was just being cunning and puppeteering them. His need for companionship is more self-serving and confused than it is human and natural. He did show concern that Wanda would die but I feel that's part of his conflict because there's no way to have Wanda (or anyone) survive if the goal is to have a world where "after the dust clears only metal will be living". Contradictory to that, you can't have much companionship when you're all that's left.

When you put it all under the microscope, I'd say that's "deeper" than a guy who is an agent of chaos, wants to watch the world burn and "just does things

I don't think the Joker in TDK just did things, that's just what he told Dent, but he also told Dent that he had nothing to do with Rachel's death, and that was a lie too. He's a liar and a manipulator. The final battle between Bats and Joker in TDK wasn't just a physical fight, although they were also fighting. People always focus on the Joker, but Ras Al Ghul in Begins was also an interesting villain.

 

[karamazov80]

To me, the ideas in the Nolan films, which affect the performances, but often aren't explicitly stated through dialogue, but can be conveyed through mood/tone, environment, performances, pacing, storytelling structure, etc. are richer and more thought-provoking than that in the Marvel films, on balance--and I'm excluding Dark Knight Rises from consideration here. When you hear a Nolan interview, vs., say, a Joss Whedon or Kevin Feige interview that comes through to me. It's like discussing film with an artist vs. discussing film with a commercial movie-maker.

For an analogy, at an extreme, I think of David Cronenberg. In his commentary tracks he comes off as the equivalent of a well-trained, and experienced academic expert in the area of film, and really human behavior and art. Things have subtle meanings that permeate the narrative, and the ideas that drive the story are often philosophically grounded and sometimes profound. This is the way Stanley Kubrick worked. His films succeed on one level to casual audiences, and on another entirely to those who want to really study his films (sometimes to a fault, like that ridiculous documentary about hidden meanings in the Shining), but it wasn't on accident. He didn't smash the audience over the head with his ideas, symbolism, the performances he was able to generate, etc., but Kubrick was responsible for the films having depth and meaning. Shelley Duvall wasn't just a good actress, Kubrick made her the actress that he wanted the audience to see on screen, because he was conveying a message about who she was, what her relationship to Jack and Danny was like, and what the whole situation in the film had led to. On the other extreme. . .Zach Snyder. Makes good movies by and large, but he comes off as just some dude who lucked into the industry. He uses the word "awesome" a lot. I think of Nolan as more on the Cronenberg end of the spectrum (though by no means do I think he's an equal to Cronenberg). And I think most of the guys hired by Marvel Studios are somewhere in the middle (guys behind Rocketeer, Troma movies, Community, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Zathura being sought out to helm their movies), though Kenneth Branaugh is a step above IMO.

I think Whedon made some really clever decisions with Avengers 2, but I don't think you can drill very far below the surface there. I don't think that's ever been something he's tried hard to do, and I don't even know if it would be desirable for him to do that, given the subject matter and audience he is targeting. But I think there is more than meets the eye in the first two Bat-films by Nolan. I think they are subversive, thought-provoking, and embedded with some fairly rich ideas about who people are, what motivates us, how society functions, and how things can go terribly wrong.

Could it be that I've been dazzled by the film-making ability of Nolan, and that he's nothing more than a more tasteful Zach Snyder with an English accent? Maybe. But that's my feelings on it. I walk away from those first two Nolan films feeling like I've just figuratively eaten a full four course, gourmet meal. When I watch the Marvel Studios stuff, I feel like I ate at Chili's or Outback Steakhouse. Snyder's stuff is more like a McDonald's Happy Meal. I like Outback Steakhouse, and sometimes I like getting a toy with my french fries, but. . .I'm not sure where this analogy was going anymore

 

[YoNoSe]

Snyder makes Unhappy Meals.

 

[Lakhota]

Snyder makes Unhappy Meals.

He punches puppies and orphan children in the face!