X-Men: Apocalypse - May 27, 2016

[The Ween]

As much as they messed up the headgear, I really want HT to do Weapon X.

Me too! I have all the other Wolvies.

 

[bboy]

what group narrative in the mcu do you speak of? The mcu characters all come across as slightly 2 dimensional and very shallow to be honest.

 

[Khev]

In what sense? Character development? I think they're on different tracks in that department. I like with the MCU is doing quite a bit, but none of those characters resonate with me on a dramatic level like Fassbender and McAvoy do. They're more like cartoon characters, akin to Deadpool (braces for Khev backlash!).

Not when the baiting is that obvious.

If superhero films don't have "cartoony" elements then they are failures, IMO. At least those based on established costumed heroes from comic books. Fassbender and McAvoy are simply exemplary actors that are compelling to watch no matter what they do or who they play (Fassbender's Steve Jobs was every bit as compelling as the larger than life Magneto, probably even moreso) and to their credit both actors do elevate the X-franchise because of their talents.

But as superhero films as a whole the MCU films (and lets just stick with the two Russo entries for a moment) far surpass anything out of the Singerverse. The Russos just know how to strike that perfect balance between "cartoony" and "grounded." It's like with cop movies. On the far side of the spectrum you've got films like Last Action Hero (cartoony from beginning to end) and then on the opposite side you've got films like Heat or The Departed that are grounded from beginning to end. Then you've got Lethal Weapon 1 and 2 and Die Hard that give us both. And in something like Lethal Weapon for instance you've got the silly one-liners and supernatural marksman shooting smiley faces at targets and a hammy Gary Busey counterbalanced with very realistic Murtaugh family dinners, drinking beer on his parked boat, or Riggs mourning his dead wife.

The Russos don't go full Last Action Hero and they aren't trying to be Unbreakable or a Nolan film. I'd say they're smack dab in "Lethal Weapon 2" land with some grounded hero moments, over the top action and somewhat cartoony side characters (Leo Getts/Ant-Man.) And that's a perfect place for current superhero movies to be in IMO.

Now if you aren't into Lethal Weapon and want all your cbm's to be Heat or something then yeah, you'll probably want to stick to Nolan or Shyamalan joints. Or if you like Roland Emmerich or Joel Schumacher 90's films then of course X-Men: Apocalypse would be more up your alley, and for those who think the crappier episodes of South Park are the pinnacle of entertainment they have Deadpool which was tailor made for them. What's nice is that there really is something for everybody these days.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

(braces for Khev backlash!).

Let me show you how it's done.

Spoiler

 

[Khev]

Unfortunately that gay shipping crap is just white noise at this point.

And X-Men QS was awesome.

 

[karamazov80]

Not when the baiting is that obvious.

If superhero films don't have "cartoony" elements then they are failures, IMO. At least those based on established costumed heroes from comic books. Fassbender and McAvoy are simply exemplary actors that are compelling to watch no matter what they do or who they play (Fassbender's Steve Jobs was every bit as compelling as the larger than life Magneto, probably even moreso) and to their credit both actors do elevate the X-franchise because of their talents.

But as superhero films as a whole the MCU films (and lets just stick with the two Russo entries for a moment) far surpass anything out of the Singerverse. The Russos just know how to strike that perfect balance between "cartoony" and "grounded." It's like with cop movies. On the far side of the spectrum you've got films like Last Action Hero (cartoony from beginning to end) and then on the opposite side you've got films like Heat or The Departed that are grounded from beginning to end. Then you've got Lethal Weapon 1 and 2 and Die Hard that give us both. And in something like Lethal Weapon for instance you've got the silly one-liners and supernatural marksman shooting smiley faces at targets and a hammy Gary Busey counterbalanced with very realistic Murtaugh family dinners, drinking beer on his parked boat, or Riggs mourning his dead wife.

The Russos don't go full Last Action Hero and they aren't trying to be Unbreakable or a Nolan film. I'd say they're smack dab in "Lethal Weapon 2" land with some grounded hero moments, over the top action and somewhat cartoony side characters (Leo Getts/Ant-Man.) And that's a perfect place for current superhero movies to be in IMO.

Now if you aren't into Lethal Weapon and want all your cbm's to be Heat or something then yeah, you'll probably want to stick to Nolan or Shyamalan joints. Or if you like Roland Emmerich or Joel Schumacher 90's films then of course X-Men: Apocalypse would be more up your alley, and for those who think the crappier episodes of South Park are the pinnacle of entertainment they have Deadpool which was tailor made for them. What's nice is that there really is something for everybody these days.

Does a comic story need to be cartoony to succeed? Not necessarily, unless you include anime cartoons in the mix or whatever. There are a range of different kinds of comics, of course. And the MCU taps into the mainstream, middle of the road comic book. Which, appropriately enough, would be the Avengers. X-Men always was a bit more focused on character angst and conflict over pithy action sequence, if you ranked stories on that continuum. So, as I've said before, I think the Singer approach fits better for X-Men. And I think the Joss Whedon/Shane Black/Russos approach works better for Avengers. And I think Deadpool makes for a nice juxtaposition with the X-Men, because he's more from the Whedon side of the spectrum, and there's not much else there like him. If he was in the MCU, he would just be a lewder Tony Stark.

As for parallels with other movies, I would not say that Departed was particularly grounded, with the insane Nicholson and Alec Baldwin performances, etc. But there aren't that many appropriate parallels really, to my eyes, because both companies have a wide range of films (MCU has Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man, while X-Men has the Singer/Vaughn movies, but also Deadpool, X3, and Origins). It's easier for me to make comparisons to another industry. So, let's say the food service industry. MCU is like, McDonald's. It appeals to everyone, it's not very adventurous. Kids love it. It's a massive corporate machine, etc. The Fox X-films are more like the higher end side of the fast food market. Not exactly fine cuisine, but you get something with a bit more substance on balance, with a tradeoff in that you can't check your brain at the door as easily. More for adults than the little kiddies. So, it's not going to appeal to as many people. And it's not as corporately centralized, so sometimes things get a bit off the rails. So, Origins was like Chipotle's E. coli breakout. Those don't happen at McDonald's, but on the other hand, your'e always getting something fairly bland and predictable. Not that there's anything wrong with either choice.

 

[Khev]

I definitely agree with you that watching most of the Singer films is like catching e. coli compared to the entertainment value of the MCU but the McDonald's comparison doesn't hold up. You'd need to pick a family restaurant that serves alcohol and that would be a respectable establishment to take an adult date to. If you were so inclined to make the dubious comparison to restaurants then Marvel/DC would be more like Darden which owns Olive Garden, Longhorn Steakhouse, Bahama Breeze, Seasons 52 and so on. Enjoyable cuisine for people of all ages with various levels of "meatiness" depending on which place you choose.

So other than your e. coli parallel I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[jye4ever]

I live near some incredibly mind blowing Peruvian cuisine, that's the MCU for me.

 

[Khev]

I live near some incredibly mind blowing Peruvian cuisine, that's the MCU for me.

karamazov thinks that Michael Jordan is the "McDonald's" of basketball. You know because he was the best, a very consistent player, and people of all ages liked watching him play. He prefers Derrick Rose because his shooting percentage rises and falls like a Brian Singer RT score. Nothing wrong with rooting for someone who goes from 70% to 17% depending on the night I suppose, I just prefer it when those guys are playing for the other team.

 

[jye4ever]

 

[Khev]

What.

 

[jye4ever]

I just wanted to give you an MCU forum appreciation hug.

If I try the same with kara i'll get this...

 

[Khev]

And then kara be all:

 

[jye4ever]

Kara can do this all day

 

[bboy]

As for parallels with other movies, I would not say that Departed was particularly grounded, with the insane Nicholson and Alec Baldwin performances, etc. But there aren't that many appropriate parallels really, to my eyes, because both companies have a wide range of films (MCU has Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man, while X-Men has the Singer/Vaughn movies, but also Deadpool, X3, and Origins). It's easier for me to make comparisons to another industry. So, let's say the food service industry. MCU is like, McDonald's. It appeals to everyone, it's not very adventurous. Kids love it. It's a massive corporate machine, etc. The Fox X-films are more like the higher end side of the fast food market. Not exactly fine cuisine, but you get something with a bit more substance on balance, with a tradeoff in that you can't check your brain at the door as easily. More for adults than the little kiddies. So, it's not going to appeal to as many people. And it's not as corporately centralized, so sometimes things get a bit off the rails. So, Origins was like Chipotle's E. coli breakout. Those don't happen at McDonald's, but on the other hand, your'e always getting something fairly bland and predictable. Not that there's anything wrong with either choice.

haha love this analogy, agreed.

 

[Khev]

Kara can do this all day

Actually after my latest series of rebuttals I'm pretty sure we won't be hearing from him again.

 

[jye4ever]

kara be like...

 

[SNIKT1950]

As superhero films as a whole the MCU films (and lets just stick with the two Russo entries for a moment) far surpass anything out of the Singerverse.

X2, FIRST CLASS & DOFP are miles ahead of anything from the MCU.

That's coming from a guy who loves TWS, GOTG, IRON MAN (2008) & THE AVENGERS (2012).

FIRST CLASS & DOFP in particular just put Feige's popcorn antics to shame. Those films just weren't worried about cheap excitement to drive the story home and rather relied on the impact of the relationships between their characters. Good cinema begins and ends with character exploration. Not fight choreography or trailer moments. FIRST CLASS & DOFP are simply better films because of their commitment to character. They're not just great CBMs. They're great films, period.

The closest the MCU got was TWS in allowing it to be a journey for Cap and Bucky (which CW dumped in favor of crossover spectacle).

 

[YoNoSe]

Rinse, repeat.

 

[jye4ever]

Well, I agree with him that FC and DOFP are great movies, not just great superhero movies, he's not wrong there.

Where he is wrong is that CW is just as great.

To snobbishly label CW as only "cheap excitement" and shrug it off as less sophisticated than FC and DOFP is not only a gross misinterpretation of the movie it also stinks of bad taste lol.