THE MARVELS starring Brie Larson, Iman Vellani and Teyonna Parris (2023) 9 9

[TupennyConan]

[paqart]

On 11/13/2023 at 10:54 AM, drotto said:

But the messaging years ago seemed to lack the in your face or even abrasive qualities that it has take on in more recent times.  Almost a here is what I think, but if we disagree we can talk about it, and maybe still be friends. Also, creators would let the viewers judge for themselves. Now the creators attack and tend to get very combative when challenged.  It really feeds the worst on both sides of the issues.

Agreed. In "Father knows best", there is what looks like content inspired by the type of things we see today, but it is disguised in the friendly trappings of the series. "Some like it Hot" takes on a completely different meaning today than when it was released. At the time, it was sold as a zany comedy, but today looks like a toe in the water to see if the filmmakers could get away with it. The content of the 1970's is played for laughs and is always genial, non-threatening. By the 1990's, with Law & Order, it started getting less genial, more confrontational. Now, it is indeed "in your face" and very unpleasant. It seems to me like someone has replaced my ravioli with rusted screws and melted plastic. I'm supposed to like it, but no thanks.

[paqart]

https://boundingintocomics.com/2023/11/13/brie-larsons-the-marvels-bombs-at-the-box-office-with-worst-opening-weekend-in-mcu-history/

The latest on The Marvels.

[VintageComics]

On 11/13/2023 at 7:44 AM, Cat said:

You didn't think they'd be nice because of WORLD WAR II MOVIES? 

Seriously? 

 

Why don't you just either add to the discussion, offer a proper rebuttal or leave it? All you've done is throw out mockery in the last few days. 

On 11/13/2023 at 9:44 AM, paqart said:

Allow me to clarify. After a steady diet of Hogan's Heroes and many other TV and films with WWII themes, I had never seen a German who was not abrasive. Every portrayal was negative. It isn't that I expected them to be bad people, as you suggest (a ridiculous notion, btw) but that I didn't expect them to be the exact opposite. The Germans I met were gracious to a degree I had until then rarely encountered. The contrast was with how they were portrayed in American filmed entertainment, which until then provided my only frame of reference.

In future, you may want to hesitate before engaging in mockery.

I had the same experience. 

I grew up programmed to think Germans were abrasive and not nice people through the same shows and in the same way. 

What I found, after spending my entire adult life working with German firms and German people, was that they were incredibly polite and gracious people. Which is why I continued to work for them.

And I am certain that the main reason they are so gracious and polite is because they quite literally took accountability for what happened in World War 2 to heart, and walked forward with humility. 

The West can really use some accountability and humility these days but it's nowhere to be found. 

 

Edited November 13, 2023 by VintageComics

[Artboy99]

On 11/13/2023 at 6:47 AM, BigLeagueCHEW said:

Movie was drek , post credit scenes were the most exciting part.

I agree, and the post credit scene is about forming a new team...of who? Does anyone honestly like the current characters?

RiRi Williams

Cassie

Kate Bishop

Shuri

FalconCap

Captain Marvel

Ms. Marvel

Other Captain Marvel

She-Hulk

Yelena

Etc.

 

[BigLeagueCHEW]

On 11/13/2023 at 9:15 AM, Artboy99 said:

I agree, and the post credit scene is about forming a new team...of who? Does anyone honestly like the current characters?

RiRi Williams

Cassie

Kate Bishop

Shuri

FalconCap

Captain Marvel

Ms. Marvel

Other Captain Marvel

She-Hulk

Yelena

Etc.

 

Deadpool, Wolverine, Loki, Venom, and Spider-Man are the only MCU Characters I like that is left over, hope they return. Your list is  (no offense to you, lol)

Edited November 13, 2023 by BigLeagueCHEW

[namisgr]

On 11/13/2023 at 10:54 AM, drotto said:

But the messaging years ago seemed to lack the in your face or even abrasive qualities that it has take on in more recent times.  

Native Americans who've rightly hated their portrayals in a number of movies and television shows dating back over 80 years wouldn't agree with that.  And as for Sleeping Beauty and her dependence on Prince Charming to mosey along and awaken her adult life, that's a kind of messaging that was rampant over and over again for many decades, to the detriment of women thinking about or envisioning different professional and personal lives than those common portrayals.

Perhaps some of the more modern portrayals likely seem in your face because you find them objectionable?

[Cat]

On 11/14/2023 at 2:28 AM, VintageComics said:

Why don't you just either add to the discussion, offer a proper rebuttal or leave it? All you've done is throw out mockery in the last few days. 

I had the same experience. 

I grew up programmed to think Germans were abrasive and not nice people through the same shows and in the same way. 

What I found, after spending my entire adult life working with German firms and German people, was that they were incredibly polite and gracious people. Which is why I continued to work for them.

And I am certain that the main reason they are so gracious and polite is because they quite literally took accountability for what happened in World War 2 to heart, and walked forward with humility. 

The West can really use some accountability and humility these days but it's nowhere to be found. 

 

I was LITERALLY dumbfounded that someone who makes such wondrous claims about being a "grandiose free and critical thinker" would take his opinions on IRL Germans and Japanese people from... World War II movies, presumably ones produced mostly by the USA, at that. I mean, c'mon. The joke writes itself on that one. 

I've mostly stayed quiet because I haven't seen the film yet, and I'm not so sure if I'm keen on it. My best buddy really enjoyed it, and he had the same level of knowledge as me going in, and our tastes are remarkably similar, so it may be worth it after all. I'll definitely wait until Disney Plus though, that's for sure. 

My other comments have been on the remarkably off-topic politics, conservatism, COVID talk, etc etc that's attempted to be pushed through this thread in varying ways. I've called it out once I think? 

I leave anything you do, Roy. You grandstand as you will, believing you're invincible. All the while, those points rack up. I'll let you write yourself out of here. Until then, you're merely an annoyance. Always changing topics to be about yourself. Or stretching their parameters to try and include things hinting at COVID, or whatever today's pet conspiracy theory is, especially if it's a death. It gets very tiring.

Things were so much nicer and more pleasant during your 3 month sabbatical. 

 

 

[paqart]

On 11/13/2023 at 12:27 PM, namisgr said:

Native Americans who've rightly hated their portrayals in a number of movies and television shows dating back over 80 years wouldn't agree with that.  And as for Sleeping Beauty and her dependence on Prince Charming to mosey along and awaken her adult life, that's a kind of messaging that was rampant over and over again for many decades, to the detriment of women thinking about or envisioning different professional and personal lives than those common portrayals.

Perhaps some of the more modern portrayals likely seem in your face because you find them objectionable?

No question about it. I'm not making any effort to hide that fact, so it isn't a particularly novel observation. 

There is another way to look at the princess movies btw, and it is the way they were likely viewed at the time they came out. Women who married and took care of the household were not looked down upon, and many (men and women) recognized the real value they contributed to society. This included essential support to the husband's workplace success, often included chores that are not much different from what people today are paid to do. The difference is that as part of a household, a woman had more freedom in some ways than they do today, where they exist at the beck and call of an ever-changing stream of corporate bosses. 

Not all women want to give up on a family or a household to pursue economic triumphs outside the family in a commercial workspace. Some hate the idea of doing that, even those educated in top universities . I know, because I married one. The workplace isn't necessarily a paradise for women freed from household "drudgery", and describing it that way is an insult to every woman who genuinely enjoyed raising a family, of whom there are many.

As for Native Americans, you are shifting the topic. This thread isn't about which marginalized or misrepresented groups absolutely must have movies made about them, it's about movies that 1) don't appeal to their previous audience, thus resulting in low ticket sales, and 2) a new version of inclusion that is just as fake as what it is trying to replace.

I grew up with the Lone Ranger and Tonto on TV. I loved the show,  and genuinely admired Tonto. He wasn't a lesser man because his role was secondary to the Lone Ranger. More importantly, I later learned that the version of American Indian life found in film and TV was false. Later, I read books written by ethnographers, like George Catlin, who lived with Native American tribes in the early 1800's. Caitlin's portrayal was self-consciously sympathetic, but it was nothing like what we see, or have ever seen, in popular entertainment. Based on those works, early Native American tribes ran the gamut from Hamas/ISIS levels of savagery all the way up to completely peaceful monks that we hear about in the Himalayan mountains. Our pop culture has blended these unrealistically, while removing the most negative traits, to create more sympathetic portrayals. My opinion, both are wrong.

That said, sometimes the most unexpected movies are the most realistic. For instance, based on my reading of the relevant non-fiction literature on the subject, "The Exorcist" is the most realistic paranormal thriller ever made. Weirdly enough, "Ghost" is a distant second. But again, realism isn't the issue. The issue is appeal. There are many completely unrealistic movies that are nevertheless engaging. Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Doctor Strange are all examples of appealing but unrealistic movies. Realism isn't required to make something interesting or appealing. The most realistic film I've ever seen is "Tora! Tora! Tora!" about the attack on Pearl Harbor. It is an excellent movie, but not all films have to be like that.

You seem to think that the change of narrative allows a different perspective into modern films. That is true. Again, it is irrelevant. What is relevant is that I, and many others, don't like the change. It is also relevant that the number of people who have rejected the change is greater than the number of people who embrace it. That is fine, but not for movies that cost $150 million to produce. If they reduced the budgets to around $30 million, they might have enough of an audience to make a profit.

Or, Disney could make this new type of movie as charity projects by funding them with other movies marketed to the original MCU audience. Disney could have two brands, MCU, and MCYOU. Branded that way, customers like myself wouldn't avoid everything made by Disney, but would make a bee line for the MCU material. Other people, perhaps yourself, would avoid the material you find offensive by patronizing the MCYOU instead. If this was done, the money that went into the MCU might even be enough to fully subsidize the MCYOU movies so that they could operate at a loss without harming the bottom line. Putting everything into the same basket does hurt the bottom line, or changing the fare from MCU to MCYOU, because the existing market is disenfranchised. It's like trading gold bars for a handful of fake magic beans: not a good trade.

 

Edited November 13, 2023 by paqart

[N7 M31]

On 11/8/2023 at 10:49 PM, N7 M31 said:

I would like to reply to some of paqart's comments on this thread....But i thought better of it and decided that wouldn't be good. 

A quick reminder to myself ...and anyone else who might need it

[Cat]

On 11/14/2023 at 4:45 AM, paqart said:

No question about it. I'm not making any effort to hide that fact, so it isn't a particularly novel observation. 

There is another way to look at the princess movies btw, and it is the way they were likely viewed at the time they came out. Women who married and took care of the household were not looked down upon, and many (men and women) recognized the real value they contributed to society. This included essential support to the husband's workplace success, often included chores that are not much different from what people today are paid to do. The difference is that as part of a household, a woman had more freedom in some ways than they do today, where they exist at the beck and call of an ever-changing stream of corporate bosses. 

Not all women want to give up on a family or a household to pursue economic triumphs outside the family in a commercial workspace. Some hate the idea of doing that, even those educated in top universities . I know, because I married one. The workplace isn't necessarily a paradise for women freed from household "drudgery", and describing it that way is an insult to every woman who genuinely enjoyed raising a family, of whom there are many.

As for Native Americans, you are shifting the topic. This thread isn't about which marginalized or misrepresented groups absolutely must have movies made about them, it's about movies that 1) don't appeal to their previous audience, thus resulting in low ticket sales, and 2) a new version of inclusion that is just as fake as what it is trying to replace.

I grew up with the Lone Ranger and Tonto on TV. I loved the show,  and genuinely admired Tonto. He wasn't a lesser man because his role was secondary to the Lone Ranger. More importantly, I later learned that the version of American Indian life found in film and TV was false. Later, I read books written by ethnographers, like George Catlin, who lived with Native American tribes in the early 1800's. Caitlin's portrayal was self-consciously sympathetic, but it was nothing like what we see, or have ever seen, in popular entertainment. Based on those works, early Native American tribes ran the gamut from Hamas/ISIS levels of savagery all the way up to completely peaceful monks that we hear about in the Himalayan mountains. Our pop culture has blended these unrealistically, while removing the most negative traits, to create more sympathetic portrayals. My opinion, both are wrong.

That said, sometimes the most unexpected movies are the most realistic. For instance, based on my reading of the relevant non-fiction literature on the subject, "The Exorcist" is the most realistic paranormal thriller ever made. Weirdly enough, "Ghost" is a distant second. But again, realism isn't the issue. The issue is appeal. There are many completely unrealistic movies that are nevertheless engaging. Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Doctor Strange are all examples of appealing but unrealistic movies. Realism isn't required to make something interesting or appealing. The most realistic film I've ever seen is "Tora! Tora! Tora!" about the attack on Pearl Harbor. It is an excellent movie, but not all films have to be like that.

You seem to think that the change of narrative allows a different perspective into modern films. That is true. Again, it is irrelevant. What is relevant is that I, and many others, don't like the change. It is also relevant that the number of people who have rejected the change is greater than the number of people who embrace it. That is fine, but not for movies that cost $150 million to produce. If they reduced the budgets to around $30 million, they might have enough of an audience to make a profit.

Or, Disney could make this new type of movie as charity projects by funding them with other movies marketed to the original MCU audience. Disney could have two brands, MCU, and MCYOU. Branded that way, customers like myself wouldn't avoid everything made by Disney, but would make a bee line for the MCU material. Other people, perhaps yourself, would avoid the material you find offensive by patronizing the MCYOU instead. If this was done, the money that went into the MCU might even be enough to fully subsidize the MCYOU movies so that they could operate at a loss without harming the bottom line. Putting everything into the same basket does hurt the bottom line, or changing the fare from MCU to MCYOU, because the existing market is disenfranchised. It's like trading gold bars for a handful of fake magic beans: not a good trade.

 

So be honest, and I mean HONEST. What do you want? What is it you want and don't want to see in a Marvel film. Include examples if necessary. 

[namisgr]

On 11/13/2023 at 1:45 PM, paqart said:

Not all women want to give up on a family or a household to pursue economic triumphs outside the family in a commercial workspace. Some hate the idea of doing that, even those educated in top universities . I know, because I married one. The workplace isn't necessarily a paradise for women freed from household "drudgery", and describing it that way is an insult to every woman who genuinely enjoyed raising a family, of whom there are many.

Nobody has written anything about 'all women', making your comment more of a personal editorial than a point of thread discussion.  Nobody has written about homemakers facing "drudgery", making that comment irrelevant to the thread discussion as well.

The insult to women, as you call it, is to neglect the wishes of many millions of them who live rewarding and satisfying lives that include values to the forefront in movies you personally find objectionable, and the many millions of girls and young women who stand to benefit from exposure to role models and ideas that increase the richness and diversity of their opportunities in life.  Again, even if you find such role models and ideas objectionable.

Just because you don't like certain messages and find yourself not the target for movies expressing them doesn't change the fact that they can be influential and impactful in positive ways on people who don't want to be pigeonholed by those who can't relate to or benefit from these messages.  It's a great big world out here, filled with all kinds of people, and it should be no surprise that there is a wide diversity of movies, music, art, and culture out here for anyone and everyone to experience as they choose.  The runaway worldwide commercial success of the Barbie movie and extraordinary popularity of Taylor Swift should make this plain to anyone.

Edited November 13, 2023 by namisgr

[paqart]

On 11/13/2023 at 2:01 PM, namisgr said:

Nobody has written anything about 'all women', making your comment more of a personal editorial than a point of thread discussion.  Nobody has written about homemakers facing "drudgery", making that comment irrelevant to the thread discussion as well.

The insult to women, as you call it, is to neglect the wishes of many millions of them who live rewarding and satisfying lives that include values to the forefront in movies you personally find objectionable, and the many millions of girls and young women who stand to benefit from exposure to role models and ideas that increase the richness and diversity of their opportunities in life.  Again, even if you find such role models and ideas objectionable.

Just because you don't like certain messages and find yourself not the target for movies expressing them doesn't change the fact that they can be influential and impactful in positive ways on people who don't want to be pigeonholed by those who can't relate to or benefit from these messages.  It's a great big world out here, filled with all kinds of people, and it should be no surprise that there is a wide diversity of movies, music, art, and culture out here for anyone and everyone to experience as they choose.

You are having a hard time understanding this. Perhaps I haven't been clear. I'll try again, but this time using completely generic stand-in words so that the conversation doesn't get muddled with irrelevant associations.

1. We have two groups, "Square" and "Circle."
2. 50,000,000 people belong to the Square group.
3. 1,000,000 people are in the Circle group.
4. 100,000 people belong to both groups.
5. Movies made for the Square group are very successful.
6. Movies made for the Circle group are low budget and often unsuccessful.
7. Taking a movie franchise from the Square group and converting it to a Circle movie limits it's Square audience, while increasing its Circle audience.
8. The maximum size of the Circle Audience is less than the Square audience.
9. Therefore, if Square movies are modified to appeal to the Circle audience, their makers should expect significantly lower sales.

In other words, I couldn't care less which groups are represented, if at all, or done in a sympathetic or appropriate way. They can all be represented or none at all, or all wrong. That isn't relevant to a discussion of problems with recent Disney/MCU films. I don't watch football. Never have, don't intend to start. I'm just not interested. The people in the game can do whatever they want and it wouldn't matter to me and I wouldn't matter to them. That wasn't my attitude to Disney until about five years ago. Now, it is my attitude to Disney, and Marvel, DC, and a number of other companies. They have made it clear they don't want my business. I am no hurry to give it to them regardless. As far as I am concerned, those companies are doing everything they can to reduce the size of their own businesses and the industry itself. My guess is that independent publishers will take over before long because they are making comics their readers enjoy. The same for film studios. More and more independents are coming out with fantastic low budget successes that beat the pants off of bigger budget releases, both in box office and profit.

So, it is true I don't like certain messages in entertainment. I find it offensive. You seem to like the very things I don't like. That is not the issue. I don't have to like the same material you like, and it is annoying to see the material I like disappear from the market. If I was part of the niche market, it would be a sound decision to drop customers like me so that the larger audience is happy. However, I'm not in the niche group. Therefore, it is not a sound business decision to write off the previous audience to usher in a new but significantly smaller one. The only way that would make sense is if the goal was to convert people like me into becoming members of the niche group. And that is where it gets offensive, because that feels like coercion. 

[namisgr]

On 11/13/2023 at 2:00 PM, N7 M31 said:

A quick reminder to myself ...and anyone else who might need it

I should have paid heed to your post.  My bad.  It won't happen again.

[paqart]

On 11/13/2023 at 2:00 PM, Cat said:

So be honest, and I mean HONEST. What do you want? What is it you want and don't want to see in a Marvel film. Include examples if necessary. 

Sorry, that would be a way to get banned. Speaking of which, that only works one way. You can write what you like, but I can't. 

[Mr Sneeze]

On 11/13/2023 at 12:40 PM, Cat said:

I was LITERALLY dumbfounded that someone who makes such wondrous claims about being a "grandiose free and critical thinker" would take his opinions on IRL Germans and Japanese people from... World War II movies, presumably ones produced mostly by the USA, at that. I mean, c'mon. The joke writes itself on that one. 

I've mostly stayed quiet because I haven't seen the film yet, and I'm not so sure if I'm keen on it. My best buddy really enjoyed it, and he had the same level of knowledge as me going in, and our tastes are remarkably similar, so it may be worth it after all. I'll definitely wait until Disney Plus though, that's for sure. 

My other comments have been on the remarkably off-topic politics, conservatism, COVID talk, etc etc that's attempted to be pushed through this thread in varying ways. I've called it out once I think? 

I leave anything you do, Roy. You grandstand as you will, believing you're invincible. All the while, those points rack up. I'll let you write yourself out of here. Until then, you're merely an annoyance. Always changing topics to be about yourself. Or stretching their parameters to try and include things hinting at COVID, or whatever today's pet conspiracy theory is, especially if it's a death. It gets very tiring.

Things were so much nicer and more pleasant during your 3 month sabbatical. 

 

 

Right? I mean who knew that when we were made to watch season after season of Hogans Heroes in grade 8 social studies that germans weren’t so easily plied by apple strudel.

[paperheart]

[Bosco685]

[paqart]

On 11/13/2023 at 3:22 PM, Mr Sneeze said:

Right? I mean who knew that when we were made to watch season after season of Hogans Heroes in grade 8 social studies that germans weren’t so easily plied by apple strudel.

Is there a reason you wrote this? Are you trying to be amusing, or just careless? The point is that Germans were relentlessly caricatured by western media from about 1940 through at least the 1970's. This doesn't imply anything about apple strudel or persuasion thresholds. It simply fails to impart an alternate view. Therefore, anything different, particularly something that is the opposite of the caricature, would naturally be interesting.

For instance, North Korean defectors are often surprised by how much food exists in other countries, including America. They were taught to be thankful they had food during their famine because Americans had less. This is how propaganda works.

[kimik]

On 11/13/2023 at 10:15 AM, Artboy99 said:

I agree, and the post credit scene is about forming a new team...of who? Does anyone honestly like the current characters?

RiRi Williams

Cassie

Kate Bishop

Shuri

FalconCap

Captain Marvel

Ms. Marvel

Other Captain Marvel

She-Hulk

Yelena

Etc.

 

Looking like a stellar list that will draw in the fans so far.............