Top 5 M-SHE-U Failures 4 4

[sfcityduck]

On 4/12/2023 at 2:09 PM, october said:

Unlike time travel and infinite universes? They are the final arrows in the quiver of dead-end, idea-less, pointless, zero-stakes storytelling. There is nothing, nothing, creative about those tired, stale tropes...and they were both already used. Hell, they built an entire phase around the second one.

I hate time travel and multi-verse's when they are not done well (Avengers, Rip Hunter) but Loki is doing it very well.  Latest Spiderman did it well.  Miles Morales did a fantastic job.

Wandavision didn't go down that road at all.  Nor did Hawkeye.  

I dunno, the outrage seems selective since you guys seem to have loved Avengers and the many Spidermans.  And the MC comic universe has been on this road for 40 years.  So hard for Marvel to avoid it.

Still, while I share your frustration with reboots and time travel and multiverse stories, I can still appreciate the creativity and entertainment value of Loki!  Not sure how anyone could not.  Disney went out on a limb with that one and I am glad they did.

 

[october]

On 4/12/2023 at 4:23 PM, sfcityduck said:

I hate time travel and multi-verse's when they are not done well (Avengers, Rip Hunter) but Loki is doing it very well.  Latest Spiderman did it well.  Miles Morales did a fantastic job.

Wandavision didn't go down that road at all.  Nor did Hawkeye.  

I dunno, the outrage seems selective since you guys seem to have loved Avengers and the many Spidermans.  And the MC comic universe has been on this road for 40 years.  So hard for Marvel to avoid it.

Still, while I share your frustration with reboots and time travel and multiverse stories, I can still appreciate the creativity and entertainment value of Loki!  Not sure how anyone could not.  Disney went out on a limb with that one and I am glad they did.

 

If I never see another movie/show with one of the following cliches, I will be overjoyed:

1. Time travel
2. Multiple universes
3. Surprise twins!
4. Imaginary person/MPD

Efforts like the last Spider-Man succeed in spite of these crutches, never because of them. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by october

[sfcityduck]

On 4/12/2023 at 2:11 PM, TupennyConan said:

Entertainment isn't profitable nor entertaining when it's an angry social lecture.

Once an entertainer decides the angry social lecture matters most, they should enter politics & revist entertaining some other day.

Disagree. Stan Lee was a vocal supporter of civil rights.  Some readers had your view back in the 1960s.  One wrote a letter to complain about Marvel’s support for civil rights stating “I’m not a racist, just a concerned Marvelite who doesn’t want his favorite comic company to be ruined by something that doesn’t concern you as comic publishers.” Sounds exactly like your point. Stan Lee's response?  This in a 1969 letters page:

Quote

“But, such matters as racism and inequality do concern us, Tim — not just as comic mag artists and writers and publishers, but as human beings. Certainly it’s never been our intention to portray all, or even most, white Americans as hard-core bigots or screaming racists. Maybe it’s just that we think that many people in the land of the free have too long turned their backs or averted their eyes to the more unpleasant things that are going on every day. Maybe we felt we could do something — even within the relatively humble format of what used to be called a ‘comic-book’ – to change things just a bit for the better. If we failed, let’s just say that we’d at least like to have it said of us that — we tried.”

Stan didn't stop trying.  Shortly before he died he posted a viedo stating: "Marvel has always been and always will be a reflection of the world right outside our window.  That world may change and evolve, but the one thing that will never change is the way we tell our stories of heroism. Those stories have room for everyone, regardless of their race, gender or color of their skin.  The only things we don’t have room for are hatred, intolerance and bigotry.”

'nuff said.

Lots of very profitable and entertaining move and tv products also provided important social and political messages.  And nothing in Marvel/Disney is "angry." Quite the opposite.

[sfcityduck]

On 4/12/2023 at 2:28 PM, october said:

 

Efforts like the last Spider-Man succeed in spite of these crutches, never because of them. 

The things you dislike were the central storyline of the last Spider-Man.  It would not have been made without them.

[TupennyConan]

On 4/12/2023 at 5:30 PM, sfcityduck said:

Disagree. Stan Lee was a vocal supporter of civil rights.  Some readers had your view back in the 1960s.  One wrote a letter to complain about Marvel’s support for civil rights stating “I’m not a racist, just a concerned Marvelite who doesn’t want his favorite comic company to be ruined by something that doesn’t concern you as comic publishers.” Sounds exactly like your point. Stan Lee's response?  This in a 1969 letters page:

Stan didn't stop trying.  Shortly before he died he posted a viedo stating: "Marvel has always been and always will be a reflection of the world right outside our window.  That world may change and evolve, but the one thing that will never change is the way we tell our stories of heroism. Those stories have room for everyone, regardless of their race, gender or color of their skin.  The only things we don’t have room for are hatred, intolerance and bigotry.”

'nuff said.

Lots of very profitable and entertaining move and tv products also provided important social and political messages.  And nothing in Marvel/Disney is "angry." Quite the opposite.

Fair enough. Thanks for the post. 

[Bosco685]

On 4/12/2023 at 5:16 PM, sfcityduck said:

The title of this thread is "The Top 5 M-SHE-U Failures." 

I thought it was "sfcityduck takes on all MCU challengers - BRING IT!"

[october]

On 4/12/2023 at 4:32 PM, sfcityduck said:

The things you dislike were the central storyline of the last Spider-Man.  It would not have been made without them.

I'm aware. I saw it. The rest of the film was enough to overcome it. 

[sfcityduck]

On 4/12/2023 at 2:50 PM, october said:

I'm aware. I saw it. The rest of the film was enough to overcome it. 

To me the best part of the film was the three Spider-Man's.  Otherwise, the film was a bit of a drag and the reboot at the end was super-annoying to me.  (Reminded me of how they got out of the MJ marriage.)  But the three Spider-Man's was pretty awesome.  So for me, that meeting was not something to be overcome, it was something to be celebrated.  To each their own.

[october]

On 4/12/2023 at 5:00 PM, sfcityduck said:

To me the best part of the film was the three Spider-Man's.  Otherwise, the film was a bit of a drag and the reboot at the end was super-annoying to me.  (Reminded me of how they got out of the MJ marriage.)  But the three Spider-Man's was pretty awesome.  So for me, that meeting was not something to be overcome, it was something to be celebrated.  To each their own.

Seeing the three Spideys on screen together was cool enough to overcome the use of a tired, overdone trope. If a film is good enough, and the results are compelling enough, I can overlook the fact that it took a lame way to get there. The rest of Phase 4 that used the multiverse? Not so much. 

[october]

On 4/12/2023 at 4:16 PM, sfcityduck said:

I have no problem with strong female characters or movies about females.  

Neither do a lot of people in this thread. It's a question of storytelling (well, for me at least). Shows that give us realistic, flawed people/women who overcomes odds to grow, change and succeed are embraced by most/all fair minded viewers (The Queen's Gambit). Shows that plop a nearly perfect 16 year old girl with Tony-Stark levels of intelligence into the story out of nowhere don't get the same positive reception. Is some of that sexist? Would a male Mary Sue face the same scrutiny? Honestly, probably not...and that sucks. Poor storytelling is poor storytelling. Either way, it's present in SO MANY movies now. It's as ubiquitous as the "useless bubble head hollering in the background whose only function is giving the male lead someone to save" was in 80's action movies. 

Couple that with now clownish/depowered/broken legacy characters (Thor, Hulk, Luke, Han, etc, etc) and it makes for some rough viewing. 

[Microchip]

This article makes the point clearly.   In terms of creativity, the 80's looks like the peak for movies.  

We all know the wealth of stories and characters in comic books spans decades before, and after the 80's, but the big question is leadership at Disney and co adhering to inclusivity narrative push by institutional lenders currently.  The mandated cultural narrative makes for really bad movies, no one wants to watch, no matter which stories, or characters are dragged into the picture.

https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/air-tetris-mario-bros-making-sense-of-cinema-s-latest-1980s-moment-20230412-p5czsf.html

The year ahead is full of throwback titles: there’s a third Guardians of the Galaxy, a franchise not set in the 1980s, but whose success has been fuelled by its retro soundtrack choices; a new entry in the Evil Dead franchise that started in 1981; a live-action remake of The Little Mermaid, Disney’s 1989 animated hit; a new CGI entry in the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles franchise that first emerged from the sewers in 1984; another Ghostbusters movie (spooks first sighted in 1984); and of course, the big-budget, big-screen Ryan Gosling adaptation of the 1981 TV series The Fall Guy, now in production in Australia.

[WeR138]

The CGI in that Marvels trailer is like a circumcision gone bad.  It may well be the new benchmark to which I compare all horrible CGI in future films.

At one point, when Monica Rambeau approached the space wall, I thought the movie had morphed into an animated film. 

 

 

[drotto]

On 4/12/2023 at 6:45 PM, WeR138 said:

The CGI in that Marvels trailer is like a circumcision gone bad.  It may well be the new benchmark to which I compare all horrible CGI in future films.

At one point, when Monica Rambeau approached the space wall, I thought the movie had morphed into an animated film. 

 

 

The "Moon" scene, the costumes, and that hallway, also look like a BBC level production (not saying some of those shows are not great).

[@therealsilvermane]

On 4/12/2023 at 7:35 PM, drotto said:

The "Moon" scene, the costumes, and that hallway, also look like a BBC level production (not saying some of those shows are not great).

Well it’s a darn good thing Marvel has like SIX MONTHS to make the VFX better.

[JC25427N]

On 4/12/2023 at 7:55 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

Well it’s a darn good thing Marvel has like SIX MONTHS to make the VFX better.

You have faith that they will? This seems like the same level of VFX that they deemed acceptable for the past few entries

[media_junkie]

On 4/12/2023 at 7:55 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

Well it’s a darn good thing Marvel has like SIX MONTHS to make the VFX better.

If you are putting out a teaser, you'd think they would at least put out parts that have finished VFX.  While it is called a teaser this very well could make people decide to give it a chance or not.  spoon VFX on the very first view of the movie doesn't instill confidence.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:29 PM, media_junkie said:

If you are putting out a teaser, you'd think they would at least put out parts that have finished VFX.  While it is called a teaser this very well could make people decide to give it a chance or not.  spoon VFX on the very first view of the movie doesn't instill confidence.

I think all parties have decided whether or not they’re going to see the movie or not already and are entrenched in their camps. VFX be darned, just show me the teaser already and they did and I’m freakin elated.

[sfcityduck]

On 4/12/2023 at 3:16 PM, october said:

Shows that plop a nearly perfect 16 year old girl with Tony-Stark levels of intelligence into the story out of nowhere don't get the same positive reception. Is some of that sexist? Would a male Mary Sue face the same scrutiny? Honestly, probably not...and that sucks.

You just described what is happening here.  Excessive criticism of scenarios that are not that different than Peter Parker being able to whip up miracle spidey thread (that would be worth billions) or other tech, playboy drunk Tony Stark being able against all odds an incredible genius able to MacGyver an Iron Man suit in the middle of nowhere, a 90 lb weakling turned into the best fighter and tactician and leader of all time, etc., none of which garner any outrage here because, well, they are men and we grew up with those stories of another age. 

I get that folks prefer to watch stories about people they can empathize with or want to be, and you are right that some men can't empathize with female characters and some people can't empathize with folks of a different ethnicity or religion or nationality or whatever.  But that's not a problem with the storytelling, that's a problem with the audience.  All of these stories require the viewer to suspend disbelief. If you can do it for Tony Stark and Peter Parker (the super-genius H.S. student) but not for a college girl, then you got to ask yourself why not.

 

 

 

 

[@therealsilvermane]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:29 PM, JC25427N said:

You have faith that they will? This seems like the same level of VFX that they deemed acceptable for the past few entries

Do you think the “quality over quantity” statement and postponing the film three months is some kind of bluff by Iger and Feige? 

[JC25427N]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:37 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

Do you think the “quality over quantity” statement and postponing the film three months is some kind of bluff by Iger and Feige? 

Fair enough, here's hoping.