Saw it in Monday's New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/o...ion&pgtype=Hom epage
Curious what you think of it. Valid lament on the state of Hollywood in general and accurate assessment of the Marvel films? Or a cranky old guy pining for the way things used to be and unable to adapt to the changing times?
I have to admit I haven't yet sat down and watched a Marvel all the way through (I loved comic books as a kid, by the way). The other day I was on a transcontinental flight and the woman in front of me was watching Aquaman. I watched parts of it in between chapters of my book--kind of an interesting perspective to just see the visuals and read the subtitles but not hear anything. Visually it was extremely rich with very impressive sets and effects. Another thing I noticed was how frenzied the editing pace was, with cuts every few seconds and lots of sweeping camera movements. Seemed like constant motion.
Hard to evaluate the dialogue, but from what I could see it felt pretty one-dimensional and predictable. Didn't seem like there was a lot of character development going on, but of course I would need to really sit down and watch the film all the way through to evaluate that.
The fight scenes came fast and furious throughout the movie, like every few minutes. I get that action movies are all about action--that's the whole point--but it almost felt like the film was essentially a series of fight scenes linked by brief interludes of dialogue and cursory story development.
I remember going to see Star Wars as a kid with my brother and grandparents in Manhattan when it came out. My grandparents and I found it pretty forgettable, but my brother was blown away and went back and saw it many times (he loved sci-fi). I like a good action flick as much as anyone, but it has to have rich characters and a compelling narrative--amazing action sequences and effects alone don't engage me. Anyway, that seemed to be the start of a huge transformation in the industry that continues to this day, and maybe the Marvel stuff is just the current form of that.
In any case, if people enjoy escaping for 2 hours in a Marvel film, that's great. Maybe it's not my cup of tea, but I have nothing against those films being made. I do think Scorsese has a point, though, that it's healthiest for cinema as a whole if there's oxygen and room for other, more character and story-centered films, or as he says risk-taking films that push boundaries and challenge assumptions, traditions, conventions. Maybe that's happening more in streaming these days (Breaking Bad being a great example), but it does seem like Hollywood is going all-in on safe, internationally-marketable clone films that offer a couple hours of action-packed escape but not much else. Valid survival strategy?
Opinions?
Curious what you think of it. Valid lament on the state of Hollywood in general and accurate assessment of the Marvel films? Or a cranky old guy pining for the way things used to be and unable to adapt to the changing times?
I have to admit I haven't yet sat down and watched a Marvel all the way through (I loved comic books as a kid, by the way). The other day I was on a transcontinental flight and the woman in front of me was watching Aquaman. I watched parts of it in between chapters of my book--kind of an interesting perspective to just see the visuals and read the subtitles but not hear anything. Visually it was extremely rich with very impressive sets and effects. Another thing I noticed was how frenzied the editing pace was, with cuts every few seconds and lots of sweeping camera movements. Seemed like constant motion.
Hard to evaluate the dialogue, but from what I could see it felt pretty one-dimensional and predictable. Didn't seem like there was a lot of character development going on, but of course I would need to really sit down and watch the film all the way through to evaluate that.
The fight scenes came fast and furious throughout the movie, like every few minutes. I get that action movies are all about action--that's the whole point--but it almost felt like the film was essentially a series of fight scenes linked by brief interludes of dialogue and cursory story development.
I remember going to see Star Wars as a kid with my brother and grandparents in Manhattan when it came out. My grandparents and I found it pretty forgettable, but my brother was blown away and went back and saw it many times (he loved sci-fi). I like a good action flick as much as anyone, but it has to have rich characters and a compelling narrative--amazing action sequences and effects alone don't engage me. Anyway, that seemed to be the start of a huge transformation in the industry that continues to this day, and maybe the Marvel stuff is just the current form of that.
In any case, if people enjoy escaping for 2 hours in a Marvel film, that's great. Maybe it's not my cup of tea, but I have nothing against those films being made. I do think Scorsese has a point, though, that it's healthiest for cinema as a whole if there's oxygen and room for other, more character and story-centered films, or as he says risk-taking films that push boundaries and challenge assumptions, traditions, conventions. Maybe that's happening more in streaming these days (Breaking Bad being a great example), but it does seem like Hollywood is going all-in on safe, internationally-marketable clone films that offer a couple hours of action-packed escape but not much else. Valid survival strategy?
Opinions?
Comment