And I believe I always respond that your movies aren't as deep as you think they are. There are plenty of films I watch for depth and they rarely involve people dressing up in spandex. I can enjoy The Godfather, Apocalypse Now, Do The Right Thing, ect. And I can also enjoy Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy and other MCU films. Just because I enjoy one thing for one reason, doesn't mean I can't enjoy something else for an entirely different reason. I'm happier this way. I don't need to do mental gymnastics to justify my likes and dislikes.
I can decide on my own (a decision). I don't need anyone telling me, if this are the same people that justified why Thor Ragnarok was a spoofy movie when I asked why couldn't the movie be more true to the story like DOFP or The Dark Knight was. Disney is not really fitting the bill for many that liked it when there was no cinematic universe.
.
I can enjoy Blade, The Dark Knight, Spiderman 2, Logan, Unbreakable , X-Men 2. Anything without a cinematic Disney crossover that don't usually know what story telling is.And I can also enjoy Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy and other MCU films. Just because I enjoy one thing for one reason, doesn't mean I can't enjoy something else for an entirely different reason. I'm happier this way. I don't need to do mental gymnastics to justify my likes and dislikes.
It's hard to tell what are their high class and low class stuff. the movies are the same. Disney tell directors they take care of everything. No MCU higher class touches the non cinematic movies. The mediocre story telling and tone of MCU is present throughout the films. Disney has let things get too industrialised. Its like diet sodas, there is a lot of them to go around but not much quality to go around,This is Disney actually thinking they have become too big to fail. fine wines you have to seek it out, it comes often and always from the outside. (Logan, Into the Spiderverse).
Last edited by Marvelgirl; 01-29-2019 at 07:20 AM.
I will concede that I think Logan and Into the Spider-Verse are better then a good chunk of the MCU movies (although Spider-Verse is actually pretty MCU-like, really). But those movies aren't all the same (different genres for one). Also, some of them have gone some surprising complex ways, e.g Winter Soldier, the Guardians of the Galaxy movies (character stuff), Black Panther, to name a few. Even some of the less wine-like ones are really well done within their scope (I don't think anyone would argue that Ragnarok or the Ant-Man movies are deep, but they have some well-conceived characters and are really well-put together comedies).
Last edited by WebLurker; 01-29-2019 at 07:14 PM.
Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
(All-New Wolverine #4)
Want to know what else Disney now owns due to buying 21st Century Fox ? They own the classic MTM Enterprises brand. Back in the late 1980's , MTM sold to Fox in a deal and here is a list of shows Disney now owns.
Mary Tyler Moore Show
Bob Newhart Show
WKRP in Cincinnati
Hill Street Blues
Remington Steele
Evening Shade
Rhoda
Lou Grant
Newhart
White Shadow
What is kinda sad is I wonder what Grant Tinker and Mary Tyler Moore would think. Both were married when Tinker & Moore formed MTM Enterprises and ran it for years before they sold it off to 20th Century Fox. Both would pass away within 2 months of each other in 2016/2017.
"The story so far: As usual, Ginger and I are engaged in our quest to find out what the hell is going on and save humanity from my nemesis, some bastard who is presumably responsible." - Sir Digby Chicken Caesar.
“ Well hell just froze over. Because CM Punk is back in the WWE.” - Jcogginsa.
“You can take the boy outta the mom’s basement, but you can’t take the mom’s basement outta the boy!” - LA Knight.
"Revel in What You Are." Bray Wyatt.
Winter Soldier, the Guardians of the Galaxy movies (character stuff), Black Panther are as complex as Disney wants them to be though simplistic in a world of mutants and cape crusaders.
Again, this is what Disney consider deep for them. this is Disney. this is not another studio. what's that saying? a pg 13 fox or warner brothers movie is an R rated disney movie.ven some of the less wine-like ones are really well done within their scope (I don't think anyone would argue that Ragnarok or the Ant-Man movies are deep, but they have some well-conceived characters and are really well-put together comedies).
If I was a Disney employee and I pitched them Blade, The Dark Knight, Spiderman 2, Logan, Unbreakable , X-Men 2, Disney will say they are too deep and something lighter like Black Panther or GOTG will be better.
If you care so much about staying true to source material then you should hate Dark Knight as much as Thor Ragnarok.
I love both films for different reasons and Dark Knight is arguably the best comic book movie ever made but it's a bad Batman movie. Why? Because Bruce whole goal is to get Harvey elected so he can retire with Rachel. Sorry Batman doesn't retire it's a flaw in the Nolan films it fits the Batman Nolan created but it's not true to the source material just how Thor Ragnarok was true to the Thor of the MCU but not the Thor of the Marvel Universe.
That makes no sense.
Rating has got nothing to do with depth.
You remind me of another poster who used to hang out here. He or she was obsessed with the idea that high ratings and lack of humor equaled depth. While I haven't seen everything on your list there, I submit for your your consideration Pixar. They've worked with Disney their entire career, have never made a movie rated above PG (and many of those did't even deserve that), and usually have a sense of humor about them. That said, they consistently put out movies with a great deal of depth and complexity, usually exceeding that of the superhero genre's standard offerings. Up, Inside Out, WALL-E, the Toy Story movies, the Incredibles movies, to name a few. So, I find your argument vague and unconvincing.
(FIY: SM2 is very much on the level of stuff we get from Disney overall and I've yet to hear a convincing argument that Guardians 2 lacked depth. Logan violence and language wasn't what made it a deep movie; the way it explored the characters was. On top of that, Disney has given us stuff like Zootopia and Star Wars: The Last Jedi.)
Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
(All-New Wolverine #4)
Disney is, of course, a company. Hard to say what any individual thinks. I doubt they think they are unstoppable. But they have acquired so much diversification that a failure in one part wouldn't mean much. I would also add that things people are labeling as failures were, in most cases, overwhelming successes. "The Last Jedi" comes to mind. It has a lot of problems for those of us who care about nitpicking details that most people don't care about but, regardless of how someone who doesn't like it tries to spin it, it was one of the most successful movies ever made.
Power with Girl is better.
A person who once tried to justify why Thor 3 is a good Thor or Ragnarok film does not get to call TDK a bad batman movie to me. the feelings you have of TDK is not related to the truth that Disney will never green-light the movie. a failure on Disney's part.
Adam driver thinks episode 9 is their last chance to get it right. How did it come to that? Is it fair to say Disney and their movies live on a different plant?
Last edited by Marvelgirl; 02-01-2019 at 09:24 AM.
That just seems super hypocritical to me. Like you can trash what one side likes but the other side isn't allowed to trash what you like, and then you expect the other side must like what you like as well.
It's dangerous to think that everything must cater to your tastes and be made to your specifics or else it's a faulty product, but that's part and parcel for the original post in this thread, too.
And no matter how many apologists try to excuse Last Jedi using that "success", the facts remain it created problems for the franchise afterwards that have necessitated changes and course corrections. Batman v Superman did well also, and we all know the issues WB have dealt with ever since.
What problems? Batman vs Superman created problems when you compare the success of the first two DC movies to the success of the Marvel movies and caused people to stop going to DC movies until they lightened up.
I think there are huge problems with The Last Jedi but I'm a details guy. The vitriol on the Internet doesn't reflect how many people loved or hated it. Ticket sales reflect that.
I don't see the relative failure of "Solo" as being evidence of a failure with the main movies. Right now, why the side movies haven't worked out that well while the main movies are phenomenal successes is something they are trying to figure out. It may just be people don't consider the side movies to be anything but asides, nothing to do with continuing the main story.
You can blithely refer to apologists all you want but it may be even more of a mistake to listen to people fanatical enough to argue on the Internet endlessly over the vastly greater number of people who buy tickets.
Power with Girl is better.
Daisy Ridley thinks it's doing fine. So what's the point? Neither means anything.
Do Disney and their movies live on a different planet? You mean they don't see how horribly unsuccessful their movies are? Well, when TFA isn't the second biggest movie of modern times and TLJ isn't number 11, there may be a problem. For the moment, I'd suggest those who keep saying the new SW main movies are not beloved by the overwhelming majority are living in a different reality where a movie is a failure because one person, themselves, doesn't like it.
Power with Girl is better.