Is the Marvel Age Of Movies Done?

[Kirby101]

THE ROOM (2003). An R rated movie that dealt with serious themes like love, friendship, betrayal. It”s a true example of an auteur movie. Tommy Wiseau wrote, produced, directed, and starred in the movie. It clearly shows the difference between studio run movies like the MCU and a true singular vision.

I am thinking this sarcastic, as The Room is known as one of the worst movies of the last 20 years.
James Franco's The Disaster Artist was all about this terrible film and the strange director who made it.

[Vakanai]

Funny enough, I'm the opposite with the Punisher movies. I actually hate the Tom Jane version the most and I enjoyed Warzone more than it. But none of them work for me at all.

Watchmen was ok. It wasn't great but it was a "good attempt" given the complexity of the source material.

Deadpool 2 wasn't bad but it was very average to me, a lot of the humor didn't land. I didn't like BoP at all, I had to force myself to finish watching the movie.

Weird on our different responses to the two Punisher movies, just goes to show different tastes and all that. But yeah, they're neither great or work from a comic book accuracy angle as I understand it. Thought the Netflix series was good though, but kind of unfair to compare films and series.

I get you on Deadpool 2 and Watchmen, but we're definitely far apart on BoP. While not great, I thought it was a really fun film and I always have a hoot watching it.

I am thinking this sarcastic, as The Room is known as one of the worst movies of the last 20 years.
James Franco's The Disaster Artist was all about this terrible film and the strange director who made it.

I don't know about The Room, but I grew suspicious it might have been sarcastic the moment the word auteur was used - literally nobody ever means it and always uses that word sarcastically, still I didn't want to assume.

[Kirby101]

Of the R rated Super movies, the only one I didn't like was the all too serious Joker. The rest were R because of the type of humor they had.
And Logan was R, but not sure why, it could have easily been PG 13. There was probably a couple of scenes that gave it that.

[inisideguy]

While I agree that R ratings don't make for better movies, that there is like you said a place for all types of movies, including superhero movies. However compared to pg13 superhero movies r rated superhero movies are very rare. And now that Disney/MCU has absorbed Fox and the X-Men back they'll become even more so. So yeah, it doesn't make movies better, but it's still kind of a shame that such a rare treat as R rated superheroics will become that more rare. There's still the DCEU taking R risks for now, but with the low BO of BoP and TSS I wouldn't be surprised to discover they're done with that rating too. And that'd literally leave just the small independent guys ala Kick-Ass, Super, and Defendor. Those 3 were over 11 years ago. After that it's just been Logan, Deadpool, Deadpool 2, Joker, Birds of Prey, and The Suicide Squad. Half that was Fox. Half the R rated films in the genre in the last decade are now off the table. So, R isn't an indicator of quality, but losing out on that diversity of ratings in the genre is kind of a shame.

You can always watch The boys. Or other fantasy projects and cartoons that are R rated.

[inisideguy]

Of the R rated Super movies, the only one I didn't like was the all too serious Joker. The rest were R because of the type of humor they had.
And Logan was R, but not sure why, it could have easily been PG 13. There was probably a couple of scenes that gave it that.

Well both Blade and Kick ass had a lot of gore.

[Kirby101]

Well both Blade and Kick ass had a lot of gore.

Yeah, worked for Blade as a vampire movie, and Kick Ass was sort of a comedy, also true to it's source, as are the all ages MCU films.

[Vakanai]

Of the R rated Super movies, the only one I didn't like was the all too serious Joker. The rest were R because of the type of humor they had.
And Logan was R, but not sure why, it could have easily been PG 13. There was probably a couple of scenes that gave it that.

I loved Joker, best comic book movie since The Dark Knight, but to each their own.
Agreed on Logan though, didn't seem so gory as to warrant it in my opinion.

You can always watch The boys. Or other fantasy projects and cartoons that are R rated.

I probably will one day, but no reason to get Amazon Prime right now, barely order enough from there so can't justify it.
And what other projects? There's literally no other in this genre that I know of.

[ed2962]

I am thinking this sarcastic, as The Room is known as one of the worst movies of the last 20 years.
James Franco's The Disaster Artist was all about this terrible film and the strange director who made it.

Technically, Tommy Wiseau is an auteur. It's his vision and he was able to get it on screen the way he wanted. He's just a bad auteur.

[Kirby101]

Technically, Tommy Wiseau is an auteur. It's his vision and he was able to get it on screen the way he wanted. He's just a bad auteur.

So was Ed Woods.

[WebLurker]

Honestly, for me the entire "Marvel doesn't do R-rated movies criticism" is a non-starter of a discussion. Marvel has already said they will do an R-rated Deadpool.

And that they're not opposed to making R-rated movies in general, they just haven't had to to make their movies yet.

Beyond that, I am much more concerned about a movie's quality rather than its rating. Also, the rating of a movie must fit the tone of the character.

Agreed, although I think there can be exceptions. Spider-Man is very much not an R-rated character inherently, but I could see a faithful adaptation of Kraven's Last Hunt possibly being rated R, but that's a specific case, not a generalization.

A good chunk of R-rated superhero movies have been average to absolute garbage from Watchmen to The Punisher movies to the recent Hellboy. The second Deadpool was pretty average same with Birds of Prey despite them being rated-R. Beyond superhero movies, we saw the Aliens vs Predator sequel get an R-rating and it was dogshit, people also complained about Die Hard 4 being PG-13 but the R-rated fifth movie was absolute nonsense and far worse.

I've watched enough movies across a variety of genres for a long enough time to say categorically that the rating of a movie doesn't improve a movie. The movie needs to be executed well regardless of its rating.

I've noticed that the R-rated comic book movies that tend to be best received are the ones that use the rating to help inform the story (like how Logan was about the toll of a violent life and used the R-rated violence to communicate that point), while ones that just slap some profanity and blood on a PG-13 movie to be edgy don't fare as well (e.g. BvS). (Kinda on the fence r.e. Birds of Prey, given that I think that one turned out pretty well, but I think that almost all the R-rated content was just superficial paint on a PG-13 flick.)

Excusing wanting to see specific characters and stories and tones brought to life, I've noticed a recurring idea in the "we need more R-rated comic book movies" is this conception that anything less is just kiddie stuff and not mature storytelling for adults. I think there is a place for the R-rated ones, but this idea that they're inherently mature is a pretty basic misunderstanding of how storytelling works and what "mature" actually means. Heck, as we've seen, there's literally a PG-rated Batman cartoon show and movie that more mature than anything in the R-rated Snyderverse.

But yeah, just make good movies; the rating is only to help audiences navigate the content, not be a benchmark of quality.

[Castle]

I know this is in response to someone else, but no way would more violence make a movie better. Blood and gore are just filler material, same as prolonged sex scenes.

That will strictly depend on how it is used with the story. So gong back to saving private ryan, which has now become the gold standard, there is a very strong reason the first 15 minutes of that movie is often hailed as the greatest in all of cinema. the violence, blood and gore did play a part in it and I remember Tom Hanks say he spoke to many vets of world war 2, who praised the film and said, that is 100% exactly what happened to them. Here is one clip of a vet I can find.




I really doubt that if Spielberg has not pushed the war genre as he did with Saving Private Ryan, with the violence a step further from many other great war movies of their time, like The Guns of Narvone or the Bridge of the River Kwai, Saving Private Ryan would not have had the same impact.

In fact speaking of Saving Private Ryan, the movie single handily taught me what Sound Mixing is on film in a way I may never have gotten it on paper, because up till then I have never heard so many gun shots sound that extremely realistic in a film. I did not even need to check the Oscars to know that Saving Private Ryan must have won the awards in the sound mixing and sound editing categories and oh boy, did it win for that. That is film making of high class. where violence and gore becomes art that does elevate the movie from not just great but to masterpiece. Goodly any War movie now is just seem as dumbed down compared to Saving Private Ryan.

In a partial sense comic films have had a similar growth of how realism, story telling and violence is portrayed, But no need to rehash this topic as it is already been roughly discussed on this thread,
https://community.cbr.com/showthread...was-made/page2

I will also ask that you look at your own commentary. It's interesting you even once said, MCU films have more in common with Batman and Robin, even more than the DCU. Which is another way of saying MCU movies just brought a particular age of movies back where we are all force to pretend Comic films can not deal with heavier content.

However we still cannot pretend about that for long when we have look wider in the seas of comic films that did the equivalent of what saving private ryan, did its own genre and this is where the age of marvel is now just becoming limited, almost in the same sense many early world war films look limited compared to Saving Private Ryan.

[Rincewind]

I don't know about The Room, but I grew suspicious it might have been sarcastic the moment the word auteur was used - literally nobody ever means it and always uses that word sarcastically, still I didn't want to assume.

The descriptions I used for THE ROOM are all accurate and meet the definition by some of what constitutes a quality movie.

I personally enjoyed watching THE ROOM, specifically watching the Rifftrax Live version.

[inisideguy]

That will strictly depend on how it is used with the story. So gong back to saving private ryan, which has now become the gold standard, there is a very strong reason the first 15 minutes of that movie is often hailed as the greatest in all of cinema. the violence, blood and gore did play a part in it and I remember Tom Hanks say he spoke to many vets of world war 2, who praised the film and said, that is 100% exactly what happened to them. Here is one clip of a vet I can find.




I really doubt that if Spielberg has not pushed the war genre as he did with Saving Private Ryan, with the violence a step further from many other great war movies of their time, like The Guns of Narvone or the Bridge of the River Kwai, Saving Private Ryan would not have had the same impact.

In fact speaking of Saving Private Ryan, the movie single handily taught me what Sound Mixing is on film in a way I may never have gotten it on paper, because up till then I have never heard so many gun shots sound that extremely realistic in a film. I did not even need to check the Oscars to know that Saving Private Ryan must have won the awards in the sound mixing and sound editing categories and oh boy, did it win for that. That is film making of high class. where violence and gore becomes art that does elevate the movie from not just great but to masterpiece. Goodly any War movie now is just seem as dumbed down compared to Saving Private Ryan.

In a partial sense comic films have had a similar growth of how realism, story telling and violence is portrayed, But no need to rehash this topic as it is already been roughly discussed on this thread,
https://community.cbr.com/showthread...was-made/page2

I will also ask that you look at your own commentary. It's interesting you even once said, MCU films have more in common with Batman and Robin, even more than the DCU. Which is another way of saying MCU movies just brought a particular age of movies back where we are all force to pretend Comic films can not deal with heavier content.

However we still cannot pretend about that for long when we have look wider in the seas of comic films that did the equivalent of what saving private ryan, did its own genre and this is where the age of marvel is now just becoming limited, almost in the same sense many early world war films look limited compared to Saving Private Ryan.

I think you are comparing apples to oranges. First off comic book films are not the same genre as war films. And Saving private Ryan wasn't the first war film to show massive amounts of violence. It was filmed in a different way. But it wasn't the first to show how bad war is. I honestly don't understand what you are ever trying to say. But there is no reason a spider-man movie should have blood and gore. This is all crazy talk. There are several deconstruction type comic book films out there whether its Kick Ass or The Boys or Invincible. Why someone wants the MCU to have films like these is really beyond me. You can watch the Watchman show on HBO for more serious deeper type content. Its there. But for some reason you want Disney to make films like this. I like The Boys. That doesnt mean I want Captain America to be like The Boys. Heck I liked Invincible. That doesnt mean I want every animated movie I watch to be like that. This is lunacy.

[phonogram12]

The F bombs rules also address meaning.

“I’m going to f*cking kill him.” = PG-13; assuming it’s a one time use.

“ I’m going to f*ck him.” = R rating, even if is a one time use.

Even then it can get complicated. The movie FREQUENCY had to cut it’s one f word used as a threat because it made the scene “too intense”.

That makes sense, actually. Ever since I read that about the 1 f bomb rule, I've only really paid attn to it's frequency, but now that you mention it, I have never heard it used in the actual sexual sense in a pg13 before.

[chicago_bastard]

That will strictly depend on how it is used with the story. So gong back to saving private ryan, which has now become the gold standard, there is a very strong reason the first 15 minutes of that movie is often hailed as the greatest in all of cinema. the violence, blood and gore did play a part in it and I remember Tom Hanks say he spoke to many vets of world war 2, who praised the film and said, that is 100% exactly what happened to them. Here is one clip of a vet I can find.




I really doubt that if Spielberg has not pushed the war genre as he did with Saving Private Ryan, with the violence a step further from many other great war movies of their time, like The Guns of Narvone or the Bridge of the River Kwai, Saving Private Ryan would not have had the same impact.

In fact speaking of Saving Private Ryan, the movie single handily taught me what Sound Mixing is on film in a way I may never have gotten it on paper, because up till then I have never heard so many gun shots sound that extremely realistic in a film. I did not even need to check the Oscars to know that Saving Private Ryan must have won the awards in the sound mixing and sound editing categories and oh boy, did it win for that. That is film making of high class. where violence and gore becomes art that does elevate the movie from not just great but to masterpiece. Goodly any War movie now is just seem as dumbed down compared to Saving Private Ryan.

In a partial sense comic films have had a similar growth of how realism, story telling and violence is portrayed, But no need to rehash this topic as it is already been roughly discussed on this thread,
https://community.cbr.com/showthread...was-made/page2

I will also ask that you look at your own commentary. It's interesting you even once said, MCU films have more in common with Batman and Robin, even more than the DCU. Which is another way of saying MCU movies just brought a particular age of movies back where we are all force to pretend Comic films can not deal with heavier content.

However we still cannot pretend about that for long when we have look wider in the seas of comic films that did the equivalent of what saving private ryan, did its own genre and this is where the age of marvel is now just becoming limited, almost in the same sense many early world war films look limited compared to Saving Private Ryan.

Saving Private Ryan isn't the gold standard of anything. Spielberg didn't push the genre at all, at least not in a positive way.

Realism has nothing to do with a film's quality, let alone if it qualifies as a masterpiece, so bringing up opinions of war veterans says nothing about its merit for the art. If you want realism watch documentaries.

Films like Come and See or Apocalypse Now aren't concerned with being a realistic portrayal of war but they are far better films than Spielberg's trivialized take on a war movie. Believing that Saving Private Ryan was the first movie that showed the horrors of war in an explicit way just shows one's lack of knowledge about the matter.

Oh, and did you know that Christopher Nolan made a war movie that has a PG-13 rating?