|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jun 24, 2011 21:28:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jun 25, 2011 5:44:57 GMT -5
It's makin' me nervous, though. Believe me, I'm the ultimate Glass-half-full guy when it comes to superhero films (I kind of liked Ghost Rider, even. . . ), so of course I'll see it and probably enjoy it. But. . . Many of the dialog clips used in the trailer are so embarrassingly cliche'd that it makes me fear for the film in general: "We are much alike, you & I. . . " (Villain to Hero) "You're late." "Well, nobody's perfect." (Cocky exchange after cavalry-save moment) The insightful "You must remain true to who you are" advice from the Father Figure (who is likely going to meet his demise). The well-composed slow-motion shot of the Hero & his Team bursting into the villain's lair (VERY cool to see the Howling Commandos, though-- no question!). Oddly enough, what I found most compelling was the pre-transformation stuff. That part of the trailer was sucking me right in. Chris Evans looked a little weird- and his voice doesn't really match that body or physique- but my response was the desired "I want to see more of that story". An unintended consequence of this Hollywood Superhero Summer is that the formulaic constraints and/or obstacles of the genre become all the more problematic when we're seeing these films one after the other. Particularly the individual-male-hero-overcoming-personal-or-internal-adversity-in-order-to-defeat-the-big-external-foe-in-the-end films. Heck, Disney's animated Hercules from a dozen years ago would fit right into this mold. . . I will say that Chris Evans is working better than I thought he would. Looks like he's stepping up to the challenge. HB |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jul 22, 2011 5:32:16 GMT -5
Reviewer Ann Hornaday in this morning's Washington Post gave the film a glowing review-- says it's the best of this summer's superhero films. I will say that she's sort of unreliable as a critic-- but I would MUCH rather have her spreading this solid good will than sitting on the fence with an ambivalent review. Good news, indeed-!
HB
(PS/Modif: Actually, as I'm browsing around the net, I'm seeing many positive reviews, and LOTS of high praise for Chris Evans, which is very gratifying, as he's been oft-quoted about being more-or-less scared to death about taking on such a deeply iconic role. Kenneth Turan (LA Times, I think?), who can be particularly harsh, credits Evans directly with much of the film's success.
Ahh-- such a relief. . . )
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Jul 22, 2011 9:39:48 GMT -5
Rotten Tomatoes is mixed at the moment, about 57% last I checked. It's worse than Thor (78%) and the latest X-Men (82) but far better than Green Lantern (26%).
Remember that the Avengers' teaser that leaked a few days ago is after the closing credits, so it's worth remaining a bit more.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgermaniac on Jul 24, 2011 17:48:27 GMT -5
Just a terrific movie. I think it is my favorite super hero movie ever.
One of my favorite parts (and I hadn't heard it going in) was the cameo from the Human Torch of the Invaders.
|
|
|
|
Post by owene on Jul 29, 2011 9:19:02 GMT -5
Just seen it, enjoyed it and felt it got across a nicely streamlined version of the WW2 MU really well, most of it's changes were good ideas.
Excellent Peggy Carter, really good Brubaker style Bucky and I liked Howard Stark and Arnim zola a lot.
The origin stuff is much better than the action stuff but it's all good.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 31, 2011 11:16:36 GMT -5
CA is the number one movie in America right now, making about 65 mill in its opening weekend--almost exactly what Thor did. Green Lantern did 52 mill in it's first week, but then sank like a stone due to bad word of mouth. I haven't seen CA yet but my friends who have seen it liked, but didn't love, it. I hope it does well--but frankly I think these super hero movies are coming out too quickly. It's hard to get excited when four major super hero movies come out in a space of a month or two. They need to be major events, IMO/
|
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Aug 3, 2011 12:32:58 GMT -5
In its second week, CA has now dropped to 3rd place with less than 25 million in sales. Not good.
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 7, 2011 6:52:12 GMT -5
In its second week, CA has now dropped to 3rd place with less than 25 million in sales. Not good. And it's really a pretty darned good film. Individual elements aside, I think it's strictly a better "movie" than both Thor and GL-- although I think X-Men: FC remains the best one of the summer. It's also the rare case where I think the movie was better than its trailer. The trailer actually edited in cliche'd moments that didn't exist as such in the movie itself (the afore-mentioned "you're late"/"nobody's perfect", for instance). Chris Evans completely stepped up to this role, and surprised me. I would not have guessed this actor (judging from previous roles) could hope to convey Cap's crucial humility-- and that quality is in fact what brings this character across here. Really nails it. And yep, it turns into kind of a 30's matinee movie serial for the 2nd half of the film--- but geeze, that's so delightfully correct (and obviously intentional) that it behooves the viewer to surrender to it. But bobc I think you're correct-- the glut of traditional super-hero flicks likely dilluted the box office across the board. I do imagine they're banking on LARGE DVD revenues down the road, though, with "special boxed Avengers Editions" and all that. Perhaps the $$'s for behinds-in-theater-seats isn't as important an indicator as it once was. . . HB |
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Aug 7, 2011 7:47:24 GMT -5
I still haven't seen it, HB--but both Austin newspapers gave it very luke-warm reviews. My friends who have seen it have mostly liked it, but nobody was overwhelmed by it either.
Yeah I'm having trouble generating enthusiasm over super hero films right now just because there are so many out. Now Conan is set for release. It just seems weird that there are more super hero movies out in one summer than in (practically) the whole rest of movie history. For forty years you basically had either Batman or Superman, with a few grade Z heroes along the way.
I am going to see The Decemberists tomorrow at an outdoor venue and it is going to be 107. degrees. Yay.
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 7, 2011 9:21:11 GMT -5
I still haven't seen it, HB--but both Austin newspapers gave it very luke-warm reviews. My friends who have seen it have mostly liked it, but nobody was overwhelmed by it either. Yeah I'm having trouble generating enthusiasm over super hero films right now just because there are so many out. Now Conan is set for release. It just seems weird that there are more super hero movies out in one summer than in (practically) the whole rest of movie history. For forty years you basically had either Batman or Superman, with a few grade Z heroes along the way. I am going to see The Decemberists tomorrow at an outdoor venue and it is going to be 107. degrees. Yay. And that's why the HB-Family doesn't live in Texas! (Although recent heat-indexes have had our relative temps in the DC area at over 110 several times in the last few weeks. . . ). Sister-in-law lives in Carrollton and calls regularly with weird-heat-related updates. Yeesh-- and I'm originally from lovely, cool Michigan. . . Man, that Conan trailer is actively making me NOT want to see that film. I don't think there's a single clip throughout that lasts longer than 1.25 seconds--- it's just a relentless collage of action and spectacle, no story-telling in the image sequence at all. This tells me: No Scenework Worth Watching Could Be Found In This Film. Yikes. I was debating with HB-Son that perhaps the broader-scope drawback of doing superhero films as part of a larger, ongoing story is that it just takes too flippin' long to get the bigger story told. It's more on the scale of published books (maybe one a year, at best?) than the monthly crawl of their comic-book source material. The expectation then becomes so hyper-inflated that anything short of a ground-breaking, life-changing blockbuster is deemed a solid disappointment. And then you're reluctant to invest your hopes for another year or so of waiting for the next installment. And of course there's NO sense of trust that the studio(s) will hold up their end of the deal and not either a) drop the franchise (where's the next Hellboy film?) or b) Re-boot the franchise in a moment of greed or pique (there was an audibly palpable reaction of betrayal and dismay from the crowd when they saw the trailer for the upcoming Spidey reboot at my local theater---- that does not bode well.). In a way, modern television may really be the best medium to tell a good superhero story. A series provides so much more time to actually invest yourself in the characters-- which is what will ultimately drive the story. HB |
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Aug 7, 2011 12:13:20 GMT -5
I didn't want to say it, but yeah that Conan trailer isn't exactly making me stampede towards the theater! I'm not hearing anybody talking about it--it's almost like everybody senses it's not going to stack up against the original. I probably won't go see it.
Yeah it's been nearly 50 days straight of temps over 100 degrees (and before that it was high 90's since April). It's the worst drought in Texas history. I can't believe half the country has been flooded for months, but those of us in central Texas aren't getting a frikkin' drop. I mean that literally.
Anyway--You know what I'd like to see in a Marvel movie? SENTINELS! I'd love to see the X-Men or Avengers tackle the sentinels in a movie! There was a time when they were amongst the most feared adversaries of any Marvel super team--and I think visually, they'd be really impressive on the Big Screen. If we can afford to make a Tranformers movie, we can make sentinels!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Aug 7, 2011 12:54:52 GMT -5
Hmm, I have seen it and have mixed feelings about it. I would say that, for me, it wasn't quite as good as Thor or X-Men F.C, but much better than, say, X3 or Daredevil. There were some nice touches like the Howling Commando and especially Howard Stark, but the Red Skull was disappointing, just the typical "I'm bad because I'm bad" villain without much depth.
|
|
|
|
Post by pulpcitizen on Aug 7, 2011 13:06:16 GMT -5
I thought they gave an in-movie explanation for his evil: his worst traits were amplified, pushing him to become a megalomaniac due to the super-soldier treatment he underwent.
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 7, 2011 15:38:34 GMT -5
Anyway--You know what I'd like to see in a Marvel movie? SENTINELS! I'd love to see the X-Men or Avengers tackle the sentinels in a movie! There was a time when they were amongst the most feared adversaries of any Marvel super team--and I think visually, they'd be really impressive on the Big Screen. If we can afford to make a Tranformers movie, we can make sentinels!!! That, bobc, is a first-rate, five-star suggestion. Heck, how in the world did we get through three X-Men films without ever seeing Sentinels, for that matter? Historically, in the vast majority of their appearances, it seems like they've only been defeated by the barest, barest of margins and/or with the aid of well-timed variable circumstances. They even look good in the "cut" scenes from the X-Men Legends games-- they'd surely be terrific in CGI on the big screen! They'd need to be treated as a primary threat, though. The danger with stupid Hollywood is that they'd simply be one aspect of a larger arsenal under the antagonist's control--- and then be largely wasted like the Destroyer was in Thor. But yeah-- if the X-Men aren't using them, then there's no reason the Avengers realm shouldn't have access, eh? HB |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 7, 2011 15:47:08 GMT -5
I thought they gave an in-movie explanation for his evil: his worst traits were amplified, pushing him to become a megalomaniac due to the super-soldier treatment he underwent. Yep, that's right. During that very nice scene w/ Dr. Erskine (boy, there's an actor in a role that it's a shame to only be able to use once). The Red Skull isn't ever going to be more than a one-dimensional nut-job, though. He's probably one of Marvel's least complexly motivated (and, to me, least compelling or interesting) villains. Whereas in the comic book, he was generally- or at least often- portrayed as doggedly pursuing his beloved Hitler's dream, I think the movie actually improves upon that by ramping the megalomania up even further, so that he actually views the entire Nazi party as nothing more than a simple, disposable stepping-stone to his own conquest of the world. He out-Nazi's the Nazis, as it were. . . HB |
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Aug 7, 2011 17:31:39 GMT -5
HB--wasn't there a "Danger Room" sequence in one of the X-Men movies, where they fought Sentinels? I mean it wasn't really the Sentinels--but at least we got a glimpse. Maybe I just dreamed that...
One way or the other--a story surrounding them would be great (hopefully). Remember way back in the early 70's, when the Avengers fought the Sentinels? They almost lost!! When I read those issues as a kid, I didn't know who these giant robots were--but it was clear they were way different, and way scarier, than the typical and often-used generic giant robots that popped up routinely in Marvel comics during that period.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Aug 7, 2011 17:41:53 GMT -5
I thought they gave an in-movie explanation for his evil: his worst traits were amplified, pushing him to become a megalomaniac due to the super-soldier treatment he underwent. Yep, that's right. During that very nice scene w/ Dr. Erskine (boy, there's an actor in a role that it's a shame to only be able to use once). The Red Skull isn't ever going to be more than a one-dimensional nut-job, though. He's probably one of Marvel's least complexly motivated (and, to me, least compelling or interesting) villains. Whereas in the comic book, he was generally- or at least often- portrayed as doggedly pursuing his beloved Hitler's dream, I think the movie actually improves upon that by ramping the megalomania up even further, so that he actually views the entire Nazi party as nothing more than a simple, disposable stepping-stone to his own conquest of the world. He out-Nazi's the Nazis, as it were. . . HB I must have missed that line. But still... didn't the scene where Cap goes through several succession missions whilst the Skull is grinding his teeth in a car make him look like a goofy Scoby Doo villain? I find him interesting at times in the comics, especially in juxtaposition to Magneto during the Acts of Vengeance story, but here he felt one-dimensional after Loki, Green Goblin or Magneto himself. IIRC Sentinels do in fact appear in X3, veeeery briefly as a danger room exercise. Wolverine beheads one just before the session ends. I'm not sure they would work as a primary threat, once again due to lack of personality and impossibility to cast any actor to help with their facial expressions, BUT it would be great to have them in somewhere. But this leads to a bigger question - how "comic-y" should comic book movie adaptations be? Green Lantern was more or less a live comic book, and ended up being an utterly awful and hopeless film, smashed by critics and word of mouth alike (at the moment it hasn't even earned its budget back yet!). Batman Begins and Dark Knight were as realistic as possible and often very different from the source material, and were a critical and box office success. Most Marvel movies fit nicely in the middle, so I'm not sure what sort of reaction big purple robots would produce. |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 7, 2011 19:33:27 GMT -5
HB--wasn't there a "Danger Room" sequence in one of the X-Men movies, where they fought Sentinels? I mean it wasn't really the Sentinels--but at least we got a glimpse. Maybe I just dreamed that... There certainly could have been. Man, it's just been so long since I've seen those films. . . and I don't seem to have retained much from the 2nd and 3rd ones (other than the unspeakably lame "big battle" scene at the end of X3. . . ) Your impression of them echoes mine exactly. I know I read reprints of the Mark I versions very early on, and read the original stories with Larry Trask (Mark II)-- and man, they were just SO scary! I think it was the combination of cold, efficient, semi-sentience with their very unique, smooth, elegant design--- as well as their wisely-unexplained ability to adapt to pretty much any Mutant power and integrate a system-wide immunity to it. What's been kind of cool in the Marvel Universe over the years is that the original "Trask" design (which I believe key aspects of were considered forever lost) is still considered the best of them all. It's sort of like another minor design quest-- like recreating the Super Soldier Formula. Man, I remember when the Sentinels crashed the Christmas Eve party, as it were, back in New X-Men #98 or 99-- first time we'd seen them in years-- and it produced that delightful, horrified feeling you get when you're really involved with a story--- like the elevator floor just dropped out from under you. . . HB |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 7, 2011 19:44:35 GMT -5
[But this leads to a bigger question - how "comic-y" should comic book movie adaptations be? Green Lantern was more or less a live comic book, and ended up being an utterly awful and hopeless film, smashed by critics and word of mouth alike (at the moment it hasn't even earned its budget back yet!). Batman Begins and Dark Knight were as realistic as possible and often very different from the source material, and were a critical and box office success. Most Marvel movies fit nicely in the middle, so I'm not sure what sort of reaction big purple robots would produce. I assume they'd still be under the guidance of Trask-- acting as his avatars or proxies, yes? Of course, there's a precedent for getting Trask's mind or essence into a Master Mold unit (Inc. Hulk Annual #7) in order to make the mission more directly personal. Their calm relentlessness, though, is part of what makes 'em so scary (like any of the Terminator models, in fact)-- so I think there's plenty of story to be drawn from that well, given a chance--! HB |
|
|
|
Post by owene on Aug 8, 2011 3:25:37 GMT -5
In its second week, CA has now dropped to 3rd place with less than 25 million in sales. Not good. I think thats pretty normal, its doing fine financially, about neck and neck with what Thor was making over the same periods and that was considered a big hit. should end somewhere between 300 and 350 million worldwide. I'm not sure it will have quite Thor's impact overseas, and I dont think it is quite as good as Thor was but the Cap numbers were big enough for them to be talking about a Cap solo sequel. It had a lower budget than Thor (and all the other big hero movies of the summer) as well. |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 9, 2011 5:16:42 GMT -5
In its second week, CA has now dropped to 3rd place with less than 25 million in sales. Not good. I think thats pretty normal, its doing fine financially, about neck and neck with what Thor was making over the same periods and that was considered a big hit. should end somewhere between 300 and 350 million worldwide. I'm not sure it will have quite Thor's impact overseas, and I dont think it is quite as good as Thor was but the Cap numbers were big enough for them to be talking about a Cap solo sequel. It had a lower budget than Thor (and all the other big hero movies of the summer) as well. Unfortunately, IMO, this summer's box office results for the "big" films released will do nothing but reinforce Hollywood's sequels-forever mindset. Harry Potter's final installment hit huge, which is understandable; as did Transformers 3, which isn't. And didn't the PiratesOTC film (#4) dominate in it's early summer slot? There's no incentive for original film-making at all. And it's definitely a drag that the critically-reviled Smurfs film seriously outperformed Cap this past weekend. To paraphrase Syndrome from The Incredibles: When every movie is huge, NO movie is huge. I'm stunned Cowboys & Aliens, for instance, didn't fare better. Just another "big" film in a summer full of them. (And I thought it was one of the better ones by a good stretch.) HB |
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Aug 11, 2011 9:11:00 GMT -5
I dunno, it seems some of you guys want literal translations from comics to screen, which seems to be what doomed Green Lantern.
My wife saw this with me and LOVED it. She's generally bored with superheroes (she can't even sit through Dark Knight which I don't blame her for-it's a dire depressing movie...), but found Cap charming and thought the movie tugged on the heartstrings just right.
I suppose if you were looking for the perfect superhero movie this didn't hit on all levels, but if you were looking for a fun movie with an extremely likable good guy that didn't just sit solidly within the genre, it did so wonderfully.
And I predict the box office will follow Thor's pretty closely when all is said and done...
|
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Aug 12, 2011 12:48:10 GMT -5
Well the real world has gnawed away at any heart-strings I might have once had, and I haven't seen the movie--so I can't comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Aug 13, 2011 9:52:14 GMT -5
Hey Guys. I started working for a new company a couple of weeks ago, and the 13 YO son of a co-worker showed up at the office the other day, so I picked his brain regarding how kids his age viewed super heroes like Captain America. I wasn't surprised to learn that he and his friends liked the live movies, but found the actual characters "corny." I asked if he ever bought any comics and he looked at me like I was crazy--he said he and his friends only ever bought Manga books. He never watches super hero cartoons. Just thought I'd pass this on.
|
|
|
|
Post by pulpcitizen on Aug 13, 2011 12:21:48 GMT -5
Hey Guys. I started working for a new company a couple of weeks ago, and the 13 YO son of a co-worker showed up at the office the other day, so I picked his brain regarding how kids his age viewed super heroes like Captain America. I wasn't surprised to learn that he and his friends liked the live movies, but found the actual characters "corny." I asked if he ever bought any comics and he looked at me like I was crazy--he said he and his friends only ever bought Manga books. He never watches super hero cartoons. Just thought I'd pass this on. It is inevitable really; comics are genrally not selling above 100K yet the movies may be watched by as many 30-40 million people-plus. So in essence the comic book audience is going to be Less than 0.0033% of the movie audience - such a small proption as to be negligible. In turn it is inevitable that most of that audience probbaly have never read a Captain America comic book. |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 14, 2011 6:05:51 GMT -5
Yep, it really appears like that 13-year-old has been abandoned at the side of the comic book industry marketing highway. I'm not sure the current product would have appealed to me at that age, either.
I guess. . . I don't get how this industry is sustaining itself at this point. How is it making a profit? IS IT making a profit? At least in the comics wing?
Well, wait a minute. A title sells, say, 60 thousand copies at $4 each a month. That's $240,000 a month, times 12 months (I feel like I'm doing PAJAMA GAME. . . ), which comes to, hmm, $2,880,000 gross for that title for the year. Wow, can that be right? I wonder what the final profit-margin tends to be per issue? Even if it's as little as 10%, say, that does seem to make it a worthwhile venture to keep in operation. Although that's a wild guess on my part. . .
HB
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Aug 14, 2011 15:46:18 GMT -5
I suppose it's the events that allow editors to experiment with other titles. Have a look at last July's sales www.newsarama.com/comics/july-2011-comic-book-sales-110805.htmlASM 666 sold over 260.000 copies, at 4 dollars it's 1.040.000 dollars. I'm sure some of that must go to finance, say, Alpha Flight or some new miniseries. |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 15, 2011 17:34:29 GMT -5
I'm forgetting to take into account that a comic book costs (no kidding) 20 times more to purchase now than it did in 1971. That's, what, a 2000% inflation in price? (Am I right?) Even taking into account the claims of exorbitant printing and paper cost increases, upgrades in materials quality, and better compensation for artists, writers, and staff-- it certainly seems like they still don't have to sell nearly as many units to make a nice profit and support their business model.
I mean, what other commonly-available commodity costs 20 times more now than it did 40 years ago?
O'course, that Newsarama link shows almost nothing but declines in sales in almost every metric. Maybe the gravy train's hit the wastelands?
HB (in a cynical mood. . . )
|
|
|
|
Post by pulpcitizen on Aug 16, 2011 7:25:18 GMT -5
...I was debating with HB-Son that perhaps the broader-scope drawback of doing superhero films as part of a larger, ongoing story is that it just takes too flippin' long to get the bigger story told. It's more on the scale of published books (maybe one a year, at best?) than the monthly crawl of their comic-book source material. The expectation then becomes so hyper-inflated that anything short of a ground-breaking, life-changing blockbuster is deemed a solid disappointment. And then you're reluctant to invest your hopes for another year or so of waiting for the next installment. And of course there's NO sense of trust that the studio(s) will hold up their end of the deal and not either a) drop the franchise (where's the next Hellboy film?) or b) Re-boot the franchise in a moment of greed or pique (there was an audibly palpable reaction of betrayal and dismay from the crowd when they saw the trailer for the upcoming Spidey reboot at my local theater---- that does not bode well.). In a way, modern television may really be the best medium to tell a good superhero story. A series provides so much more time to actually invest yourself in the characters-- which is what will ultimately drive the story. HB On Hellboy, I think the lack of third instalment is more to do with Guillermo del Toro being busy with other projects than anything else. |
|
