Rate the Last Movie You Saw

[Duckman]

Just finished Tenet (for probably the first time of many).  I'm not normally much of a fan of Pattinson but all the leads in this did very well (in particular Branagh).

I thoroughly enjoyed Inception although I did after multiple viewings have problems with the "layers within layers" concept at some points.  Like Inception, Tenet is thoughtful sci-fi and on the first watch I enjoyed it thoroughly.  It's possible that later I may pick up something that I see as a flaw but after the initial watch it hangs together well and does some very interesting things both cinematically (much like Inception did allowing Ariadne to play within the dream) and in terms of writing and plotting.

In the end, definitely a film worth multiple viewings.

[InfestedKerrigan]

JLSC 

Comic book movie 3/5 : better than Catwoman, graphics of XMO wolverine/LotR, plot amounts to Superman (1978) meets Avengers: infinity saga

Blockbuster Movie 1/5 : The graphics for DC just continues to blow. They clearly don't listen to criticism in this regard, and likely compare it to their Arrowverse shows to justify "how good it looks," with arrowverse stuff generally looking better. The one caveat to this is the Speed Force in JL.  Done very well, without copying what we've seen done with quicksilver.

Pacing does well for roughly four 1 hour sessions. 

We'll see if they follow up with the open ended stuff. If their MO is anything to go by, nope.

 

Still refuse to watch Rise of Skywalker. D+ is getting upset with me.

 

[InfestedKerrigan]

I almost forgot, f_k both JL. Most things were forgivable, projects taken as a whole, but Lex Luthors yacht is laughable.  Being on such a tiny fishing boat would be below his stature so drastically.  That yacht was in the "affordable," or "lower entry level," as you prefer.

[Romans832]

Monster Hunter - 8/10 - Rushed, great ending teaser, I like what they went for, just sorry it was so dam'd rushed.

[Romans832]

Jiu Jitsu - 7/10? - like I get it, but what??

What's up with so many openings to be done early and magically no one "finish him"?

It was good, but confused

[Brother Glacius]

2 hours worth of ZSJL? Does that count? It was long enough for me to see that it was not worth going another two hours. Ugh. Sorry to the ZS fanbois out there...but christ..that was bad. If you are really going to spend that money to redo it...then make it better. Don't tack on two hours and meander along with stupid stuff. Just ugh.

[InfestedKerrigan]

1 hour ago, Brother Glacius said:

2 hours worth of ZSJL? Does that count? It was long enough for me to see that it was not worth going another two hours. Ugh. Sorry to the ZS fanbois out there...but christ..that was bad. If you are really going to spend that money to redo it...then make it better. Don't tack on two hours and meander along with stupid stuff. Just ugh.

I almost shut it off at two hours. It just wasn't engaging enough, but after stretching and getting a snack, was able to watch another hour before shutting it off for the night and finishing it the next morning. I used friends HBO, so I don't feel cheated outta money.

[Munkie]

I liked the Snyder cut more than the 6 hour movie that was the last 2 Avenger movies. It took me 2 sittings: 3hr/1hr.

Everything in the MCU is just incredibly low stakes no matter what's happening. Half of all life wiped out? No worries, they'll all be brought back. There was never any doubt that things would end up hunky dory. Every fight is scaled to be relative to the cinematic moment that is required. Sometimes we're supposed to believe Cpt America has his work cut out for him while fighting a French mercenary protecting a freighter, but he equally has his work cut out for him when he's fighting intergalactic world-conquering super beings. No matter what the source of the power of an attack it always manifests as kinetic energy. If you're Thor or the Hulk, it'll knock you through a car and steel reinforced concrete. If you're Black Widow or Hawkeye, it'll knock you into a wall and some plaster will fall down. Everything scales in the moment to provide an inconvenience, but the outcome is never in question.

I enjoyed the split between the god-mode characters and the mortal characters in JL. Batman and The Flash never battle Steppenwolf because they know they're no match. They focus on the grunts and let the people who can handle him do the battling.

I agree that the CGI is not as good, but I like the surreal aesthetic more. MCU is so polished and glossy that it just lends itself to that "gee, shucks, everything will turn out swell" atmosphere they built. There seems like so much more wasted time in those movies because none of the fights matter. Nobody will actually get hurt, they'll just knock eachother into and/or through things until it is time to end it. Then the predetermined winner wins and skips away merrily.

Maybe it's simply a function of being burnt out on the MCU, but the ZSJL offered something that felt unique and interesting for the first time in a long time. I didn't know what was going to happen next, and I enjoyed that.

[Duckman]

7 hours ago, Munkie said:

I enjoyed the split between the god-mode characters and the mortal characters in JL. Batman and The Flash never battle Steppenwolf because they know they're no match. They focus on the grunts and let the people who can handle him do the battling.

And see, this is the same problem I have with JL in a nutshell.  Batman *can* fight and kill Superman.  Why the heck can he *not* fight Steppenwolf?

Aside from GRR Martin, *nobody* writes stuff where the outcome is indeterminate (and George's writing is so bad that the only logic to when characters die is "I was bored of him" so that's not an improvement).  I mean, let's get serious...  DCU is the one we were talking about 6 months ago with Wonder Woman '84.  Did you have any questions about the outcome there?  Was there something I missed where Maxwell Lord wished to be invincible and able to take punches from an Amazon?

Don't get me wrong...  I'm not denying what you are saying about the MCU...  I'm just saying DC is not doing it better.  I will *totally* buy the argument that this felt ZSJL offered you something different and unexpected.  It didn't do that for me but that has more to do with my expectations than the movie itself.

[Ish]

I still want to know why no one inside the Time-Warner monolith didn’t raise the obvious point that Steppenwolf is a below D-List villain who’s last major appearance in the comics was in in early Nineties... and who they had killed off in 2008. Murdered by the Clock King. The. Clock. King.

Yeah, yeah, he’s a Jack Kirby creation and that’s normally a pedigree that guarantees greatness... But Kirby made up background filler characters and Jobber villains too. Steppenwolf is a Jobber, he’s not a Big Bad Evil Guy.

Seriously, the dude was killed off by the Clock King. A moderately athletic middle aged man with an uncanny skill for accurate time keeping and some fencing lessons.

Out of the hundreds of thousands of villains in the DC Universe, why the hell would you pick Steppenwolf!? Okay, sure, they wanted the New Gods tie-in and wanted to save Darksied for a sequel... Why not use Kaliback? Devilance? DeSaad? Granny Goodness and the Female Furies? Glorious Godfrey?

To put it in WH40k terms, this movie basically had the nine Loyalist Primarchs all unite to form a team to take on not one of the four Ruinous Powers, not one of the Chaos Primarchs, not even someone like Abbadon or Khârn... No, they were fighting against a lousy Unnamed Generic Chaos Space Marine Sergeant. 

[Brother Glacius]

I'm sorry, you complain about the MCU bringing back everyone when characters actually did die at the end of it? And the DCU just brought back the only person it had killed, ie Superman with a moronic "lets use these mother boxes" plot line?? Give me a break. 

[Ish]

Adjusting for “population size” the MCU has a much higher percentage of heroes who have died and stayed dead than the DCEU.

 

[InfestedKerrigan]

15 minutes ago, Ish said:

Adjusting for “population size” the MCU has a much higher percentage of heroes who have died and stayed dead than the DCEU.

 

I raise you the New 52, post crisis.

[InfestedKerrigan]

2 hours ago, Brother Glacius said:

I'm sorry, you complain about the MCU bringing back everyone when characters actually did die at the end of it? And the DCU just brought back the only person it had killed, ie Superman with a moronic "lets use these mother boxes" plot line?? Give me a break. 

Vision is the only hero MCU has brought back from the dead, currently.  "Mygamora" stayed dead, Stark is dead. Snap back, for better or worse, isn't considered brought back from the realm of the dead. 

[Ish]

The Ancient One; Black Widow; Dum Dum Dugan and the other Howling Commandos; Elektra; Peggy Carter; Phil Coulson*; Fandral; Gamora; Groot; Heimdall; Hogun; Iron Man; Mar-Vell; Odin; Quicksilver; Volstagg; and Yondu...

All either shown dying on screen or explicitly mentioned as having died off-screen.

One might quibble that some of these are “mentors” or “parental figures,” which usually comes with a limited shelf-life in any superhero story, but I’d say they all count as full-blown superheroes. 

* He dies in The Avengers but comes back in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and then dies again.

[Ish]

44 minutes ago, InfestedKerrigan said:

I raise you the New 52, post crisis.

I was specifically referring to the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the DC Extended Universe film franchises. 

Falling down the rabbit hole of comics continuity is guaranteed to drive us more insane than reading the Necronomicon in Wonderland while doing LSD.

[InfestedKerrigan]

42 minutes ago, Ish said:

I was specifically referring to the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the DC Extended Universe film franchises. 

Falling down the rabbit hole of comics continuity is guaranteed to drive us more insane than reading the Necronomicon in Wonderland while doing LSD.

You mean you don't go caving on a bakers dozen of blotter?

[Ish]

Just a half dozen. A man’s got to know his limitations.

[Munkie]

10 hours ago, Duckman said:

And see, this is the same problem I have with JL in a nutshell.  Batman *can* fight and kill Superman.  Why the heck can he *not* fight Steppenwolf?

Batman was able to fight Superman because he was familiar with him and was able to exploit his weaknesses. Batman is a master tactician. He wasn't capable of beating him though. Superman died by compromising his own invulnerability to kill a creature of similar power and with the same weakness.  ZSJL Batman was constantly in over his head. He brought out all of his best tech and it was consistently overmatched. Cyborg had to get the Nightcrawler going after it got beat, and the Batmobile got destroyed by grunts.

He says over and over again in the movie that his best way to contribute is to unite powerful beings and his wealth. 

10 hours ago, Duckman said:

Aside from GRR Martin, *nobody* writes stuff where the outcome is indeterminate (and George's writing is so bad that the only logic to when characters die is "I was bored of him" so that's not an improvement).  I mean, let's get serious...  DCU is the one we were talking about 6 months ago with Wonder Woman '84.  Did you have any questions about the outcome there?  Was there something I missed where Maxwell Lord wished to be invincible and able to take punches from an Amazon?

I won't defend WW'84. It was a very stupid movie. You can see my review of it at the top of the previous page. I'm not here to emphatically state that DCU is "better" than MCU, though I do prefer it. I appreciate that they experiment with ideas rather than take a formula and repeat it 20+ times. MCU plays it very, very safe. It is a cash machine, not an artist's sandbox. There are plenty of misses but Shazam and Birds of Prey are far more fun than any movie Marvel has done in years, IMO. Thor Ragnarok is the last really interesting entry in the MCU it was largely due to it being different feeling than everything they'd done recently.

The only MCU characters who have perma-died are ones who died because the actors got bored of their contracts. Is that interesting? Not to me. We knew Stark and Cap were going to have a proper send off. Black Widow is chronologically dead, but is getting her own show...so does it matter? Not really.

6 hours ago, Brother Glacius said:

I'm sorry, you complain about the MCU bringing back everyone when characters actually did die at the end of it? And the DCU just brought back the only person it had killed, ie Superman with a moronic "lets use these mother boxes" plot line?? Give me a break. 

After Infinity War, the conversation immediately shifted to how they were going to go back in time to undo the snap. Much of the speculation was that they'd somehow separate the Time Stone and go back that way. Turns out the Time Stone doesn't matter AT ALL because there are other ways of controlling time. Is it less moronic to have multiple ways of controlling time, and thus undercutting the supposed importance of a one-of a kind stone?

There was never any doubt that everyone who got snapped away was going to snap back, and there were absolutely no consequences whatsoever from it. While it was never in doubt whether Superman would remain dead, his resurrection was actually a plot point. There were characters arguing against it and it didn't work out perfectly. Everyone was in total agreement that unsnapping was the correct course of action, they did it, and there were high 5s all around. Exciting stuff 🙄 

We knew which characters were going to stay dead long before Endgame came out. We merely watched it to see by which manner they'd be dispatched. All with noble and glorious ends.

It's also more than a little intellectually dishonest to compare the first ensemble movie of one franchise with the 4th of another. Did a single Avenger suffer anything more than a mild inconvenience in the first movie? Of course not. That wouldn't bring the "feel good" vibes.

Conversely, ZSJL hints at a post-apocalyptic future where the world still gets destroyed, despite their efforts. Where Superman has turned evil, Batman has compromised his code, and several others have died. A world where things can't just be fixed with enough gumption and brightly colored suits.

Will that be realized? I genuinely don't know. But the MCU wouldn't touch that with a 10-foot-pole. It might mess up the pretty bow they put on the ending.

 

[Ish]

12 hours ago, Munkie said:

ZSJL hints at a post-apocalyptic future where the world still gets destroyed, despite their efforts. Where Superman has turned evil, Batman has compromised his code, and several others have died. A world where things can't just be fixed with enough gumption and brightly colored suits.

This is the exact opposite of the story I want to see in a superhero movie. Superman and the Batman are meant to inspire hope for tomorrow, the courage to face our fears, and the conviction that doing the right thing is the right thing.

I want a story where gumption (and a brightly colored suit) triumphs over malfeasance (and a dark suit).

Otherwise, I can just stay home and read the newspaper.

[Brother Glacius]

Against my better judgement, I finished the movie yesterday. Going back in time to fix things? Really? Best you could come up with? And then it still went on for another 20+ minutes after that?? And for what, a preview of something that will never be? Oh, and lets toss in MM just because we need to extend this film? I wasn't a fan of the first cut either, it seemed like a poor version of Avengers. The second version is a pure ego trip.

And you are really complaining that the Snap was undone? Like that would somehow make the MCU better? Tell me what other superhero movie have you seen where the hero doesn't win and everyone dies? Did the demons win in Shazam? huh..nope..was there any question about that? Nope. I'm sorry, but that is a dumb argument to make about a hero movie. "The good guys won...so unoriginal." So if that is your big complaint about the MCU...1st world problems.

[InfestedKerrigan]

21 minutes ago, Brother Glacius said:

Against my better judgement, I finished the movie yesterday. Going back in time to fix things? Really? Best you could come up with? And then it still went on for another 20+ minutes after that?? And for what, a preview of something that will never be? Oh, and lets toss in MM just because we need to extend this film? I wasn't a fan of the first cut either, it seemed like a poor version of Avengers. The second version is a pure ego trip.

And you are really complaining that the Snap was undone? Like that would somehow make the MCU better? Tell me what other superhero movie have you seen where the hero doesn't win and everyone dies? Did the demons win in Shazam? huh..nope..was there any question about that? Nope. I'm sorry, but that is a dumb argument to make about a hero movie. "The good guys won...so unoriginal." So if that is your big complaint about the MCU...1st world problems.

 

Watchmen

[InfestedKerrigan]

Being a contrarian put aside, my biggest gripe about the film, as mentioned previously, was using the same method as Superman The Movie to save the world.

[Munkie]

47 minutes ago, Brother Glacius said:

Against my better judgement, I finished the movie yesterday. Going back in time to fix things? Really? Best you could come up with? And then it still went on for another 20+ minutes after that?? And for what, a preview of something that will never be? Oh, and lets toss in MM just because we need to extend this film? I wasn't a fan of the first cut either, it seemed like a poor version of Avengers. The second version is a pure ego trip.

And you are really complaining that the Snap was undone? Like that would somehow make the MCU better? Tell me what other superhero movie have you seen where the hero doesn't win and everyone dies? Did the demons win in Shazam? huh..nope..was there any question about that? Nope. I'm sorry, but that is a dumb argument to make about a hero movie. "The good guys won...so unoriginal." So if that is your big complaint about the MCU...1st world problems.

You're getting very worked up about this, but whatever.

I'm not complaining that the snap was undone. My point is there is never any tension in any MCU movie. The snap did not matter at all. Half of all life was wiped out and there was no emotional impact whatsoever. Because not only do you know the snap will be undone, there will be no moral questions about whether undoing it is right, no debate about what the consequences might be, and it turns out there will be no consequences so it's a good thing they didn't waste time wondering if there might be.

It could have been an interesting arc, but since everything is effortless, care free, and turns out exactly as planned, it wasn't. 

You complained that using Mother boxes is a moronic way to bring a character back. I responded that having supposedly important stones end up not mattering because there is always another out is equally, if not more moronic.

"Thats the best you can come up with" is not actually a counter argument. At least I offered one.

Can you explain why setting up the Infinity Stones to be important over the course of 20+ movies, and then illustrating that they, in fact, are not important in one movie is good story telling?

All comic book movies are absurd and unrelatable on some level. I just find the sacredness (both in the way Disney tightly controls the IP and the worship of fans) laughable. 

"The plot devices of my comic book movies are beyond reproach! Yours are stupid and it's wrong for you to not agree!"

You don't have to like it, that's fine. I'm not head over heels for it, but I found it more interesting than anything the formulaic and repetitive MCU movies have done in a long time.

[InfestedKerrigan]

58 minutes ago, Munkie said:

Can you explain why setting up the Infinity Stones to be important over the course of 20+ movies, and then illustrating that they, in fact, are not important in one movie is good story telling?

Eh, we haven't seen the ramifications of futzing with the stones, yet. Though, if the comics are any indication, there won't be. 🤣