Captain America - the first great Marvel Studios movie?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/motion-...rica-offers-sprawling-sincere-superhero-story

This reviewer thinks so! And has some really encouraging things to say about it. This guy isn't one of my top/favorite movie critics, but still, everything he's saying is making me hopeful this will break the malaise of Iron Man/Hulk/Thor and be something really good.

http://www.villagevoice.com/2011-07-20/film/captain-america-movie-ignores-its-roots-for-easy-money/

But wait. This reviewer, I usually like, but this review seems like....a lot of plot description(mild spoilers) and just general problems with the whole Avengers thing and not really this movie specifically. I dunno, it's not very convincing.

There should be more reviews coming today and tomorrow. I'm slightly on the fence on seeing this in theaters, and probably not going to see it in 3D.
 
Frank

Frank

That second review is as pretentious as it gets. They didn't set out to make fucking Schindler's List.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jay
Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

More reviews I'm checking seem to be kind of negative too. And it seems my worst fears about this being another cookie cutter prequel to Avengers are true. I'll just skip it and watch Avengers, I guess.
 
Chad Sexington

Chad Sexington

I'm going on Saturday as part of a birthday party. I haven't been to a movie for a birthday since I was like... eleven. But I get to finally see what this UltraAVX buzz everyone is talking about is.
 
Frank

Frank

Charlie Don't Surf said:
More reviews I'm checking seem to be kind of negative too. And it seems my worst fears about this being another cookie cutter prequel to Avengers are true. I'll just skip it and watch Avengers, I guess.
Click to expand...
That's cool, as long as the complaints are about it's merits as a movie and now about how it doesn't deal with the ramifications on the holocausts if there were nazis with laser guns.
 
Espy

Espy

I like him overall but McWeeny is... pretty hit or miss for me. CA looks far more interesting to me than Thor did but my movie going time is limited so this one might wait till Blu-Ray.
 
J

Jiarn

It's Charlie, they're all the same!

Loved IM1&2, Thor and Hulk. Can't wait for this too! It's going to make so much money it's ridiculous! Avengers here we come!
 
C

Chibibar

You know, I never go with reviewer when I want to watch a movie. I see a preview, if it interest me, then I go see it.
Then again, I have the luxury of actually having a NICE theater that does 3.50$ for matinee showing and 5.50$ for evening shows (2$ extra for 3D)
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Yeah, I don't get the "cookie cutter Avengers prequel" concept. Iron Man 2 is absolutely the most guilty of that, where most of it was basically a two-hour movie shouting "Avengers! Avengers! Tease! Tease!" Thor and Incredible Hulk, though, were pretty standalone movies. The SHIELD stuff in Thor wasn't as spoon-fed as it was in Iron Man 2. You could have had that as any government agency, but for the Marvel Universe, it works.
 
phil

phil

Fuck! I hate how these new boards delete your old post when you add a new one close to one another. I have to re write what I wrote and argle blargle blargle.
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

I think Charlie means "not that good" and is just typing fast. And if he does, then I mostly agree. Of the previous ones, only Iron Man could be considered a generally all-around good movie (but I did enjoy them all).

I think I'm just more comfortable with the idea of "bad movies I still like" than he is. ;)
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

SpecialKO said:
I think Charlie means "not that good" and is just typing fast. And if he does, then I mostly agree. Of the previous ones, only Iron Man could be considered a generally all-around good movie (but I did enjoy them all).

I think I'm just more comfortable with the idea of "bad movies I still like" than he is. ;)
Click to expand...
That's because Charlie doesn't know what a dictionary is, and equates "like" to "good" and "favorite" to "best".
 
phil

phil

OK!

So what I originally wrote was that the recent marvel movies tend to follow a similar structure or formula. While this doesn't lead to being good cinema, as nothing new is added to the art form, that doesn't disqualify it from being a good movie.
 
Gusto

Gusto

I love Ironman. Hulk and Thor were better than I thought they'd be for a different reasons. Ironman 2 was okay and is actually growing on me.

I'm looking forward to Captain America and will be seeing it tomorrow night.

Seriously though. it's got Hugo Weaving. SOLD.
 
P

Philosopher B.

I'm hoping this is good because Joe Johnston's previous best film had Nazis in it (even though that was two decades ago and, uh, his track record hasn't been stellar since).
 
DarkAudit

DarkAudit

I reject, REJECT the cop out of "just watch it in 2D". No. If they hosed it down in 3D juice just to hose it down in in 3D juice, I will not enable them in any D. Let them find some other sucker to take money from.
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

DarkAudit said:
I reject, REJECT the cop out of "just watch it in 2D". No. If they hosed it down in 3D juice just to hose it down in in 3D juice, I will not enable them in any D. Let them find some other sucker to take money from.
Click to expand...
That is hands down the most retarded argument I've ever heard. That's like saying that you refuse to watch a black and white movie because there's a colorized version of it. Either way, you're passing on a movie for a completely arbitrary reason.
 
DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Bowielee said:
That is hands down the most retarded argument I've ever heard. That's like saying that you refuse to watch a black and white movie because there's a colorized version of it. Either way, you're passing on a movie for a completely arbitrary reason.
Click to expand...
That's not at all the same. Colorizing is a dead idea, anyway. Hollywood will continue to hose down movies in pointless 3D juice until it becomes unprofitable to do so. Movie houses will continue to be lazy and forget to uninstall the 3D gear when 3D films finish their runs, ruining the experience for 2D films.

They will come up with something even more stupid, like 4D (I'm looking at YOU, Spy Kids!).

I refuse to give my entertainment money to the 3D fad. I'm spending it on video games and baseball instead. Michael McKenry's home run vs Chicago had far more emotional impact around here than any explosion from Michael Bay.
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

Frankly, you're shooting yourself in the foot if your intent is to show how unprofitable 3D movies are. By passing on the movie entirely, you're dollor voting not against 3D, but the movie itself. If you really want to show how much you don't want to see 3D movies all over the place, going to see it in 2D is casting your dollar vote. So, again, it's still a completely arbitrary reason to not see a movie. Also, colorization is only dead because all movies are already in color. Who's to say the same thing won't happen to 3D in 20 years.
 
DarkAudit

DarkAudit

The first trick is finding a theater that will show the film in 2D. Good luck with that, especially around here.

By sticking to my guns and just not bothering, I can buy an extra game during a Steam sale or an extra seat to this Saturday's baseball game.
 
DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Bowielee said:
You completely sidestepped the point of the argument, so I'll assume you're just trolling, then.
Click to expand...
No. I am dollar voting against the movie itself, because the studio decided to 3D-ify it.

It doesn't matter what D it's in, because all the news reports will say "X movie took in $Y million at the box office this weekend." You won't see it broken down into what D made the most money, and even if it did, 3D would likely come out ahead even if it sold fewer tickets than the 2D version.

I don't just dollar vote against 3D, I dollar vote against the studios that do it. I dollar vote against the crap theaters that can't be bothered to reset their auditoriums properly after a 3D film has left. I dollar vote against the crap theaters that can't set up their auditoriums correctly for 3D in the first place.
 
Frank

Frank

Actually they have been separating the money made via 3D and 2D. I've seen a dozen articles about the recent decline in 3D viewership over 2D.
 
Gusto

Gusto

Frankie Williamson said:
Actually they have been separating the money made via 3D and 2D. I've seen a dozen articles about the recent decline in 3D viewership over 2D.
Click to expand...
Of course they have! Do you have any idea how much demographic data they can pull on stuff like this? To say that "they're not gonna look at 2D vs. 3D sales, only overall sales of a film available in 3D" is completely asinine.
 
DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Gusto said:
Of course they have! Do you have any idea how much demographic data they can pull on stuff like this? To say that "they're not gonna look at 2D vs. 3D sales, only overall sales of a film available in 3D" is completely asinine.
Click to expand...
I stand by my statement. When CNN, MSNBC, or TMZ reports grosses on Sunday nights, the headline is just X made $Y.

You guys seem to be taking my not wanting to go see it awfully personally. How does my not seeing it detract from your enjoyment of the movie? Do you have a stake in the studio or something?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top