Last movie you watched......

I have no idea why "American Hustle" got so many award nominations. I could've watched the first 20 minutes and the last 20 minutes and skipped pretty much everything in between.

But I also live in Jersey, so the political corruption thing... that's my daily existence!

 

Saw Captain America: The Winter Soldier this afternoon. I knew far too many of the twists before they happened, but still really enjoyed it. I thought it was one of the better movies in the Marvel Movieverse. I still prefer Avengers and Iron Man, but Winter Soldier was better than the others, including Captain America: The First Avenger.

Chris Evans is excellent as Steve Rodgers, which isn't easy. The character has to be a confident bad ass, the type who is going to lead others into combat, but still hold onto a bit of humility and determination to always do the right thing. There were some smaller character moments that work and the elevator scene, most of which was already in the trailers, is still outstanding.

That said, it isn't all Cap. Black Widow, Nick Fury and Sam Wilson (Falcon) all have moments. There is plenty of action, but also has a plot that ties together elements from the previous movies to lead to some major changes going forward. I get some of the criticism of the movie, including the collateral damage from the fight scenes. I've also heard there isn't enough of the actual Winter Soldier, but I don't agree with that at all.

Also, there are two scenes after the credits start to roll. The one in the middle is important to the ongoing Marvel Movieverse. The one at the end just makes obvious something that I thought was already clear enough during the movie.

 

You rock. Thanks for this. Probably gonna see it today.

 

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

I always manage to stay spoiler-free for these things, so it was quite the treat to see the Marvel Cinematic Universe move in bold directions. I loved how it expanded on many threads from the first Cap film and the Avengers film, while laying the groundwork for future installments. Great story, great characters, great action, and touches of appropriate humor (smart humor, not dick and fart jokes).

What kills me is how Marvel can find storytellers to take a potentially antiquated character with strong morals like Steve Rogers and get it so right, while DC keeps screwing up the character of Superman. Sure, I liked "Man of Steel" for the action romp it was, but Dick Donner got the heart of the character much like Marvel gets the heart of a character like Cap.

Really looking forward to Guardians and the Avengers sequel.

 

No problem. I usually don't go on opening weekends, but it was becoming very difficult to avoid spoilers. I watch Agents of Shield and I have read that show will reflect events in The Winter Soldier at some point, possibly as soon as this week, so I'm glad I don't have to skip it. (I like the show, but not nearly enough to risk spoiling the movie.)

Bradley raises a good point. Man of Steel was on HBO last night and I watched part of it. Captain America and Superman should be very similar at heart. Both are idealistic and inspirational, uncompromising in their ideals. Both have been thrust into our world from another one, Superman literally being an alien and Cap being displaced from his own time. That is where the character moments should come from, the two of them forming and maintaining connections even though they sometimes feel they don't belong.

The Winter Soldier got the character beats right. Cap's relationships. The little moments. His choice during the final fight scene, one that was set up perfectly during a flashback earlier in the movie. (Trying really hard to dodge spoilers here.)

Man of Steel just didn't do that as well. Even at the end, when they show his reaction to having to kill. The anguished cry. Leaning on Lois for comfort. It's not that the scene wasn't well done, but it clearly wasn't earned. They trusted the audience's knowledge of Superman instead of showing us in the actual movie That really bugged me then and it still does.

 

My biggest problem with Man of Steel was the senseless destruction of property and buildings - many of which probably had people in it. Superman, the one we grew up knowing, would've taken the fight to a desolate area and would not have raked the bad guy's face across the side of a skyscraper, causing it to topple to the ground - killing who knows how many. But fighting in the middle of nowhere, I guess doesn't make for good cinema - at least in the eyes of hack directors like Zack Snyder and Michael Bay.

 

The funny part is I've heard the same criticism about The Winter Soldier, though the collateral damage isn't nearly at the same level because you don't have beings as powerful as Kryptonians fighting.


Of course, you could argue that the heroes in both movies didn't always have a choice about where the battles would take place. Particularly in Man of Steel, it's not like Superman could fly off and be sure Zod would chase him during the final fight. Zod had just promised to make all of humanity pay for Superman's actions. Maybe he would have followed. Maybe he would have slaughtered a few thousand people first.

 

The character of Zod is not an entity separate from the authority of the director.

Ever since 9/11, the "terrorist" meme -- Zod is one -- has been rather popular. Iron Man 3? Terrorist group. Every villain in the Batman series aside from Two-Face (who's barely in the movie) is a terrorist. (Although the Joker is more of an anarchist.) They don't want to rule anything. They just want to destroy and move on. The final Batman movie is basically a riff on the sleeper cell.

It's what Nolan is interested in.

 

I don't think Zod fits your theory at all. He was going to restore his people by any means necessary and he was more than willing to destroy all of humanity to do it. Once Superman took that goal away, Zod turned to vengeance.

 

Re: Marvel vs. DC movies, if anything, I wonder if the early success of the DC movies is what's stagnating them now. They had far, far more success earlier than Marvel with things like Superman, and the various Batman movies until they hit Batman and Robin. In contrast, Stan Lee couldn't get any of his shit made, and when he did, it was really bad. As a result, it seems like once they did get some success (Spiderman, X-Men) it started up momentum, whereas at the same time DC was starting to flounder and only got bailed out by the strength of Nolan's Batman trilogy. Take that out of the equation, and it's been a pretty big dry spell for DC, at least as far as a movie that was both critically and commercially successful. (Stuff like Superman Returns made a ton of money but nobody cares about it now.)

 

I don't think so. The success of Superman and Superman II was a long time ago. Even the first of the Michael Keaton Batman movies was in 1989.

It is also worth noting that in one sense, you can't really lump all the Marvel franchises together. That is frustrating for fans, but perhaps it helps move along production more quickly. That is how we end up with four major movies about Marvel characters so close together this summer (The Winter Soldier, Amazing Spider-Man 2, X-Men: Days of Future Past and Guardians of the Galaxy). Marvel Studios is only responsible for two of those.

That said, I'd still much rather see Spider-Man and some of the X-Men characters woven into the Marvel Movieverse. Sadly, I just don't see it happening any time soon.

 

I saw Non-Stop last night. Great, action-packed thriller.