Avengers Infinity War Part 1 (2018)

[Goffe]

12 hours ago, The Stingray said:

 

Why do u even watch these movies?

because, unlike shit like wrinkle in time or rampage or uprising, these movies score good reviews and make a shit ton at the box office, and since i don’t consider myself someone who just watches movies casually, i feel like i should at least watch ‘em. 

 

also because i have time and went with friends. 

Edited May 4, 2018 by Goffe

[Murgatroyd]

I think most of my problems with this movie stem from the fact that I watched thinking of it as a superhero movie, when it isn't one. Sure, it has "Avengers" in the title, and has a couple dozen heroes, but the movie isn't about them. It's all about Thanos. It's a supervillain movie, and a fairly good one.

[Goffe]

the heroes combined have far more screen time than thanos, they are the ones we’re supposed to root and cheer for, and for 90% of the time he’s only there to throw punches at our heroes, so no, it’s still a superhero movie.

[MrSinister]

13 minutes ago, Goffe said:

the heroes combined have far more screen time than thanos, they are the ones we’re supposed to root and cheer for, and for 90% of the time he’s only there to throw punches at our heroes, so no, it’s still a superhero movie.

I dunno. I’ve seen plenty of Godzilla movies where he’s barely in the film, like the 2014 one. Gamera doesn’t even appear in Gamera 3 until the end of the movie besides a brief scene early. The plot revolves around Thanos I think. So heavens to Murgatroyd he might be right. And how can it be soulless when it’s got the *drumroll* soul stone!

Edited May 4, 2018 by MrSinister
Gamera! GAMERA! Gamera is really neat! Gamera is full of meat! We’ve been eating Gamera!!

[Lordmandeep]

I find it funny when people say IW is 100% Product and zero percent art, when many directors with a much smaller scale, story and number of characters still mess up to make a cohesive and entertaining movie.

 

What the Russo Bros did is deliver generic entertainment at its best, but it to suggest took no artistic effort is frankly absurd. 

 

I do not know how making a movie about a guy having sex with a fish is what the art of filmmaking is all about to some. 

Edited May 4, 2018 by Lordmandeep

[Goffe]

That’s because Godzilla is not the protagonist? I have only seen the american versions, but in neither of them Godzilla was the protagonist; the human characters were.  

 

IW not having a proper protagonist speaks a lot about the problematic nature of the 30 characters crossover concept. IW does have a slightly more fleshed out villain than the paper thin ones that Marvel likes to put in their movies, but he’s still very much an antogonist who is there to fight heroes mainly.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

22 hours ago, MrWhite said:

That is a Goffe-ass Goffe post.

He’s just stubborn & jealous because franchises like MCU and ”The Fast & the Furious”-films recently has are doing better than the box office and outgrossed most of the films from his favorite movie-franchise, lol. 

He always has despised most blockbusters of this decade.

 

And judging by his avatar...you could guess what the franchise is.

 

Edited May 5, 2018 by MrFanaticGuy34

[filmlover]

15 hours ago, Lordmandeep said:

I do not know how making a movie about a guy having sex with a fish is what the art of filmmaking is all about to some. 

lol at this flop attempt at Shape of Water shade.

[MrSinister]

15 hours ago, Goffe said:

That’s because Godzilla is not the protagonist? I have only seen the american versions, but in neither of them Godzilla was the protagonist; the human characters were.  

 

IW not having a proper protagonist speaks a lot about the problematic nature of the 30 characters crossover concept. IW does have a slightly more fleshed out villain than the paper thin ones that Marvel likes to put in their movies, but he’s still very much an antogonist who is there to fight heroes mainly.

Depends on the film. The Japanese ones can give him a lot more personality. In Mothra vs Godzilla (64) for instance the plot centers around his wanton destruction of Japan and making a beeline to destroy the egg of Mothra that washed ashore in a typhoon and was confiscated by some greedy industrialists. In this case the plot centers around whether Mothra (worshipped as a deity) and her twin fairies the shobijin will interfere when mankind’s  nuclear testing laid waste to their island and people, and Japan was unwilling/unable to return the egg in the first place. I’d argue they are the protagonists there.

 

in it’s sequel however, Ghidorah comes to lay waste to the earth, and while there’s a side plot involving a Venusian that’s taken over the mind of a princess embroiled in an assasination plot, who predicts the coming of Godzilla, Rodan and Ghidorah, I’d argue Godzilla is the protagonist here because as the Shobijin translate his discussion with Rodan and Mothra, the plot centers around whether he will be able to give up his hangups and hatred of mankind to face down a planetary destroyer who will destroy Japan and Mothra first and earth next, and if Godzilla wants to be stubborn and just continue his week long fight with Rodan, everyone is screwed. Many more films involve space invading monsters and Godzilla’s ability to drive them back. But then there’s the one where he’s like a force of nature just laying waste to Japan or some where he’s flat out evil and out for revenge. He’s the title character almost always and often the protagonist.

 

Here the plot centers around Thanos, and while the heroes may collectively get more sceen time, I think he has the most screen time of any individual character. The plot centers around his machinations. He’s the one with the big choice to make. (Sure there’s the guardians and thor’s Decision to split up or not, Spidey’s decision to stick around the alien ship, Doctor stranges decision to give it up when he did, but none of those decisions carried the weight or regret of Thanos’). The film proper ends with his reflection on what he lost in exchange. I’m pretty sure they intended for him to be the main character here and went out of their way to structure it so. Thanos is like a mad protagonist of a Greek Tragedy here and while I realize appeal to popularity here is a fallacy, I’m not the only one who thinks so. Perhaps one of these arguments explains better what I cannot properly word:

 

http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2018/05/03/is-thanos-the-protagonist-of-avengers-infinity-war/

 

http://amp.denofgeek.com/us/movies/avengers-infinity-war/273128/thanos-marvels-most-unusual-protagonist

 

https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/thanos-is-the-real-protagonist-in-avengers-infinity-war-hes-unlike-any-marvel-villain-yet-4447803.html/

 

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/features/931645-why-thanos-is-the-main-character-of-avengers-infinity-war/

 

https://www.quora.com/Is-Thanos-the-protagonist-of-Avengers-Infinity-War

Edited May 5, 2018 by MrSinister
The 98 Godzilla movie was terrible! Its not a Godzilla movie it’s a comedy of Errors

[Lordmandeep]

48 minutes ago, filmlover said:

lol at this flop attempt at Shape of Water shade.

 

I am not saying IW is an Oscar film but I am getting tired of being lectured that blockbuster films are not real filmmaking. 

 

They are able to get stories and appeal them to a wider audience, of course, its not going to be overly complex and layered as an oscar bait film. 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2018 by Lordmandeep

[That One Girl]

1 hour ago, MrFanaticGuy34 said:

He’s just stubborn & jealous because franchises like MCU and ”The Fast & the Furious”-films recently has are doing better than the box office and outgrossed most of the films from his favorite movie-franchise, lol. 

He always has despised most blockbusters of this decade.

 

And judging by his avatar...you could guess what the franchise is.

 

 

yes when someone dislikes a film you like he’s clearly just jealous and hates every blockbuster

[Goffe]

7 hours ago, Lordmandeep said:

 

I am not saying IW is an Oscar film but I am getting tired of being lectured that blockbuster films are not real filmmaking. 

 

They are able to get stories and appeal them to a wider audience, of course, its not going to be overly complex and layered as an oscar bait film. 

 

 

But SOW is pretty straightforward and simple (that’s not a bad thing btw). Your example makes even less sense now.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Goffe

[Lordmandeep]

3 minutes ago, Goffe said:

But SOW is pretty straightforward and simple (that’s not a bad thing btw). Your example makes even less sense now.

How is a guy having sex with a fish simple and easily accessible lol 

[CoolioD1]

1 hour ago, Lordmandeep said:

How is a guy having sex with a fish simple and easily accessible lol 

goffe wasn't talking about accessible just that it's not "complex and layered" like you were saying. shape of water just Free Willy with fucking.

Edited May 5, 2018 by CoolioD1

[Ethan Hunt]

The shape of the Water is movie that feels pretty afraid to offend anyone

[CoolioD1]

51 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

The shape of the Water is movie that feels pretty afraid to offend anyone

yeah, i remember before i saw it and heard parts of it described to me i was like "this shit sounds too weird to win best picture" and then when i watched it i was like "ooooh now it makes sense"

[Jake Gittes]

Good enough to make me actively wish it were better. In the character interactions, the plotting, the aesthetics, and the oh-so-daring ending, it's the pull-out-all-the-stops season finale to a big-screen network TV show, which is not a new take, but the 10-years-in-the-making aspect makes this quality acutely felt all over again. Easy to rank the storylines in order of preference - everything involving Guardians, Thor, and Thanos when he interacts with any of them is tops, Cap and his crew are still mostly stuck in bullshit self-serious Civil War mode before finding themselves in the MCU version of Phantom Menace's Naboo battle (but at least Cap gets the best entrance), and Stark, Spidey, Strange etc. are solidly in the middle. Emphasis on teamwork and mutual help likewise isn't exactly new but is reinforced strongly and consistently enough that it comes back around to being dramatically effective - the glove scene is a tense highlight, and the sacrifices actually work. This is the first time I've been impressed by Pratt as a dramatic actor; when Quill drops the smartassery and desperately tries to make himself sound like the biggest badass in a moment of crisis, it's heroic and moving precisely because of how overwhelmed and uncool he actually is. It's the gesture that counts.

 

On the ending: haven't read any detailed takes/articles/threads on here, but I was bewildered that the movie wiped out almost everyone except the original Avengers, making it all the more obvious how temporary this is. A truly risky, heavy move would have been killing off two or three people from the original crew for good, and leaving the remaining ones (Thor and Hulk, let's say) and everyone from phases 2 and 3 to deal with this whole mess in the next movie. As it stands, when you know that e.g. Homecoming 2 is already on the schedule, it's hard to care too much about this even in the moment, much less be haunted by it or anything afterwards. And that's a problem, given how heavy the movie plays it. It rings false.

 

Apologies if you've already read any of the above a hundred times in the past week and a half.

[Goffe]

11 hours ago, Jake Gittes said:

Apologies if you've already read any of the above a hundred times in the past week and a half.

Movie is such an empty space that every criticism, every point has already been repeated a hundred times as there is so little to it, I agree. Is there a bigger sign of a bad movie?

Edited May 8, 2018 by Goffe

[pepsa]

5 hours ago, Goffe said:

Movie is such an empty space that every criticism, every point has already been repeated a hundred times as there is so little to it, I agree. Is there a bigger sign of a bad movie?

 

What is this arguing over movies that are fully subjective, it is like people arguing about what colour is the most beautiful. Maybe films are a little more objective but instead of 100% subjective maybe 70%. So saying it’s obviously bad is pretty pointless especially when most people seem to enjoy it.

 

[Jake Gittes]

5 hours ago, Goffe said:

Movie is such an empty space that every criticism, every point has already been repeated a hundred times as there is so little to it, I agree. Is there a bigger sign of a bad movie?

Yes, like it being outright bad.