Black Panther: Wakanda Forever | Nov 11 2022 | Starring 2023 Best Supporting Actress Oscar Nominee Angela Bassett. She did not do the thing!

[Nikostar]

7 minutes ago, cmbbox2390 said:

That's interesting to me because, when the teaser came out, one of the things many people praised the most was how beautiful the cinematography is.
 

A lot of people were also saying how different it looks from any other MCU films. 

Cinematography really looks great. Even the underwater scenes look very realistic.

[OncomingStorm93]

5 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

From what I’ve seen, many people believe that a big problem with movies like Eternals, MoM and L&T is that their directors were supposedly given too much freedom to do what they wanted. 

I've frequently seen Sam Raimi's direction of MoM cited as one of the film's highlights, an opinion which I agree.

[Gavin Feng]

5 minutes ago, OncomingStorm93 said:

I'm not talking about the narrative. I'm talking about the use of the camera, the contents of the frame. DS2 looked and visually felt like a Sam Raimi movie. Or do you disagree?

 

My point is, for these movies, committee vision before director's vision. The best result is both studio and filmmaker share the same vision, because filmmakers can do what they're good at while studio could deliver anything they want.

 

Is DS2 a Sam Raimi's work? My answer is yes. His style is quite distinctive like his classic movies. Is Sam Raimi a better filmmaker than Scott Derrickson? I would say yes. Sam Raimi has proven his unique and great visual storytelling ability with so many good works. But does DS2 a better movie than the previous one? I don't think so. General audience don't think it's better either. And why is that since studio had a better director on the sequel? Because committee's vision go first. I'm not sure what the creative differences between Derrickson & Marvel were, but I think the assemble models for almost every sequel of solo movie under Marvel has restricted to what the filmmakers could do.

 

In DS2, way more heroes were brought to us. And the movie is considered as a backward step. In BP2, they will show more characters. That's why I think Coogler couldn't do much on this one. Not saying he totally lose control or his style -- because Marvel don't have to hire big names if they don't want their personal signet -- but he couldn't deliver his top talent like his previous movies. Nobody think DS2 could present Sam Raimi's filmmaking talent, right? And I think Coogler has been in same situation.

[Gavin Feng]

1 hour ago, WittyUsername said:

From what I’ve seen, many people believe that a big problem with movies like Eternals, MoM and L&T is that their directors were supposedly given too much freedom to do what they wanted. 

 

A description about the essence of MCU movies I would give -- sorry for lack of better words -- is marketing desire like porn. The reason Marvel formula could always work is that the movie just deliver what people want in a directly effective way. 

 

When I click on a porn video, I want nothing but satisfying my desire. Even though I already know the layout -- a) Flirtation; b) Non-penetrative sex; c) Penetrative sex, it still work quite well, because that's what I want. For those who go to see Marvel movies, formula is the promise of getting what they want in these movies. If studio let filmmakers do whatever they want while setting a goal of marketing desire, audience would feel dissatisfaction. Nobody want to learn anything about art while watching porn or Marvel movies. It's all about desire. So movies like Eternals couldn't work really well.

 

Assemble is another problem. Because I'm tired of watching threesome, foursome, multipleversesome for solo hero movies. I want a sex between two persons. A more sincere and high-quality experience. I hope Marvel Studios leadership can learn about that.

 

Edited October 22, 2022 by Gavin Feng

[Mr Terrific]

I’m a comic book person, so I’m used to a bunch of characters. What are you seeing that makes you think this has too many characters?

Main hero has to be replaced. Main villain has to be replaced. 

[OncomingStorm93]

1 hour ago, Gavin Feng said:

 

My point is, for these movies, committee vision before director's vision. The best result is both studio and filmmaker share the same vision, because filmmakers can do what they're good at while studio could deliver anything they want.

 

Is DS2 a Sam Raimi's work? My answer is yes. His style is quite distinctive like his classic movies. Is Sam Raimi a better filmmaker than Scott Derrickson? I would say yes. Sam Raimi has proven his unique and great visual storytelling ability with so many good works. But does DS2 a better movie than the previous one? I don't think so. General audience don't think it's better either. And why is that since studio had a better director on the sequel? Because committee's vision go first. I'm not sure what the creative differences between Derrickson & Marvel were, but I think the assemble models for almost every sequel of solo movie under Marvel has restricted to what the filmmakers could do.

 

In DS2, way more heroes were brought to us. And the movie is considered as a backward step. In BP2, they will show more characters. That's why I think Coogler couldn't do much on this one. Not saying he totally lose control or his style -- because Marvel don't have to hire big names if they don't want their personal signet -- but he couldn't deliver his top talent like his previous movies. Nobody think DS2 could present Sam Raimi's filmmaking talent, right? And I think Coogler has been in same situation.

 

I was never making the underlined argument. All I said is that the cinematography looks more like the Marvel digital house style than Black Panther, where Coogler had his own DP, not Marvel's person, and it's apparent to me as someone who highly values cinematography. Go back and look at the trailers for the first Black Panther, and tell me the camerawork isn't crisper, more vibrant, better lit, better framed, yadayada than what we've seen from Wakanda Forever.

 

That's not to say there haven't been some great shots, such as the slow-mo dance ritual at T'Challa's ceremony, and the shot of the new Black Panther dropping down at the end of the final trailer. As a whole though, there's a distinctly digital sheen over everything that I didn't feel in the first film.

Edited October 22, 2022 by OncomingStorm93

[Durden]

31 minutes ago, OncomingStorm93 said:

 

I was never making the underlined argument. All I said is that the cinematography looks more like the Marvel digital house style than Black Panther, where Coogler had his own DP, not Marvel's person, and it's apparent to me as someone who highly values cinematography. Go back and look at the trailers for the first Black Panther, and tell me the camerawork isn't crisper, more vibrant, better lit, better framed, yadayada than what we've seen from Wakanda Forever.

 

That's not to say there haven't been some great shots, such as the slow-mo dance ritual at T'Challa's ceremony, and the shot of the new Black Panther dropping down at the end of the final trailer. As a whole though, there's a distinctly digital sheen over everything that I didn't feel in the first film.

 

Rachel Morrison was busy shooting her first movie as director.

 

And about Autumn Durald:

 

Quote

 

Loki alum Autumn Durald takes over from Rachel Morrison as the sequel's cinematographer, and Coogler says he wanted to maintain the first film's rich world while also exploring new visual ideas. He points to the sequel's use of water and the color blue, as well as a switch from using spherical camera lenses to anamorphic ones.

 

"I think this film has the fog of loss over it, and anamorphic lenses warp the image a little bit," he explains. "Sometimes when you go through profound loss, it can warp how you look at the world."

 

The result, he hopes, is an emotional blockbuster that feels both epic and intimate. "What we were after was just making it feel tactile, even though it felt like a dream," Coogler explains. "The film should feel like a really wild dream that you would have, but where everything felt like it was really there."

 

 

EW.

[OncomingStorm93]

31 minutes ago, Durden said:

 

Rachel Morrison was busy shooting her first movie as director.

 

And about Autumn Durald:

 

 

EW.

Ok, I see that.

 

I'm allowed my opinion that what they attempted is a step down, based on what we have seen so far. I'm allowed to change my opinion after seeing the final product.

[Saul Goodman]

A lot of hate for DS2 is overblown, sure it could have been longer to explore some things more. But the movie looks stunning and very much feels like a classic Strange adventure. Raimi's touch can be seen in almost every frame. Hope he returns for DS3.

[Legion Again]

11 minutes ago, Saul Goodman said:

A lot of hate for DS2 is overblown, sure it could have been longer to explore some things more. But the movie looks stunning and very much feels like a classic Strange adventure. Raimi's touch can be seen in almost every frame. Hope he returns for DS3.

If anything, the hate is understated -- people tend to give it's awful elements a pass because of some of that stuff.  

 

Raimi wasn't really the problem though, he'd be fine returning as long as they got a great writer.

 

[Liiviig 1998]

13 minutes ago, Saul Goodman said:

A lot of hate for DS2 is overblown, sure it could have been longer to explore some things more. But the movie looks stunning and very much feels like a classic Strange adventure. Raimi's touch can be seen in almost every frame. Hope he returns for DS3.

My Favorite phase 4 film but all the beautiful direction is held back by a terrible script.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2022 by Liiviig 1998

[Saul Goodman]

Yep, Waldron's script was meh. Some of the scenes are literally carried by Lizzie and Benedict's acting.

[Jeight]

Mom is a well received movie by every account with decent audience scores across the board. There are other cbms this year with objectively divisive reception if you know where to look. Some pretty recent....

Edited October 22, 2022 by Jeight

[YM!]

2 hours ago, Jeight said:

Mom is a well received movie by every account with decent audience scores across the board. There are other cbms this year with objectively divisive reception if you know where to look. Some pretty recent....

Yes, MoM did get solid reception at 70%+ RT however it also is one of the more divisive CBMs amongst the GA this year as seen with PostTrak scores and CinemaScore being one of Marvel’s worse. It did have mixed reception amongst the GA even though in grand scheme of things it’s positive in the vague sense. I say that as someone who likes MoM.

[Jeight]

16 minutes ago, YM! said:

Yes, MoM did get solid reception at 70%+ RT however it also is one of the more divisive CBMs amongst the GA this year as seen with PostTrak scores and CinemaScore being one of Marvel’s worse. It did have mixed reception amongst the GA even though in grand scheme of things it’s positive in the vague sense. I say that as someone who likes MoM.

The only aspect that would support the "divisiveness" is the cibemascore and thats it. Letterboxd , postrak, rt are positive. A posttrak at the 80s isnt bad at all

[Menor the Destroyer]

Tbh I don't think MoM was that great visually, was a step down from DS1 in that department. As for WF the trailers have looked more impressive visually than BP's I think.

[Liiviig 1998]

23 minutes ago, Menor Reborn said:

Tbh I don't think MoM was that great visually, was a step down from DS1 in that department. As for WF the trailers have looked more impressive visually than BP's I think.

First DS to this day is the best MCU film visually IMO .

[Nikostar]

3 days 🎉🎊🪅

[jedijake]

43 minutes ago, Nikostar said:

3 days 🎉🎊🪅

Until what?

[Legion Again]

4 hours ago, Jeight said:

Mom is a well received movie by every account with decent audience scores across the board. There are other cbms this year with objectively divisive reception if you know where to look. Some pretty recent....

Oh my god, everytim