[beardo]

Hulk was best Hulk again.

[beardo]

X-Men: Days of Future Past
Eh, was ok, but felt extremely underwhelming after having see Age of Ultron, and the severe lack of Wolverine fight scenes was extremely disappointing.

[Vindictus]

How would you compare the Quicksilver in the two movies? I got the feeling that most people like DoFP Quicksilver more, whereas I felt AoU Quicksilver had more character and was utilized significantly better.

[beardo]

I preferred the Avengers version. He more accurately resembled the comic character physically, and he wasn't as annoying as the X-Men version, although that one has a more accurate origin. Actually being a mutant and being the son of Magneto.

[Saddam Hussein]

The Quicksilver in DoFP had the worst wig in the entire history of wigs.  He looked like he had just stuck a mop on his head.

[beardo]

Quite

[Vindictus]

http://screencrush.com/avengers-2-dvd-blu-ray/

Thank God. Biggest problem was a lack of screen time. Hopefully now we can see what the hell Thor did in the pool, while listening to Whedon wheeze out commentary.

[Crudblud]

Thor (Kenneth Branagh)

Actually kind of not bad at all, even pretty good at times. The whole thing does have the air of overgrown children in plastic suits playfighting in their backyard (never let it be said that Marvel does not know their audience), imagining fantastic worlds and creating stories about banishments, rescues, evil plots etc., but it's done with a certain spirit and vivacity that lifts it above the sort of film-by-committee style of Favreau's Iron Man. Branagh's camera style occasionally leaves something to be desired, falling over into sterotypical modern action territory with shaky handheld nonsense right from the get-go, in addition to some really awkward Dutch angles which he uses to show us... Natalie Portman looking pretty? Really, Ken? My main criticism however is that the over-reliance on CGI makes a lot of stuff look and feel terribly synthetic, and mostly what has stuck with me since finishing the film is questions like: how cool would the giant fire breathing robot have been as a practical effect using animatronics? And others the answers to which we may never know.

Character wise, Thor is actually a likeable hero. Not from the get-go, but he has an arc, and Chris Hemsworth plays him in a charming manner that reeks of valiant fairytale princes and knights, which is highly appropriate. I hate to keep bringing up Metal Guy, especially when I've already done it once earlier in the review, but the differences between the arcs of Thor and Tony Stark are quite interesting to compare. Stark's progression goes: rich asshole > rich asshole with a conscience > rich alcoholic asshole with a conscience; but Thor grows from an arrogant, warlike, power hungry manchild into a respectable, noble, and selfless defender of the people he comes to love. Obviously he has to change rather quickly in the time he has to spare, since there's nary a moment of the film's just under two hours that goes by without a pratfall, action sequence, or INTENSE ACTING!!! (not to mention one or two "Hulk claps out the flames" moments, such as the hammercopter technique), but it's handled rather well. Other performances I liked were Stellan Skarsgård as Old Scientist of Unidentifiable Ethnicity, Anthony Hopkins as One Eyed Man with Loud Stick, and Idris Elba as Comically Segregated Black Dude. The female side of the cast is a little flimsy, not because of the actors but because they aren't really given much to do. For example, Natalie Portman's job is to look serious and say science-y things, then ogle Thor's muscles and act embarrassed when he catches her in the act. Jaimie Alexander as Sif is the major exception, but she is literally generic warrior maiden who spent her life trying to prove that she is just as strong as the men and what have you.

You can tell I liked this more than other MCU offerings so far because I have run on into a whole third little paragraph here. It's pretty good, and I feel like Branagh's involvement has helped with that, I don't wish to present a dichotomy between "serious filmmaking" and "mere entertainment," because that's just silly and unfair, but I do feel like his history with Shakespeare, and his understanding of fantasy, mythology, and how to direct action, helped keep this from being a stodgy and dull, and it was silly in good way, not in a "I want to find the address of the people who wrote this and punch them" way. The hammercopter thing will never not be really fucking stupid, however. So yeah, MCU confirmed for getting better over time, I guess, or at least I hope so.

Next time on 2015: A Capeshit Odyssey: Nazis with bad skin conditions.

[rooster]

No thoughts on Loki?

[Crudblud]

Hiddleston's performance apparently did not make much of an impression on me, because I actually forgot he was in the film. That's probably a better answer to your question than any attempted recollection could provide.

[Rushy]

The female side of the cast is a little flimsy, not because of the actors but because they aren't really given much to do. For example, Natalie Portman's job is to look serious and say science-y things, then ogle Thor's muscles and act embarrassed when he catches her in the act. Jaimie Alexander as Sif is the major exception, but she is literally generic warrior maiden who spent her life trying to prove that she is just as strong as the men and what have you.

Considering how many le wiminz I know that ogle Chris Hemsworth I daresay it'd be more weird for her not to.

[rooster]

Hiddleston's performance apparently did not make much of an impression on me, because I actually forgot he was in the film. That's probably a better answer to your question than any attempted recollection could provide.

He was the whole ending. Did you even watch the movie?

[Crudblud]

Hiddleston's performance apparently did not make much of an impression on me, because I actually forgot he was in the film. That's probably a better answer to your question than any attempted recollection could provide.

He was the whole ending. Did you even watch the movie?

No, I just go around reviewing movies I haven't watched based on Wikpedia plot synopses.

[Blanko]

My exploration of Taiwanese second new wave cinema continues! This time we're looking at Tsai Ming-liang, a Malaysian-born director that nonetheless is ostensibly of major significance to Taiwanese cinema, having risen to recognition for his exploration of urban alienation in Taipei, spanning multiple films.

Rebels of the Neon God (Tsai Ming-liang, 1992)

A brilliant debut. Set amidst the neon lights of Taipei, the titular "rebels" are two youths: one already with a rebellious background, making his living in petty theft, having to come to terms with himself when he's confronted with the opportunity of a loving relationship; another a social outcast who disappoints his family by dropping out of school, and sets out on an act of revenge against the other youth for breaking his father's car's side view mirror. It's full of great characterisation and rich subtext, and the "neon god" that is Taipei is beautifully shot, capturing amazingly the urban lifestyle the film portrays.

Although the film is truly gorgeous, unfortunately much of it was lost to the poor print quality of the copy I watched. Bad tracking, audio popping and other such issues plagued the experience. On the bright side, the film has very recently been restored and is now being played in select cinemas in the US. If any of you Americanites get the opportunity to go see it in cinemas, I highly recommend it! Here's to hoping I'll get to enjoy an eventual Bluray release, at least. 9/10

Vive L'Amour (Tsai Ming-liang, 1994)

This is where Tsai's reputation as a minimalist becomes very apparent. Shots that span minutes displaying only subtle character interactions, minimal use of dialogue, and very little camera movement in general; I'm not typically one to criticise for minimalism, but Tsai's utilisation of it is definitely very excessive here. Tsai does very little to get the viewer invested in the characters, and when the surprisingly emotionally loaded ending rolls around, it's hard to muster the empathy and emotional investment the film expects, when it has done almost nothing to build up to it.

The film is quite interesting in concept; a salesman (conveniently with the same name as the main character from Rebels of the Neon God, and played by the same actor) finds a key to the apartment of a real estate agent, and begins living there without the knowledge of the resident. Meanwhile, a one-night stand of the agent begins doing the same. There's a fair amount of good dark comedy involved, and Tsai shoots the interiors of the luxurious apartment incredibly well, but as discussed above, Tsai's lack of restraint does make it a bit of a challenging watch. 6/10

[Blanko]

The Avengers (Joss Whedon, 2012)

Blanko is watching capeshit? Whaaaat? Okay, maybe I was curious enough to see what the fuss is all about. Despite my constant mocking of capeshit, I actually hadn't seen any of it besides a few of Sam Raimi's Spiderman movies and The Dark Knight. I was inspired by Crudblud's courageous endeavour to at least give one movie a shot. I picked this movie because it had all the characters in it and had the highest RT score. If that's not good enough of a reason, too bad! So...

Let Capeshit Odyssey 2: Electric Boogaloo begin! ...and end, because I'm not watching any more of this shit.

Honestly, I went into it with the best of intentions. I kind of expected to come out of it thinking it's at least a technically competent movie and if I didn't like it (okay, I was never going to actually like it), it would simply be because of personal preference. Maybe I would even give it a fair score, like a 7/10 or something. I didn't get even that. I tried.

So, the movie spends literally an hour just setting up our core cast. The expositionary dialogue is constantly infused with terrible screenwriting tropes: the zany jokes, mocking of each other's abilities, and dramatic one-liner responses keep the audience reminded on who all the characters are and what they do about five times over, when one would suffice, given that these characters have very little character. At other times we get inconsequential technobabble. The script is occasionally self-aware enough to play on its tropes for comedic effect, but ultimately most of the comedy is entirely unintentional. It also seems to me that Whedon is not very good at getting good performances out of his actors, because there wasn't a single one I found convincing. There were a few actors whose work I've genuinely enjoyed in other films, so it's sad to see them perform at this level.

When the obligatory exposition is out of the way, we finally get to the point that seems like the end of the first act when the stock villain escapes, but this movie is not one to care about smooth pacing and plot progression, so we're actually well past the halfway mark and ready to enter the Big Final Battle stage. When we finally get to the point where our ensemble of heroes can actually work together as an ensemble, most of the cast is instantly relegated to fighting disposable, non-threatening robots while a couple get to do something important and take down the stock villain. When the stock villain is taken down, another threat is shoehorned in just so we can witness disposable robots being destroyed in completely interchangeable scenes for ten more minutes.

It's really weird to me that in a medium where the main characters can do incredible things, most of the action is just... punching. Captain America just punches robots, Scarlett Johansson punches robots, Thor swings his hammer around and punches robots - you get the idea. Iron Man and the guy shooting arrows are the only two characters that actually do anything interesting at all. It's not like there's any remarkable choreography to their punching either, it's all shot in a very vanilla style, and there are no actual set pieces for the characters to fight in. The cinematography in general looks like a TV show. It's not engaging and it all just blends into a blur of fast-cut shots.

When all is said and done, I'm not sure I've learned anything about capeshit. There's no real reason another capeshit movie would repeat the mistakes this one made. At its core, capeshit will always have to aim for the young demographic so kids buy toys and re-enact all the cool action scenes from the movies - but given that this is the most critically acclaimed movie in the MCU, am I supposed to think that this is as good as it gets? 4/10

[beardo]

You just don't "get it", balkno.

[Blanko]

inb4 it was actually satire

[Saddam Hussein]

The Avengers (Joss Whedon, 2012)

Blanko is watching capeshit? Whaaaat? Okay, maybe I was curious enough to see what the fuss is all about. Despite my constant mocking of capeshit, I actually hadn't seen any of it besides a few of Sam Raimi's Spiderman movies and The Dark Knight. I was inspired by Crudblud's courageous endeavour to at least give one movie a shot. I picked this movie because it had all the characters in it and had the highest RT score. If that's not good enough of a reason, too bad! So...

Let Capeshit Odyssey 2: Electric Boogaloo begin! ...and end, because I'm not watching any more of this shit.

Honestly, I went into it with the best of intentions. I kind of expected to come out of it thinking it's at least a technically competent movie and if I didn't like it (okay, I was never going to actually like it), it would simply be because of personal preference. Maybe I would even give it a fair score, like a 7/10 or something. I didn't get even that. I tried.

So, the movie spends literally an hour just setting up our core cast. The expositionary dialogue is constantly infused with terrible screenwriting tropes: the zany jokes, mocking of each other's abilities, and dramatic one-liner responses keep the audience reminded on who all the characters are and what they do about five times over, when one would suffice, given that these characters have very little character. At other times we get inconsequential technobabble. The script is occasionally self-aware enough to play on its tropes for comedic effect, but ultimately most of the comedy is entirely unintentional. It also seems to me that Whedon is not very good at getting good performances out of his actors, because there wasn't a single one I found convincing. There were a few actors whose work I've genuinely enjoyed in other films, so it's sad to see them perform at this level.

When the obligatory exposition is out of the way, we finally get to the point that seems like the end of the first act when the stock villain escapes, but this movie is not one to care about smooth pacing and plot progression, so we're actually well past the halfway mark and ready to enter the Big Final Battle stage. When we finally get to the point where our ensemble of heroes can actually work together as an ensemble, most of the cast is instantly relegated to fighting disposable, non-threatening robots while a couple get to do something important and take down the stock villain. When the stock villain is taken down, another threat is shoehorned in just so we can witness disposable robots being destroyed in completely interchangeable scenes for ten more minutes.

It's really weird to me that in a medium where the main characters can do incredible things, most of the action is just... punching. Captain America just punches robots, Scarlett Johansson punches robots, Thor swings his hammer around and punches robots - you get the idea. Iron Man and the guy shooting arrows are the only two characters that actually do anything interesting at all. It's not like there's any remarkable choreography to their punching either, it's all shot in a very vanilla style, and there are no actual set pieces for the characters to fight in. The cinematography in general looks like a TV show. It's not engaging and it all just blends into a blur of fast-cut shots.

When all is said and done, I'm not sure I've learned anything about capeshit. There's no real reason another capeshit movie would repeat the mistakes this one made. At its core, capeshit will always have to aim for the young demographic so kids buy toys and re-enact all the cool action scenes from the movies - but given that this is the most critically acclaimed movie in the MCU, am I supposed to think that this is as good as it gets? 4/10

ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

Also, the Chitauri aren't robots.  They're live creatures, albeit with a sort of cybernetic connection to one another and their mothership.

[Blanko]

Also, the Chitauri aren't robots.  They're live creatures, albeit with a sort of cybernetic connection to one another and their mothership.

I don't care.

[Saddam Hussein]

What did you think of the Spider-Man movies and The Dark Knight?