John Landis says hes “bored sh*tless” By Mahv-L movies - says "all mahv-L movies are interchangable"

[Alpha Male]

i'd rather watch a movie that's good but 'traditional' over a movie that's terrible but 'ambitious'.

 

[Disgustya Stallone]

i'd rather watch a movie that's good but 'traditional' over a movie that's terrible but 'ambitious'.

no one gives a f*ck what youd rather watch b*tch

 

[Mic-Nificent]

It's funny, people complain about Marvel films being "Too Formulaic"....but the first film after Avegners was Iron Man 3, which actually took a lot of risks wasn't a typical superhero film, and all people do is bytch about how terrible they think it is......

Just some food for thought......

 

[Mr. Negative]

somebody didn't like marvel movies.

okay.

 

[Black Nate Grey]

i'd rather watch a movie that's good but 'traditional' over a movie that's terrible but 'ambitious'.

That's your prerogative, its cool.
High risk High Reward >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Same old deja vu, imo.
I was just explaining why I and many others don't like MCU films. There is a sense of hollowness, shallow, vapid repetition.

I really liked Dr.Strange though, 2nd favorite Comic book movie after MoS.

 

[Bboystyle]

no one gives a f*ck what youd rather watch b*tch

Is this musty arab always PMSing in all his replies?

 

[Mic-Nificent]

That's your prerogative, its cool.
High risk High Reward >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Same old deja vu, imo.
I was just explaining why I and many others don't like MCU films. There is a sense of hollowness, shallow, vapid repetition.

I really liked Dr.Strange though, 2nd favorite Comic book movie after MoS.

But Dr Strange is the most traditional and formulaic movie that Marvel has put out since phase 1.....

 

[Alpha Male]

That's your prerogative, its cool.
High risk High Reward >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Same old deja vu, imo.
I was just explaining why I and many others don't like MCU films. There is a sense of hollowness, shallow, vapid repetition.

I really liked Dr.Strange though, 2nd favorite Comic book movie after MoS.

speaking of hollow shells.

 

[Norrin Radd]

But Dr Strange is the most traditional and formulaic movie that Marvel has put out since phase 1.....

I think Ant-Man takes that crown. shyt was just Iron Man: Rehashed

 

[Black Nate Grey]

speaking of hollow shells.

MoS was anything but hollow, stop.
That piff had layers. Christ imagery as strong, birth and death symbolism, you name it. It may have been pretentious but it had layers. MCU movies by and large don't.

BvS was the same thing but they put too much and made it confusing

 

[richaveli83]

I never understood why people complain about destruction in superhero movies. It happens all the time in the comics with NYC in particular always getting that work. These are basically gods going at it in combat. Destruction and death of civilians should be expected. Civil War and Dawn of Justice dealth with the aftermath of these battles well IMO.

As far as Mr. Landis's opinion, I respect what he's done in the past but what exactly has he done in the past 20 years that is worthwhile? Yeah he directed Thriller, Trading Places, etc over 30 years ago but what about now?

 

[Alpha Male]

MoS was anything but hollow, stop.
That piff had layers. Christ imagery as strong, birth and death symbolism, you name it. It may have been pretentious but it had layers. MCU movies by and large don't.

BvS was the same thing but they put too much and made it confusing

Before MOS at least 3 superman movies dating back to 1978 had christ symbolism and religious symbolism. They didn't exactly break new ground there.

It's a very hollow, empty movie with nothing to say about the world or its main character.

 

[Black Nate Grey]

Before MOS at least 3 superman movies dating back to 1978 had christ symbolism and religious symbolism. They didn't exactly break new ground there.

It's a very hollow, empty movie with nothing to say about the world or its main character.

The funny thing is, I used to dislike Superman before watching Man of Steel, he seemed too perfect. Now he's my favorite superhero.

One of the questions or scenarios MoS ponders is "What would a Superman in our reality be like?" Imagine you and your parents finding out as a kid you are an Alien with godlike powers, you have the power to accidentally crush your mother to death in an attempt to hug her. And if you reveal your powers the government will come after you and your family. Comic book fantasy would make it out to be the coolest thing ever (don't get me wrong it very well could be). Realistically, it would a well adjusted person insecure and unsure of themselves and their place in the world. This was reflected perfectly in the film. Clark was never confident and boisterous, he knew he was different, he was a loner because he is alone, a demi-god in a cardboard world. He isn't allowed to be like us, to be overtly emotional and lose control, because again if he does there are devastating repercussions. He only loses his temper once and the film shows the consequences when he fukks that guys truck up.

It pursued the question of "If you have great power are you obligated to save people?" Jonathan said no, straight up telling his son he should have let those kids on the bus die in order to protect his identity, and he backed up his words when he refused to let his son save him from the tornado. Clark continues to save people on his journey, having to drop everything and leave whenever he does so, so the rumors don't get too big. Again, key word here: consequences. Cause and effect. The film turns this on it's head when his other father, Jor-El tells him:

"You can save her Kal, you can save all of them."


"You will give the people of Earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you. They will stumble. They will fall. But in time, they will you in the sun Kal. In time you will help them accomplish wonders."

(GOAT superhero movie scene by the way)

He actively tells him to go be a hero, to go participate in life unafraid. Yes, you are 'different' but because of that 'difference' you can bring them something new, "an ideal to strive towards".



MCU movies feels like there are no stakes involved at all, DCEU is the complete opposite. You could easily tell if Kal didn't stop Zod then humanity was done, there was a weight of real conflict. Even if they pull of a victory it comes at a price, there are consequences. Superman won the fight but he didn't feel like he won, it came at a tangible price. Much like Luke winning the fight against Vader/Palpatine, he won, he defeated the empire and redeemed his father but it came at a price. Superman himself ended his race of people, it was a hollow victory.
Imagine killing the last other black person (if you're not black then insert your race) in the world. Now you're truly alone.

You're wrong. If MoS is hollow and empty, then wtf are MCU films? Black holes of shallow, cookie-cutter, "villian of the week", cac humour laugh-fests.

I can see how MCU is more "fun". You just want to watch a superhero movie, you don't need philosophical and political pondering. That's fine, more power to you. But don't pretend MCU aren't shallow and that DCEU films are. That's disingenuous and frankly a poor argument.

 

[Black Nate Grey]

If you have time, watch this. The way this movie plays with the themes of birth and rebirth is just . Zack Snyder is .



I think the problem is people went into this film expecting it to be a Marvel movie or conventional Superman. WB have been dealing with darker, heavy films for a while now though.

 

[Dominic Brehetto]

The funny thing about this thread is if it was John Landis shytting on dc films, this thread would be full of Disney cultists,dapping eachother,posting marvel smilies,and the same exact posters bytching about the OP would have nothing to say


Because trolling is fine when it's against dc,but say anything about marvel and they're right there to


Always funny to see the fake impartial people that only ever bytch when it's about one side,but have absolutely nothing to say when it's the other.