I was a little eh on this. Although the movie had a lot of storytelling depth, to me it felt a lot like a dumb kids movie. Stupid shyt like the generic bad guy who makes evil speeches, the legion of ancient spirit monsters, the cliche bully characters who aren't there for anything other than to prop up the protagonists,
there being a whole damn Power Rangers team at the end
, I just didn't feel like this movie was made for me, or anyone above the age of 12 for that matter.
By and large though, it left a pretty good taste in my mouth and I really appreciated the directions they went with the material, and I'd definitely check it out again because it's just a really fun movie.
What's heartbreaking to me though is how the main DCEU has settled for movies that just... fit in. The Snyder movies had their flaws, but at least they were unique in retrospect to traditional blockbuster filmmaking, and didn't feel like MCU-lite, which is how JL, Aquaman, and Shazam turned out.
I also feel like the MCU still epitomizes functional, smart storytelling in terms of the superhero genre. For example, compare the nameless bullies in Shazam with MCU Flash Thompson... very minor characters but still so much difference in terms of depth and how they serve the story and aid in the arcs of the main characters. I don't want to compare DCEU vs MCU, but it feels like them over at WB are dumbing it down for the purposes of just making something accessible, enjoyable, and un-complicated, so that they're not treated as laughing stocks and Marvel's little bro anymore.
This movie feels like everything Shazam should be, which is an uplifting story about a kid who gets to live his dream and become a superhero.
And I don't think this says anything about DC trying to fit in, this is DC understanding the appeal of a character for a change and playing into it.
Comparing Aquaman to Marvel is just as dumb too, because Aquaman's scope was way bigger than any Marvel stand-alone film. Just because they make their movies accessible doesn't mean they're copying Marvel, these movies (well, not Shazam) cost 200 million dollars to make so making them accessible is needed for them to make money, and make more money selling merchandise.
And you talk about uncomplicated like the Snyder films were some kind of high art. No, they were dumb as fukk and full of clichés and really just bet on a "mature" tone that was hardly mature and just mostly drab and lifeless.
I also feel like the MCU still epitomizes functional, smart storytelling in terms of the superhero genre. For example, compare the nameless bullies in Shazam with MCU Flash Thompson... very minor characters but still so much difference in terms of depth and how they serve the story and aid in the arcs of the main characters.
At least the bullies in Shazam were not supposed to be anything more than stock teen movie bullies. Flash Thompson in the MCU is a terribly underwritten cypher of a character when you think about just who Flash Thompson is in the mythos of Spider-Man. Sure, the MCU version of Flash was better than the hardly shown Flash from the Raimi movies but the character was still flat as fukk.
Maybe my issues come from the fact they chose an actor that just didn't fit what Flash Thompson was supposed to be in the movie but I wouldn't point to Flash Thompson as some evidence of what the MCU does right especially when there are probably a million and one other things that would be better to use.
The last two versions of Billy Batson in the comics were depicted as a more street wise, edgy little kid instead of the "aw shucks" tiny adult version that the character had been for most of his existence.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.