Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Wed Sep 17, 2014 8:25 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Rank the "Avengers" Movies! 
Author Message
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3594
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Shade2 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
I still don't see how Bay is any more misogynist then any other director


Plenty of directors don't feel the need to include "eye candy." The term "eye candy" in this context is misogynist almost by definition -- at the very least, it's objectification. It's saying, "Hey! Look at this flesh! Look at these breasts and buttocks! They fit into our current cultural definition of beauty and are AMAAAAAAAAAAAZING!!!!"

There's nothing wrong with observing or acknowledging beauty, but that's not what Bay (or the many, many other filmmakers like him) are doing. I'll readily admit that I'm in general more conservative in this area, but it does indeed come across as childish and silly to me. As AJR pointed out, most horror films qualify for this.

Any morality or issue aside, it's just lame and unconfident filmmaking. A tense scene shouldn't require a young lady be prancing around in her skivvies. A big action film shouldn't even desire to bother with scenes like Bay throws into Transformers. It's aiming for the lowest possible striking point.

Well I don't see it the same way you do. I'm not "conservative" so I just don't see how it's the "lowest possible striking point"(to me the lowest point would be humor relating to bodily fluids) and I think it's highly presumptious to say most horror films qualify.


Mon May 06, 2013 10:42 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 417
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Vexer wrote:
I'm not "conservative" so I just don't see how it's the "lowest possible striking point"(to me the lowest point would be humor relating to bodily fluids)


I think they are equal in their lowness. Either will get a rise (of sorts), and neither requires any amount of skill or intelligence. It's essentially fooling people into thinking they're being entertained. It's as artful as porn.

Vexer wrote:
I think it's highly presumptious to say most horror films qualify.


I'll clarify: I think most mainstream, major-release horror films released since the late 70s qualify, based on the ones I've seen (which is a lot). So I don't think it's presumptuous.


Mon May 06, 2013 11:29 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3594
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Shade2 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
I'm not "conservative" so I just don't see how it's the "lowest possible striking point"(to me the lowest point would be humor relating to bodily fluids)


I think they are equal in their lowness. Either will get a rise (of sorts), and neither requires any amount of skill or intelligence. It's essentially fooling people into thinking they're being entertained. It's as artful as porn.

Vexer wrote:
I think it's highly presumptious to say most horror films qualify.


I'll clarify: I think most mainstream, major-release horror films released since the late 70s qualify.

Except that there is such a thing as "art porn" (I.E. films like Shortbus).


Mon May 06, 2013 11:34 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 417
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Vexer wrote:
Except that there is such a thing as "art porn" (I.E. films like Shortbus).


Giving something a name doesn't make it exist. How does that detract from my point? Calling Shortbus "art" doesn't make it thus.


Mon May 06, 2013 11:37 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1710
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Quote:
Plenty of directors don't feel the need to include "eye candy." The term "eye candy" in this context is misogynist almost by definition -- at the very least, it's objectification. It's saying, "Hey! Look at this flesh! Look at these breasts and buttocks! They fit into our current cultural definition of beauty and are AMAAAAAAAAAAAZING!!!!"


Have you personally known women who you witnessed being offended by any of the Transformers movies? That's a dead to rights, honest to God question. I haven't, but I have seen women offended by other movies. I know one girl who was literally sickened and disgusted by what happens to Felix Leiter's wife in License to Kill, so much so that she wouldn't even speak to me at first after I recommended it (not that she accused me personally of misogyny just for liking the movie). The same thing happened for a certain scene in Man of the West. I've also known women who had problems with the wife beating in Godfather and a girl getting her face smashed by a glass bottle in Long Goodbye. I learned my lesson, and since haven't been brave enough to recommend much De Palma to girls I know.

The point is, there's a long history of misogyny in movies, and in many movies which are legitimately great, despite what some see as misogyny. You know how many dozens of times Hitchcock was accused of it? It's definitely something worth discussing, in another thread maybe. My point is just that Michael Bay's depiction of women is kid's stuff in the grand scheme of things. There's plenty of that kind of eye candy to be found in Fellini, Antonioni, Godard, and Bergman movies too. Megan Foxx is nice to look at. I think Bibi Anderson was sometimes nice to look at too.

Frankly, there is no difference between Avengers and Transformers. I sympathize more with the latter because it's more honest, less hypocritical, about it's own silliness. But more specifically on topic; I dunno if I'm just going crazy but...why do people credit Avengers with character development? I mean we all know that every single one of those characters existed in previous films right? Joss Whedon isn't responsible for any of them. On top of that, some people take too much for granted anyway that character development is the most important thing. Not everyone agrees with that. I don't think there's any great movie I've ever seen that was good primarily for character development. It's perfectly legitimate, and legitimately sophisticated, to care more about formal things like lighting, editing, staging, composition, camera movement, etc. Those are the areas I'm coming from for my opinion on these movies. Thor is also my favorite because I appreciated its humor.


Mon May 06, 2013 11:50 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3594
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Thank you McGames, I agree. I don't know any women personally who find Bay's films offensive, but I do know some who were offended by Titanic(more specifically the ending) and other romantic dramas. I don't have problem with "male-gaze" shots usually, but I DO have a problem with films that have excessive sexual violence against women like Irreversible, i'm also not cool with the scenes in the earlier Bond films with Sean Connery slapping women(plus that scene in Dr. No with him expecting the black guy to "shine his shoes" really dates the film), when Roger Moore did the same thing, he looked visibly uncomfortable doing so.


Mon May 06, 2013 11:59 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 1048
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Yup, women being offended by Michael Bay's movies is a new one on me. Plus, there's just something a little off about Megan Fox. It's like she's not even naturally beautiful. Just kind of.... plastic, just pre-packaged "hotness." JB joked in his reviews about her being one of the Transformers, and it's not hard to see why.

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Tue May 07, 2013 12:08 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 417
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
MGamesCook wrote:
Have you personally known women who you witnessed being offended by any of the Transformers movies?


Yep. With the motorcycle scene and the first scene in the third one, specifically.

MGamesCook wrote:
The point is, there's a long history of misogyny in movies, and in many movies which are legitimately great, despite what some see as misogyny. You know how many dozens of times Hitchcock was accused of it? It's definitely something worth discussing, in another thread maybe. My point is just that Michael Bay's depiction of women is kid's stuff in the grand scheme of things. There's plenty of that kind of eye candy to be found in Fellini, Antonioni, Godard, and Bergman movies too.


I don't agree that it is kid's stuff, in the sense that either it's there or it's not -- the level or explicitness isn't really the point, to me.

I certainly agree that it is a part of a lot of great films. And while I still don't care for it artistically, film is a visual medium, of course, so I don't mind "eye candy" in the sense of casting an attractive actress in a role. But the motorcycle scene (or, as you stated, similar scenes from Godard or Bergman or anyone else) that are there just to say "Hey! Check THIS out!" offend me artistically more than morally.

MGamesCook wrote:
Frankly, there is no difference between Avengers and Transformers. I sympathize more with the latter because it's more honest, less hypocritical, about it's own silliness.


I agree that some fans take Avengers too seriously, but I don't see any way that the film does. You don't have too like it (I don't at all), but I don't see how it takes itself too seriously.

MGamesCook wrote:
On top of that, some people take too much for granted anyway that character development is the most important thing.


To some people it is. It's fine if it's not for you. If a film doesn't develop its characters, I'm not going to like it.

MGamesCook wrote:
It's perfectly legitimate, and legitimately sophisticated, to care more about formal things like lighting, editing, staging, composition, camera movement, etc.


It certainly is legitimate, but I just don't look at things in that manner, personally. A film is a structured thing, to me, and can fall apart without the proper core elements. However, while I personally would never see a film just because it has great lighting, I can acknowledge certain skill elements in films that I don't think have any artistic merit. But each film requires different elements: There's a lot of technique problems with early Scorsese (the lighting and sound editing in Mean Streets are terrible), but some of those films overcome that with their quality in other areas. On the reverse side of things, Transformers/Avengers/etc are eons more enjoyable than Sci-Fi channel stuff because if you're going for big effects & explosions, why not see it done well? I have no doubt that the best F/X guys in the world worked on those films.


Tue May 07, 2013 12:10 am
Profile
Online
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 1:43 pm
Posts: 372
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
1. Thor
2. Iron Man 3
3. Iron Man 2
4. Iron Man 1
5. The Avengers
6. The Incredible Hulk
7. Captain America: The First Avenger

Thor was awesome. I really like Hemsworth in that role. Iron Man is Iron man, you could re-arrange them in any order for me. The Avengers was fun, but a little tedious. The Incredible Hulk feels a little detached from the rest for me for some reason. Maybe it was the change in actor, maybe it was something else. Captain America was boring, and Chris Evans was already in Fantastic Four which is lame. He was also better suited for his role in FF.

_________________
Sometimes I think I have felt everything I'm ever gonna feel, and from here on out I'm not gonna feel anything new. Just lesser versions of what I've already felt.


Tue May 07, 2013 1:09 am
Profile
Producer

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:04 am
Posts: 2188
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Funnily enough, the Iron Man movies are the best and worst.


3.5 stars out of 4:

1. Iron Man/Iron Man 3 (tied)
2. The Avengers


3 stars out of 4:

3. Captain America: The First Avenger
4. Thor
5. The Incredible Hulk


2 stars out of 4:

6. Iron Man 2


Tue May 07, 2013 2:42 am
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:52 am
Posts: 59
Location: England.
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
for what it's worth my girlfriend rolls her eyes at films of the ilk of transformers, just considers them films for childish little man boys. i don't think she's offended as much as she's just embarassed for anyone who actively thinks it's 'bad-ass'. but then she also is disgusted at me for not washing the dishes immediately so she's clearly highly strung.


Tue May 07, 2013 8:11 am
Profile WWW
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 622
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
The Avengers - 9/10
Iron Man - 8/10
Iron Man 2 - 7/10
Thor - 7/10
The Incredible Hulk - 6/10

I really enjoy them and think Robert Downey Jr. is fantastically entertaining in the Tony Stark character. I never knew Iron Man before the movies, so that may have something to do with it.


Tue May 07, 2013 8:56 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 724
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
OtherBen wrote:
for what it's worth my girlfriend rolls her eyes at films of the ilk of transformers, just considers them films for childish little man boys. i don't think she's offended as much as she's just embarassed for anyone who actively thinks it's 'bad-ass'. but then she also is disgusted at me for not washing the dishes immediately so she's clearly highly strung.


This is pretty funny, but also makes a nice point. The "exploitative" stuff in the Transformers movies is more for the enjoyment of adolescents, or men who haven't quite made it out of adolescence, than it is for anyone else. I'm not saying women shouldn't, or don't, get offended by it, but I think it says a lot more about the dumbing down of movies and culture in general that these kinds of things need to be resorted to in the first place to either stir up interest or add enjoyment.

It's really a matter of intent and context. It isn't like Michael Bay is the first director to throw some T&A in his movies. In a high school comedy about teenagers growing up, those kinds of things have a place. I'd argue that Bay does it just to capitalize on men enjoying seeing half naked women and it has absolutely no bearing on his story or characters. That's virtually the definition of exploitative. I mean, his idea of a budding romance is Sam Witwicky seeing Megan Fox on a motorcycle showing off her ass. That's not just really poor writing, but the main reason why it comes across as exploitative to some. I really don't think anyone would get offended if there was an attempt made to actually develop a somewhat realistic relationship instead of resorting to showing T&A and having that serve as the basis for their "romance".

It screams inauthentic to anyone who's had even a slight meaningful relationship with a woman. Most people likely don't care (I personally don't, even though I agree with Shade's overall point) because they realize that stuff is aimed at a specific target audience that will enjoy it. That doesn't mean those that do get offended are wrong or their points are any less valid.

Anyway, my rankings for these movies:

1. The Avengers ***1/2
2. Thor ***

3. Everything else sucks - ** all around (haven't seen Iron Man 3 and won't be)


Tue May 07, 2013 9:02 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pm
Posts: 1562
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
With the Tiers Method

Great Tier:
The Avengers
Iron Man

Very Good Tier
Thor
Iron Man 3


Average To Weak Tier:
Iron Man 2
Captain America

MGamesCook wrote:
Quote:
I dunno if I'm just going crazy but...why do people credit Avengers with character development? I mean we all know that every single one of those characters existed in previous films right? Joss Whedon isn't responsible for any of them. On top of that, some people take too much for granted anyway that character development is the most important thing. Not everyone agrees with that. I don't think there's any great movie I've ever seen that was good primarily for character development. It's perfectly legitimate, and legitimately sophisticated, to care more about formal things like lighting, editing, staging, composition, camera movement, etc. Those are the areas I'm coming from for my opinion on these movies. Thor is also my favorite because I appreciated its humor.


The Avengers isn't exactly deep. But it worked well as an example of fast food moviemaking done right. Admittedly a lot of the character development was done in the lead-up films. The Avengers was the culmination.

I'm not a fan of The Transformers movies for the simple fact that they represent )to me anyway) the McDonaldization of cinema. You could argue that both it and The Avengers are not exactly filet mignon. However I never really liked McDona;d's (aside from the fries and the milkshakes). If I'm going for fast food I prefer Wendy's or Taco Bell.

The Avengers is not necessarily that deeper than the Transformers movies. But it also has rumor for things like humor, better acting and somewhat more than one dimensional characters whereas teh Transformers movies just come off as big budget noisefests that are ultimately about nothing.

The Transformers movies could be more than they are. But as long as they keep raking in the dough there'll be no need fopr improvement in the eyes of those who greenlight them.

_________________
This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1347771599


Tue May 07, 2013 4:06 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
MGamesCook wrote:
Quote:
Plenty of directors don't feel the need to include "eye candy." The term "eye candy" in this context is misogynist almost by definition -- at the very least, it's objectification. It's saying, "Hey! Look at this flesh! Look at these breasts and buttocks! They fit into our current cultural definition of beauty and are AMAAAAAAAAAAAZING!!!!"


Have you personally known women who you witnessed being offended by any of the Transformers movies? That's a dead to rights, honest to God question. I haven't, but I have seen women offended by other movies. I know one girl who was literally sickened and disgusted by what happens to Felix Leiter's wife in License to Kill, so much so that she wouldn't even speak to me at first after I recommended it (not that she accused me personally of misogyny just for liking the movie). The same thing happened for a certain scene in Man of the West. I've also known women who had problems with the wife beating in Godfather and a girl getting her face smashed by a glass bottle in Long Goodbye. I learned my lesson, and since haven't been brave enough to recommend much De Palma to girls I know.

The point is, there's a long history of misogyny in movies, and in many movies which are legitimately great, despite what some see as misogyny. You know how many dozens of times Hitchcock was accused of it? It's definitely something worth discussing, in another thread maybe. My point is just that Michael Bay's depiction of women is kid's stuff in the grand scheme of things. There's plenty of that kind of eye candy to be found in Fellini, Antonioni, Godard, and Bergman movies too. Megan Foxx is nice to look at. I think Bibi Anderson was sometimes nice to look at too.

Frankly, there is no difference between Avengers and Transformers. I sympathize more with the latter because it's more honest, less hypocritical, about it's own silliness. But more specifically on topic; I dunno if I'm just going crazy but...why do people credit Avengers with character development? I mean we all know that every single one of those characters existed in previous films right? Joss Whedon isn't responsible for any of them. On top of that, some people take too much for granted anyway that character development is the most important thing. Not everyone agrees with that. I don't think there's any great movie I've ever seen that was good primarily for character development. It's perfectly legitimate, and legitimately sophisticated, to care more about formal things like lighting, editing, staging, composition, camera movement, etc. Those are the areas I'm coming from for my opinion on these movies. Thor is also my favorite because I appreciated its humor.

Must you always change the focus of a particular discussion? The quality of the Transformers films is perfectly debatable, but this thread is largely devoted towards ranking the Avengers films. There is no need to reawaken an age-old argument on this forum that warrants very little progress in terms of discussion. You and Vex find value in films that very few others on this thread actually like. There is nothing wrong with that. But there is no need to shift the entire purpose of this thread.

It is very difficult to make a case against the argument that Whedon is a better developer of characters than Bay. That is what I meant, Vex. Of course someone is welcome to argue against that. I just think that it's very hard to topple this point. Ergo, it isn't arrogant or ignorant to say so.


Tue May 07, 2013 4:48 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1710
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Quote:
Must you always change the focus of a particular discussion?


You make it difficult not to. Your first post:

Quote:
Avengers is Transformers with a brain.


Anyway, it's not as if I derailed your thread. Pretty much everyone posted their rankings, as the topic prescribed. At 2.5 hours a pop, I'm not sure if "fast" food is a good way to describe either one of these franchises.

I know a really good movie can never be pared down to simply good lighting. But doing better than filming inside an undisguised Hollywood warehouse would be nice. And making the ground level of new york a real set, but the sky level a green screen...I'd appreciate more effort than that. Making the extras a bit more believable, etc. At some point a movie needs to be directed, not just written and produced. Perhaps if Joss Whedon had simply written The Avengers, and handed it it to someone else to direct, I'd rank it higher. Filmmaking isn't simply the art of screenwriting.


Tue May 07, 2013 5:36 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 2086
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Iron Man 8 of 10
The Avengers 8 of 10
Iron Man 2 7.5 of 10
Thor 7 of 10
Captain America 7 of 10

The Incredible Hulk 4.5 of 10. (Ang Lee's Hulk is also 4.5 of 10.)
Most likely I won't be seeing Iron Man 3 until next week.

_________________
Evil does not wear a bonnet!--Mr. Tinkles


Tue May 07, 2013 5:50 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
MGamesCook wrote:
Quote:
Must you always change the focus of a particular discussion?


You make it difficult not to. Your first post:

Quote:
Avengers is Transformers with a brain.


Anyway, it's not as if I derailed your thread. Pretty much everyone posted their rankings, as the topic prescribed. At 2.5 hours a pop, I'm not sure if "fast" food is a good way to describe either one of these franchises.

I know a really good movie can never be pared down to simply good lighting. But doing better than filming inside an undisguised Hollywood warehouse would be nice. And making the ground level of new york a real set, but the sky level a green screen...I'd appreciate more effort than that. Making the extras a bit more believable, etc. At some point a movie needs to be directed, not just written and produced. Perhaps if Joss Whedon had simply written The Avengers, and handed it it to someone else to direct, I'd rank it higher. Filmmaking isn't simply the art of screenwriting.

You're more than welcome to argue against my points, but the purpose of this thread was hardly to debate the merits of Michael Bay and misogyny in film.


Tue May 07, 2013 6:06 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1710
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Quote:
You're more than welcome to argue against my points, but the purpose of this thread was hardly to debate the merits of Michael Bay and misogyny in film.


Right, no argument there.


Tue May 07, 2013 7:54 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pm
Posts: 1562
Post Re: Rank the "Avengers" Movies!
Sean wrote:
You're more than welcome to argue against my points, but the purpose of this thread was hardly to debate the merits of Michael Bay and misogyny in film.


If we're looking to Debate the merits of Mr. Bay, we have this thread http://reelviews.net/reelviewsforum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1145

_________________
This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1347771599


Tue May 07, 2013 7:55 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr