• DelvianSeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Saw it last night, mostly agree with this take on it, though in a bit less glowing terms. I didn’t think the emotional payoff alluded to in this review really worked, because I didn’t think they’d laid enough groundwork for it. Too much of this movie was more storyboard than story, with not enough time spent on actually delving into these characters’ feelings and relationships. That said, it was definitely a fun popcorn flick, with some great action, a good sense of humor, fun characters, and, as the article points out, minimal required external knowledge. And everything said about the publicity was spot on.

    • pwnicholson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. Early Marvel was deeply about character and their depth and character flaws that made them interesting. Thor, Steve Rogers, Natasha Romanov, and especially Tony Stark were interesting and complex personalities. (Bruce Banner and Clint Barton…eh).

      The stories in recent Marvel products are fine. Mildly interesting serials. Ok popcorn fare.

      But the character development has been getting more and more lacking. Even Thor has been reduced to ‘dumb blonde’/‘dumb entitled rich kid’ gags.

      I think that’s part of what makes Loki one of the only really interesting outings for Marvel recently. He stayed reasonably conflicted and complex.

      • AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The comics struggled with making Clint Barton interesting on his own for quite a while - the Matt Fraction Hawkeye series actually succeeded in making him interesting though, and I was rather disappointed when the MCU went a different route.

      • 0ops@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think Thor is actually more interesting of a character in his later movies, but other than that I pretty much agree with you

    • June@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea, my biggest gripe is how little they let the movie breathe. It was constant cuts immediately away from an important moment. I know what they were going for in each moment, but the immediate scene change ended up making it really flat and the climax was really anti-climactic. I was sure there was another 30 minutes left when the movie was about to end.

      That said I still really enjoyed it. It was fun, goofy, some really good sequences, and it did a good job setting up the next phase.