Captain Marvel (Post-release)

[n103ew]

I found it on par with the recent crop of Marvel origin movies - maybe ahead of Ant-Man and pushing toward Dr. Strange territory. It was tough to get into Brie Larson's take on this... I get that she was supposed to be stoic and controlled (or at least trying to be that way), but I just never really bought into it. I mean Jude Law was supposed to be cut from the same cloth and he pulled it off.

There were a few 'leaps of faith' that were taken for the plot's sake that came off as a little too convenient - but, hey... it's a Marvel movie. However, the idea that she gets her power from the Tesseract was perfect. I was concerned that they made her too powerful... and I still do - just not as much.

The de-aging for Fury and Coulson was amazing. The opening montage was the best part of the movie - the Marvel opening fanfare was simply and utterly brilliant.

While I found Captain marvel to be solid and fun, I do feel they still missed the mark. There wasn't enough exposition where it needed to be, Brie Larson just never clicked as her character.... It was still a little too routine and typical of a Marvel flick.

But, a typical Marvel movie isn't a bad thing and Captain Marvel isn't a bad movie. It's a fun, energetic comic book-popcorn movie that's solid ride from beginning to end. It's a good addition to the Marvel Universe....

...is it April 26th yet?

I agree with this whole heartedly. While it wasn't a bad movie, I felt Larson was wooden...I get stoic, but she never looked really comfortable in the skin of Cpt Marvel. This is my only real complaint about the film.
The tribute to Stan was outstanding.
The deaging was very well done.
The story fits and was on par with the MCU.
I just can't get past Larson's interpretation of Ms. Marvel. Could be personal taste but I think others could have done it better.

 

[firesprite]

I agree with this whole heartedly. While it wasn't a bad movie, I felt Larson was wooden...I get stoic, but she never looked really comfortable in the skin of Cpt Marvel. This is my only real complaint about the film.
The tribute to Stan was outstanding.
The deaging was very well done.
The story fits and was on par with the MCU.
I just can't get past Larson's interpretation of Ms. Marvel. Could be personal taste but I think others could have done it better.

First... she's not Ms. Marvel. She's Captain Marvel.

If it helps any, we don't really get to see much of her in full-on Captain Marvel mode. Throughout most of the movie, she was being manipulated into suppressing what makes her HER, and even though we saw hints of it creeping out, we don't get to see much of Carol's real personality. Endgame will be a better indicator of what the REAL Captain Marvel from Larson will be like.

 

[JD]

Larson's performance definitely grew on me. I've seen CM three times and the choices made for her character really seemed to fit better to me. Her wit and sarcasm is very dry.

 

[CutThumb]

Well, its good to see that Captain Marvel broke the ONE BILLION DOLLARS (said in my best Dr Evil voice) barrier today !!!

 

[firesprite]

/sarcasm Man, it's always sad when a super-hero movie flops so bad... /endsarcasm

 

[Snikt]

Definitely not a flop, obviously, but just cause it makes a lot of money doesnt exactly mean its an awesome movie. Avatar is a prime example of that. While I didnt hate this movie, I dont feel as though I ever need to see it again. Unless it was BTS stuff with the skrull make ups. *shrug*

 

[JD]

Of course many people thought Captain Marvel was an awesome movie.

https://www.therpf.com/forums/attac...7/?temp_hash=dde8890efff21b7d2fe112037c58926e

 

[Snikt]

And Im not denying that. Thats fine. Im just saying box office numbers dont necessarily mean its a great movie. There are a ton of examples of that. Transformers franchise, Fast and the Furious etc. If you get enjoyment out of it, hey, thats awesome. I was entertained for a bit, and thats the whole point. Am I going to be collecting props, buying the blu ray, quoting it, hoping for a sequel? No. Obligatory disclaimer: thats just me though. To each their own.

 

[DARTH ANIBAL]

/sarcasm Man, it's always sad when a super-hero movie flops so bad... /endsarcasm

Just like Ghostbusters 2016, I tell ya.

 

[robn1]

Just like Ghostbusters 2016, I tell ya.

Can anything be that bad?

 

[cboath]

/sarcasm Man, it's always sad when a super-hero movie flops so bad... /endsarcasm

What's worse is when they have to hit 900M or so to break even....*cough* *cough* BvS *cough* *cough*

 

[Lear60man]

RT scores are something like 79% and 58% after all the purging, and purging etc. Shazam is 91% and 90%.

Ill go see CM but not at full retail with an audience score of 58%. 58% says Redbox or Amazon Prime.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

Your loss. I like 'em both, for different reasons. Captain Marvel's been out for weeks. Shazam! just opened less than a week ago. Of course its score is going to be higher. Excited people see movies opening weekend. It might stay high over the rest of April as more ratings aggregate. It will more likely drop a bit.

 

[JD]

I just don't understand the rationale of people that just seem to come to threads to post "I'm not going to see this" or even trying to justify it further by "I'm not going to see it in theaters" or something else. Some folks wear it as a badge of pride, "look how cool I am - I can't be bothered with this."

I can understand that you might be judging by reviews... I do that to an extent, too. But - to me - a huge part of seeing a movie is the theater experience... you can't get that at home. At home there are distractions that you can't escape.

If you're not going to see it, why are you here? You lose credibility by announcing it and it's taking a thread and trying to make it about you rather than the topic.

...and for the record, yes, RT audience is at 58%. IMdb is at 7.2 with more than double the number of people voting. CinemaScore - which polls actual people at theaters ranks it an A. 70% of RPFers that voted on it ranked it in the top 2 entries (of 5). However, numbers don't tell the entire story... actually read the reviews to judge if it sounds like it works for you.



(This isn't all about a single post).

 

[mattycsi]

I just don't understand the rationale of people that just seem to come to threads to post "I'm not going to see this" or even trying to justify it further by "I'm not going to see it in theaters" or something else. Some folks wear it as a badge of pride, "look how cool I am - I can't be bothered with this."

I can understand that you might be judging by reviews... I do that to an extent, too. But - to me - a huge part of seeing a movie is the theater experience... you can't get that at home. At home there are distractions that you can't escape.

If you're not going to see it, why are you here? You lose credibility by announcing it and it's taking a thread and trying to make it about you rather than the topic.

...and for the record, yes, RT audience is at 58%. IMdb is at 7.2 with more than double the number of people voting. CinemaScore - which polls actual people at theaters ranks it an A. 70% of RPFers that voted on it ranked it in the top 2 entries (of 5). However, numbers don't tell the entire story... actually read the reviews to judge if it sounds like it works for you.



(This isn't all about a single post).

I agree with you for the most part. For me though, the theatre experience is tarnished these days by the inconsiderate morons I have to tolerate. I only go when its something Im really looking forward to or its scoring off the charts in reviews. Im prepared to put up with it.
Films that dont hit that criteria, I'll wait to watch at home because of the distractions I have there. I can wander and set the washer off and such. I can always go back to bits that may have been important, but I dont have to use all my time sitting in the theatre for something that may not end up warranting my full attention.
I dont feel my choice of venue requires annoumcement though.

 

[JD]

I agree with you for the most part. For me though, the theatre experience is tarnished these days by the inconsiderate morons I have to tolerate. I only go when its something Im really looking forward to or its scoring off the charts in reviews. Im prepared to put up with it.
Films that dont hit that criteria, I'll wait to watch at home because of the distractions I have there. I can wander and set the washer off and such. I can always go back to bits that may have been important, but I dont have to use all my time sitting in the theatre for something that may not end up warranting my full attention.
I dont feel my choice of venue requires annoumcement though.

Those morons have always been there.

 

[mattycsi]

Those morons have always been there.

Over the last 15 years they have become more moronic. Mobile phones and an inflated sense of entitlement and self importance have made such places insufferable.

 

[JoeG]

The only time I encounter those "inconsiderate morons" is when I go to the movies on Friday or Saturday nights. So you know what I did? Stopped going to the movies on those nights. When there's a movie I absolutely have to see, I usually go to one of the Thursday night shows before the actual premiere. There are always 7pm showings that night. Everyone there is excited to see the movie and into it, so none of the inconsiderate morons.

 

[mattycsi]

You're lucky. Other than when I would go to the opening night Star wars shows. I'm a weekday lunchtime guy. It's the only time that fits my schedule. Unfortunately, that also fits the schedule of the great unwashed.

 

[JD]

Over the last 15 years they have become more moronic. Mobile phones and an inflated sense of entitlement and self importance have made such places insufferable.

Not at all, just different types of morons doing different moronic things. Fortunately, the theaters I frequent don't tolerate this behavior and tend to be proactive against it.