Red Mosquito

OK. I gotta write a review now but it'll be in Spanish. Overall, I liked it!

theplatypus wrote:Ohh thia could've taken such an interesting turn

pan con alioli es muy bueno

Its a cool movie...its way better than everything Marvel did in a long time for sure...and Gal Gadot is a superstar. She is amazing.

I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

You're a critic!

LoathedVermin72 wrote: "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

This was some weird Sailor Moon shit, and it felt unearned, but I understand the need for it considering the market it shoots for. Could've been finessed better.

While i agree with most of LV view im still happy to see DC is planning on making movies out of its comics, not serialized tv like Marvel.

WW looks amazing.

VinylGuy wrote:While i agree with most of LV view im still happy to see DC is planning on making movies out of its comics, not serialized tv like Marvel.

WW looks amazing.

TBH I didn't think it looked that great. A lot of it was pretty flat and chintzy visually, especially at the beginning.

oh i loved it. From the color palette to the framing, it was more like a real movie than anything Marvel did in their last movies.
I guess the last Marvel movie that had something like this was Captain America maybe.

VinylGuy wrote:oh i loved it. From the color palette to the framing, it was more like a real movie than anything Marvel did in their last movies.
I guess the last Marvel movie that had something like this was Captain America maybe.

I mean almost any movie looks more cinematic than what Marvel does so

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:oh i loved it. From the color palette to the framing, it was more like a real movie than anything Marvel did in their last movies.
I guess the last Marvel movie that had something like this was Captain America maybe.

I mean almost any movie looks more cinematic than what Marvel does so

Not really. I would say that its more common to have the Marvel route in every movie these days. Comedys, dramas, even action movies...they all seem like tv series.

Just got tix for matinee tomorrow.

I'll probably see this Sunday or Monday. Not sure yet. Things are still up in the air. But I'm SUPER pumped to see it.

I loved the look of it. Nobody else noticed how oddly the action was cut, often showing us the immediate aftermath of the thing, like there were frames missing? It happened like five times. Also there's a shot of her throwing a tank near the end that is reallly weird.

Yeah, that was weird. Specially that scene were she gets her sword back. Really weird.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.

jwfocker wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.

Spoiler: show

I know! And then they just threw it away! They set up this great metaphor with Ares representing something in man's nature, and then, at the last second, they walk that back and are like, "Nevermind, Ares is an actual character and when he dies, the war ends." What?!

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

jwfocker wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.

Spoiler: show

I know! And then they just threw it away! They set up this great metaphor with Ares representing something in man's nature, and then, at the last second, they walk that back and are like, "Nevermind, Ares is an actual character and when he dies, the war ends." What?!

Spoiler: show

no balls. Had to go the generic route.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

jwfocker wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I appreciate that this movie follows Zack Snyder's brilliant vision of casting superheroes as contemporary mythology (literal gods), but his intuitive, baroque thematic clarity has been replaced by prosaic, expository discussion of subtext, and his beautifully complicated (and complex) optimism has been replaced by embarrassing platitudes. "Only love can truly save the world," is the conclusion they came to? Seriously?

It makes sense to me that this is being so well-received; it's not idiosyncratic enough to be divisive (or interesting). For the most part, it's...fine. It's a decently made blockbuster. The villains are milquetoast. The tone alternates between sweepingly dramatic and obligatorily light. Patty Jenkins is no visionary. She gets the job done. The movie checks the boxes and does what it needs to do. Slivers of Snyder's original vision are definitely there, but applied in a way that feels formulaic, like a TV show trying to mimic the style of a famous director who only made the pilot. In other words, a nice gesture, but ultimately empty and unfulfilling. As the DC cinematic universe progresses, I'm sure Snyder's originality will be felt less and less, and we will descend further and further into banality.

Man, for a minute I thought that last portion was a critique on humanity.

Spoiler: show

I know! And then they just threw it away! They set up this great metaphor with Ares representing something in man's nature, and then, at the last second, they walk that back and are like, "Nevermind, Ares is an actual character and when he dies, the war ends." What?!

Yep. That's what I meant with

theplatypus wrote:Ohh this could've taken such an interesting turn

That also would've been consistent with her outlook in BVS

does she fly an invisible jet in this