I recently surfed YouTube for some entertaining videos to play while on my lunch break at work. After a bit, I found one from one of my favorite content creators, Professor Thorgi: a fellow nerd talking about comic books, movies, and video games. While looking through his channel, I came across one of his older videos, in which he laid out some of his unpopular opinions about horror movies.
Upon watching the video, it occurred to me that I never put out any content expressing my own unpopular opinions about movies. Oh, sure, I've reviewed some movies I've disliked that others have praised and vice versa, and I've explored a few aspects of filmmaking that I feel deserve more attention. Still, I don't think I've ever provided my thoughts on some areas of movies where the widespread consensus seems to be predominantly one direction. Like how much "inspiration" did Joss Whedon really take from Outlaw Star when conceiving his television show Firefly?
I think it's time I provided a few of my thoughts that will likely fall into this category.
Ladies & gentlemen, it's TheNorm's unpopular opinions about movies and other related topics.
#5
Joker is still incredibly overrated.
Let me get this out of the way: yes, Joaquin Phoenix is a talented actor who delivered a genuinely astounding performance (even though he didn't deserve the Oscar for it), yes, the cinematography was absolutely gorgeous and appropriate, and yes, I understand what the movie intended to be; a deep and dark character study examining and commentating on the effects of apathy towards disabled and troubled people. I feel passionate about this unfortunate aspect of modern society as a disabled person myself.
I completely understand this film; I just don't wholeheartedly agree with it.
My issues with Joker have less to do with the quality of the film itself and more with how it chose to present and establish itself. Everything Joker is and tries to be has been delivered significantly better and more nuanced in other movies. Not to mention how utterly pretentious the whole thing comes off as to me. Also, the entire affair feels like an attempt to emulate Martin Scorsese's classic films Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy without actually understanding either of those films nor the intentions of the director.
This wasn't helped by the director, Todd Phillips, making a complete ass of himself on social media before the film's release, putting out statements proclaiming how he made a "real" movie disguised as a comic book film. Plus, while I completely understand where he was coming from when he commented how, and I quote: "...outrage is a commodity," and I do agree that the film itself was never in any danger of "encouraging" evil behavior from anyone, I don't believe that Todd Phillips is talented enough, nor wise enough, to understand what he actually made.
Todd Phillips is under the impression that he created a profound work of art that puts its protagonist onto a pedestal and says, "look at what you've done, society!" In actuality, all he's really achieved is showcase what happens when film students watching Martin Scorsese's movies in class, who don't pay enough attention and completely miss the point, are given a budget.
Joker is not a movie; it's an expensive fan film for 1970s cinema trying to appear more profound than it actually is. If you're looking for a film that succeeds in showcasing the effects of an apathetic society on a disturbed individual, check out Nightcrawler. That's a movie that actually gets under your skin!
#4
Michael Bay is a talented director.
Many people, myself included, have referred to Michael Bay as a talentless hack. I was wrong. Michael Bay has talent, but he's still a hack!
I enjoy a few of Michael's earlier films like Bad Boys (the film that arguably elevated Will Smith to movie stardom) and The Rock, one of my favorite action movies starring the late great Sir Sean Connery, and a worthy entry into The Criterion Collection.
Michael Bay's early career is where he shined the most. Then he got cocky and started producing his own movies, and everything went downhill from there.
You see, the thing about Michael Bay is that he's a talent who delivers quality stuff when he's guided by producers who are more talented and knowledgable than himself. Because his talent is best utilized in small bursts.
When Michael Bay began working after film school, he made commercials. Some of his most famous ads were for Victoria's Secret, Chevrolet, and one of the most recognizable and parodied "Got Milk?" commercials. His unique talent is creating visuals with high-intensity impact in every single frame, reinforcing recognition in the item and/or name being advertised. His commercials deliver a massive punch to the viewer and leave a lasting impression, ideal for advertising.
The problem with Michael Bay is not a lack of talent; he just doesn't know how to channel it outside of his comfort zone.
Michael Bay has never been able to think outside what he does best. So rather than try and examine what technique is best suited for each subsequent scene in a narrative, he just executes every single moment in the exact same high-impact punchiness. That's why it is often challenging to remember what happens in most of his films; every moment is treated with constant high-octane execution with no amount of variety or nuance. Nothing stands out and feels worth retaining when every scene is presented the same way.
While Michael Bay can create some fascinating visuals, he has never learned how to tell a story. All he can do is make everything look as awesome as it can, even when a scene doesn't call for it. For further proof, recall his failed attempt at making a romantic drama.
#3
The ending for Shang-Chi worked.
A common and understandable criticism towards Marvel films, especially recently, has been their apparent overreliance upon massive CGI-filled action climaxes. On the one hand, I understand where folks are coming from. Many Marvel films have been well-executed stories with three-dimensional characters, and to end on such massive extravaganzas sometimes feels out of place. But, on the other hand, it's a Marvel movie! So, of course, it's going to end on a gigantic CGI action sequence. Why would you expect anything else?
I kid, of course. I don't intend to belittle or insult anyone who takes issue with how Marvel tends to end their stories. Even so, while Shang-Chi is guilty of this, it's not entirely without merit nor narrative justification and emotional impact.
For me, the ending for Shang-Chi worked beautifully, not because of the action, but for the narrative and symbolic reasoning behind it all. It is a case of how to best externalize an internal conflict.
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is, among other things, a story about family, heritage, and the importance of knowing where your real value lies. The villain of the film, Xu Wenwu (Tony Chiu-Wai Leung), is driven by his desire to reunite with the love of his life. Because he believes that he can't continue to be a better person without the presence of his wife. He is under the false impression that his value and growth come from physical objects and the presence of other people who see his true self. As evidenced by the continued use of his magical weapons and motivations.
However, he doesn't realize until it's all too late that his value was never measured by what he had but rather by what he learned. In his grief, he allowed himself to lose sight of his lessons and follow a path of eventual destruction: both of himself and those around him. It's not until he finally faces the consequences of his folly that he relinquishes his power unto his son. In doing so, he effectively gave his son the means to make amends for his mistake.
Shang-Chi then uses the lessons of his parents to become a better person and embrace his true value.
This internal struggle against hostile forces is properly externalized with incredible battle sequences featuring magical weapons and Dragons, the latter of which are always fantastic and instantly enhance the quality of everything it touches.
#2
Black Panther and BlacKkKlansman should have shared Best Picture.
There is no denying that the Best Picture winner of 2019, Green Book, was not only a mediocre film (at best) but was ultimately not worthy of the Best Picture Oscar. Its historical inaccuracies are insulting, its cultural impact was practically non-existent, and it's yet another movie about racism with a white savior figure who, according to the film, is responsible for helping a black man "reconnect with his culture."
Remind me why critical race theory is so scary to most white people.
The winning of the Best Picture Oscar is incredibly frustrating compared to its two more considerable and more relevant competitors in Marvel's Black Panther and Spike Lee's BlacKkKlansman. Both films succeeded in providing a significant impact on modern culture, historical examination, and judicial representation.
The fact that the Academy tried to mitigate Black Panther's impact by offering a "separate but equal" award (in the 21st century) rather than outright offering it the nomination shows just how close-minded the Acadamy still is, and a sad reminder of how little seems to have changed.
Giving both Black Panther and BlacKkKlansman the Best Picture Oscar would not only have been the right thing to do, but it would also have shown that actual progress had been made and promised a brighter future not only for modern cinema but for society as a whole. Instead, the powers that be decided to keep burying their heads in the sand and ignore their own problems rather than actually address them.
Times like this make me wish Wakanda was an actual place or that Disney would at least hurry up and build a Wakanda section in Disneyland. I mean, we all know they won't, but I can dream, can't I?
#1
Star Wars needs to branch out more.
Star Wars is and always shall be an essential part of my geekhood. I love the movies, television shows, and other such spin-offs to spawn from this incredible property. There is so much that can continue to be done with this little world that could, so why isn't anyone doing anything more with it?
Yes, The Mandolorian is a great series, and some of the other shows in the works seem like they'll be fun in their own way, but they all appear to remain firmly in the realm of space adventure. And while I acknowledge that's part of its identity, I have to ask, must it remain the most dominant?
Star Wars has become a universe in and of itself, populated by people with many cultures and lore ripe for expansion. Not just in new stories to tell but also in different genres to play with.
Star Wars stories no longer need to be confined to space adventures; we can have all kinds of movies set in the Star Wars universe. Everything from crime dramas, romantic comedies, even Mark Hammil, Luke Skywalker himself, has expressed interest in seeing a Star Wars horror film with force ghosts. It can totally happen!
If Star Wars is to grow as a franchise and a relevant part of geek culture, we need to demand more different takes on the world presented therein. I, for one, would love to see what Mike Flannagan would do with a Star Wars ghost story. Make it happen, Disney!
There you have it, folks. Some of my unpopular (likely) opinions about movies. If you found any of these thoughts interesting in some way, please let me know. I enjoy discussing different perspectives.
Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm; thank you all for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment