So, after much hesitation from hearing all the negative and mixed thoughts, I finally dragged myself to check out "Eternals". And oh boy... the naysayers were wrong. What a surprise, an entire generation of audience fed on "safe" and predictable MCU action comedy fare getting turned off by this philosophical musing that literally opened with Pink Floyd's "Time". Yeah.
Needless to say, I couldn't have watched this grand adventure sooner. Is it a masterpiece? Not even remotely close. The filmmakers should have pushed harder against the Marvel executives about squeezing in more action scenes in fear of their audience falling asleep from all the philosophical moral debates the characters have among each other, but no, we get sometimes pointless scenes that serve little purpose other than keeping our ADD minds occupied.
And yet, on the other hand, sometimes they talk too much. Film is a visual medium; "show, don't tell" applies here even more than the book medium. Should have shown us the "beauty of humanity" Ajak talked about so much; should've shown us what's going on in Thena's head through a David Lynch/Sam Raimi-esque horror vision to let us learn how messed up her psychotic visions really are. But nope, we get dialogue and descriptions only.
And YET, I'm someone who believes that intent matters to a certain extent when it comes to filmmaking. The fact that MARVEL and the MCU even allowed such a complicated and bizarre source material to be greenlit, translated, and almost dumbed down for mainstream audiences is an impressive feat in itself. We're talking about literal gods with god-like values regarding the rights and wrongs of grooming an entire species (us) into a species of both beauty and violence. Not human values like money trouble (Falcon & Winter Soldier) or depression (Wandavision), but god-like values about the pains of being an immortal witnessing Hiroshima itself nuked into dust partially because of the main characters. So yeah, definitely a wild and ballsy take by Marvel there that's definitely worth commemorated in every way, no matter how mediocre some of the scenes turned out to be.
And that's why I find it so hard to give it a low score because a lot of the scenes, even though they could use more polish, are such a breath of fresh air compared to everything we've seen before from the generic action comedies that made up of the MCU. Sure, there's jokes here and there in Eternals too, but about 70% of the movie is just contemplation of the human condition and the meaning of their own existence - IN A MARVEL MOVIE. Disney/Marvel. Wrap your head around the movie studio releasing something like that. Even Pixar's Soul couldn't match the complexity of the themes presented here, folks (resorting to the kind of generic kiddish humor commonly found in the MCU instead).
9/10. I have no regrets at all. This was a hit and a swing, and it's a shame lots of people couldn't give this film the support it much needed, so instead, Marvel got a knee-jerk reaction and went for the pandering instead. "Quick! Release some fanservice in the Far From Home trailer!" Yeah. I'm still looking forward to Tobey showing up, but let's just call it what it is: fanservice. I would rather get Eternals 2 any day over Far From Over Spider-Man.
"Unsubtle" is right. There's plenty of exploitative moments here to be found littered throughout the film, dulling its potential well-intentioned message against modern prejudice - real prejudice that is far subtler and more opaque than the "Evulz White Men" of this film try so hard to be. You could practically dress them up as Stormtroopers part of the Nazi Galactic Empire of Star Wars and it would've matched the tone.
There's very little to appreciate here, both on an intellectual and entertainment level. It's indeed well-shot and has breathtaking cinematography and soundtrack... but that's about all this shallow propaganda has going for it.
There's so much potential with the concept of the story that's wasted. Seriously, when I first saw the trailer, I envisioned something grander, more unique and interesting. The script could've worked better as a sci-fi time-travel movie. It doesn't even need to be set in the past; it could've even been set in an alternate future, like Planet of the Apes, but with white people instead of apes. "Get your stinking hands off me, you damn dirty cracka!"
Anyway, this is probably why Tarantino decided to inject dark comedy into racism; anything else would've been done before.
Had quite a bit of potential to breathe new life into the franchise, but all that was squandered on banal moral preaching in the final act. Villain motivation is poorly developed, could have used more work. Plus, you could see the twist villain from miles away ever since he "died."
A lot of big words were used in the ending to justify the villain's motive, but it's all pretty pretentious and hollow without any relatability to the character's personality and motivation. This is what happens when you sacrifice character for a message.
Plus, that final scene was so unsatisfying. I guess they're paying homage to the original Saw, but along with several other kills in the movie, it contradicts the villain's motive and makes him out to be a hypocrite, and it makes the ending feel like it only existed for cheap thrills.
Disappointing, considering what the film could have done to really have a discussion about justice. In the name of justice, the filmmaker forgot the most important thing about storytelling: averting the eight deadly words, "I don't care what happens to these people."
The comedy and overall levity of the film helped us to bond with Chris' protagonist a little, and I like how his whole deal was a reversal of the "crooked badass cop protagonist" you'd see in most police movies. But like I said, the characterization needs a lot more work. You can't just throw in a bunch of fancy ideas without properly fleshing out the characters because the audience would end up feeling how hollow it is by the end, how you're trying to sell this message without connecting with them as people first. Zeke was a deconstruction of a trope and felt less like a real person. There needed to be a lot more insight into his relationships in the first place before we could give a damn about those relationships with his father and his dead colleagues. Unfortunately, the trappings of a horror film meant that there'd be no time for that when you need some gore-fest every 15 minutes or so.
It's okay. Bunch of misfits turned heroes movie, but with girls. The feminist tone is also a tad heavy-handed, but I don't really care as long as the story's good. It's not a bad story, I'll give it that much.
This is easily Tarantino's most boring film ever. And for a director known for his exciting styles that push the limits of what cinematography can do, this so-called "tribute" to Hollywood is a pathetic attempt at nostalgia.
Oh, and as a Chinese, go fuck yourself with that Bruce Lee scene.
Seriously though, there could have been so many ways to pay tribute to the glory of Golden Age Hollywood and the tragic circumstances that ultimately led to America becoming more cynical in the '70s. As a director known for loving cinema, there couldn't have been a better person to pay such a tribute, to really show how those washed out actors adapted to the changing times of cinema. What about having Cliff drop some subtle hints about his thoughts on Vietnam? Instead, we've got almost 3 hours of people driving around and moping about their dreary lives. Maybe save some of that Desperate Housewives drama for the telly, huh, 'tino?
Also, for those who said that only those who live in LA would understand and appreciate this film, good for you. I'm sure Reservoir Dogs could only be appreciated by the mafia, or Kill Bill could only be appreciated by betrayed ex-wives, or how Django Unchained could only be appreciated by black people.
I waited 15 years for this?! Movie Bob explains it better why the movie didn't work, and he pretty much hit all the problems I have with the film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwkSBGhVpzI
I was going to write a full-length review, but you know what, I just couldn't bother, much like how Brad Bird doesn't seem to bother. It has so many good plot-points about feminism, the reverse role of men and women, the emasculation of people and society when offered the privilege of convenience, individualism vs. following the law (something Civil War already tackled, sort of), but none of them seem to have a proper payoff. Just a bunch of ideas slapped together to have an excuse for a fun but nonetheless shallow fight sequence with nothing meaningful to say.
5/10. Was going to give it 6/10 since it's still a fun superhero flick that pays tribute to the Golden Age of superheroes in its visual style and even narrative theme (showing heroes being heroes), but watching Bob's review and thinking about how disappointing all this has been (especially to a Pixar fan like me who has been disappointed since Cars came out in 2006), I couldn't really care.
I disagree with a few points raised by crazy_bitch, having just seen the movie - and before I go on, let me say that I was initially quite cynical of the film. It's why I didn't bother go out watching it when it was released, and only got to see it just now on blu-ray.
First of all, the villain wasn't uninteresting or unchallenging - the former is my opinion, the latter is kinda a fact. He's interesting when you think of the film as a spiritual counterpart to Iron Man. No, not the same meaning as "spiritual sequel". What I'm talking about is that Doctor Strange, the film, deals with spiritual themes like redemption, enlightenment, and acceptance of oneself. Kaecilius was mentioned to have lost his wife, thus he yearns for the power to control time. Now, I don't know if you've personally experienced trauma that makes you crave that illusion of control in your life, but that's a very relatable topic, and I could easily see why Kaecilius fell into temptation.
And that's where the second point comes in - Kaecilius is a polar opposite of Strange, a classic textbook antagonist challenging the protagonist. So yes, he is challenging in a sense, because what he falls into temptation to, Strange fights against. Instead of going back to his old life to gain that stupid sense of control, Strange chose the more noble path for the good of mankind.
So yes, it is very textbooky in terms of storytelling, and not particularly interesting, but what's not interesting isn't really the villain here, but the fundamental root of the story itself, specifically the thing that's supposed to hold it together, the protagonist and his conflict. It's boring, and it's been done before.
Finally, I don't really care about the magic being mystical - magic is supposed to be mystical and unexplainable. That's what makes it so cool. It's the same as horror movie villains. You explain their backstory, the magic is gone. Yes, there seems to be no real stakes, but that only force the writers to come up with more creative ways to have illusionary stakes.
The Ancient One could have lived forever, but she chose not to and died anyway. Strange could just turn back time and face Dormammu stuck in that time-loop forever, but he'll be stuck in a prison, forever unhappy.
Stakes are what we see as stakes, especially in this case where the logic and morality of using magic are so malleable.
What a piece of crap. An utter waste of time that destroyed the franchise. Both Stephen King and George Romero have nothing to do with this film. Stay far away from this.
Comments 1 - 10 of 10
Movie comment on Eternals
MemphisRyder
So, after much hesitation from hearing all the negative and mixed thoughts, I finally dragged myself to check out "Eternals". And oh boy... the naysayers were wrong. What a surprise, an entire generation of audience fed on "safe" and predictable MCU action comedy fare getting turned off by this philosophical musing that literally opened with Pink Floyd's "Time". Yeah.Needless to say, I couldn't have watched this grand adventure sooner. Is it a masterpiece? Not even remotely close. The filmmakers should have pushed harder against the Marvel executives about squeezing in more action scenes in fear of their audience falling asleep from all the philosophical moral debates the characters have among each other, but no, we get sometimes pointless scenes that serve little purpose other than keeping our ADD minds occupied.
And yet, on the other hand, sometimes they talk too much. Film is a visual medium; "show, don't tell" applies here even more than the book medium. Should have shown us the "beauty of humanity" Ajak talked about so much; should've shown us what's going on in Thena's head through a David Lynch/Sam Raimi-esque horror vision to let us learn how messed up her psychotic visions really are. But nope, we get dialogue and descriptions only.
And YET, I'm someone who believes that intent matters to a certain extent when it comes to filmmaking. The fact that MARVEL and the MCU even allowed such a complicated and bizarre source material to be greenlit, translated, and almost dumbed down for mainstream audiences is an impressive feat in itself. We're talking about literal gods with god-like values regarding the rights and wrongs of grooming an entire species (us) into a species of both beauty and violence. Not human values like money trouble (Falcon & Winter Soldier) or depression (Wandavision), but god-like values about the pains of being an immortal witnessing Hiroshima itself nuked into dust partially because of the main characters. So yeah, definitely a wild and ballsy take by Marvel there that's definitely worth commemorated in every way, no matter how mediocre some of the scenes turned out to be.
And that's why I find it so hard to give it a low score because a lot of the scenes, even though they could use more polish, are such a breath of fresh air compared to everything we've seen before from the generic action comedies that made up of the MCU. Sure, there's jokes here and there in Eternals too, but about 70% of the movie is just contemplation of the human condition and the meaning of their own existence - IN A MARVEL MOVIE. Disney/Marvel. Wrap your head around the movie studio releasing something like that. Even Pixar's Soul couldn't match the complexity of the themes presented here, folks (resorting to the kind of generic kiddish humor commonly found in the MCU instead).
9/10. I have no regrets at all. This was a hit and a swing, and it's a shame lots of people couldn't give this film the support it much needed, so instead, Marvel got a knee-jerk reaction and went for the pandering instead. "Quick! Release some fanservice in the Far From Home trailer!" Yeah. I'm still looking forward to Tobey showing up, but let's just call it what it is: fanservice. I would rather get Eternals 2 any day over Far From Over Spider-Man.
Movie comment on Antebellum
MemphisRyder
"Unsubtle" is right. There's plenty of exploitative moments here to be found littered throughout the film, dulling its potential well-intentioned message against modern prejudice - real prejudice that is far subtler and more opaque than the "Evulz White Men" of this film try so hard to be. You could practically dress them up as Stormtroopers part of the Nazi Galactic Empire of Star Wars and it would've matched the tone.There's very little to appreciate here, both on an intellectual and entertainment level. It's indeed well-shot and has breathtaking cinematography and soundtrack... but that's about all this shallow propaganda has going for it.
There's so much potential with the concept of the story that's wasted. Seriously, when I first saw the trailer, I envisioned something grander, more unique and interesting. The script could've worked better as a sci-fi time-travel movie. It doesn't even need to be set in the past; it could've even been set in an alternate future, like Planet of the Apes, but with white people instead of apes. "Get your stinking hands off me, you damn dirty cracka!"
Anyway, this is probably why Tarantino decided to inject dark comedy into racism; anything else would've been done before.
Movie comment on Spiral: From the Book of Saw
MemphisRyder
Had quite a bit of potential to breathe new life into the franchise, but all that was squandered on banal moral preaching in the final act. Villain motivation is poorly developed, could have used more work. Plus, you could see the twist villain from miles away ever since he "died."A lot of big words were used in the ending to justify the villain's motive, but it's all pretty pretentious and hollow without any relatability to the character's personality and motivation. This is what happens when you sacrifice character for a message.
Plus, that final scene was so unsatisfying. I guess they're paying homage to the original Saw, but along with several other kills in the movie, it contradicts the villain's motive and makes him out to be a hypocrite, and it makes the ending feel like it only existed for cheap thrills.
Disappointing, considering what the film could have done to really have a discussion about justice. In the name of justice, the filmmaker forgot the most important thing about storytelling: averting the eight deadly words, "I don't care what happens to these people."
The comedy and overall levity of the film helped us to bond with Chris' protagonist a little, and I like how his whole deal was a reversal of the "crooked badass cop protagonist" you'd see in most police movies. But like I said, the characterization needs a lot more work. You can't just throw in a bunch of fancy ideas without properly fleshing out the characters because the audience would end up feeling how hollow it is by the end, how you're trying to sell this message without connecting with them as people first. Zeke was a deconstruction of a trope and felt less like a real person. There needed to be a lot more insight into his relationships in the first place before we could give a damn about those relationships with his father and his dead colleagues. Unfortunately, the trappings of a horror film meant that there'd be no time for that when you need some gore-fest every 15 minutes or so.
Movie comment on Birds of Prey and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn
MemphisRyder
It's okay. Bunch of misfits turned heroes movie, but with girls. The feminist tone is also a tad heavy-handed, but I don't really care as long as the story's good. It's not a bad story, I'll give it that much.Movie comment on Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood
MemphisRyder
This is easily Tarantino's most boring film ever. And for a director known for his exciting styles that push the limits of what cinematography can do, this so-called "tribute" to Hollywood is a pathetic attempt at nostalgia.Oh, and as a Chinese, go fuck yourself with that Bruce Lee scene.
Seriously though, there could have been so many ways to pay tribute to the glory of Golden Age Hollywood and the tragic circumstances that ultimately led to America becoming more cynical in the '70s. As a director known for loving cinema, there couldn't have been a better person to pay such a tribute, to really show how those washed out actors adapted to the changing times of cinema. What about having Cliff drop some subtle hints about his thoughts on Vietnam? Instead, we've got almost 3 hours of people driving around and moping about their dreary lives. Maybe save some of that Desperate Housewives drama for the telly, huh, 'tino?
Also, for those who said that only those who live in LA would understand and appreciate this film, good for you. I'm sure Reservoir Dogs could only be appreciated by the mafia, or Kill Bill could only be appreciated by betrayed ex-wives, or how Django Unchained could only be appreciated by black people.
Oh right, they're not.
Movie comment on Incredibles 2
MemphisRyder
I waited 15 years for this?! Movie Bob explains it better why the movie didn't work, and he pretty much hit all the problems I have with the film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwkSBGhVpzII was going to write a full-length review, but you know what, I just couldn't bother, much like how Brad Bird doesn't seem to bother. It has so many good plot-points about feminism, the reverse role of men and women, the emasculation of people and society when offered the privilege of convenience, individualism vs. following the law (something Civil War already tackled, sort of), but none of them seem to have a proper payoff. Just a bunch of ideas slapped together to have an excuse for a fun but nonetheless shallow fight sequence with nothing meaningful to say.
5/10. Was going to give it 6/10 since it's still a fun superhero flick that pays tribute to the Golden Age of superheroes in its visual style and even narrative theme (showing heroes being heroes), but watching Bob's review and thinking about how disappointing all this has been (especially to a Pixar fan like me who has been disappointed since Cars came out in 2006), I couldn't really care.
Movie comment on Doctor Strange
MemphisRyder
I disagree with a few points raised by crazy_bitch, having just seen the movie - and before I go on, let me say that I was initially quite cynical of the film. It's why I didn't bother go out watching it when it was released, and only got to see it just now on blu-ray.First of all, the villain wasn't uninteresting or unchallenging - the former is my opinion, the latter is kinda a fact. He's interesting when you think of the film as a spiritual counterpart to Iron Man. No, not the same meaning as "spiritual sequel". What I'm talking about is that Doctor Strange, the film, deals with spiritual themes like redemption, enlightenment, and acceptance of oneself. Kaecilius was mentioned to have lost his wife, thus he yearns for the power to control time. Now, I don't know if you've personally experienced trauma that makes you crave that illusion of control in your life, but that's a very relatable topic, and I could easily see why Kaecilius fell into temptation.
And that's where the second point comes in - Kaecilius is a polar opposite of Strange, a classic textbook antagonist challenging the protagonist. So yes, he is challenging in a sense, because what he falls into temptation to, Strange fights against. Instead of going back to his old life to gain that stupid sense of control, Strange chose the more noble path for the good of mankind.
So yes, it is very textbooky in terms of storytelling, and not particularly interesting, but what's not interesting isn't really the villain here, but the fundamental root of the story itself, specifically the thing that's supposed to hold it together, the protagonist and his conflict. It's boring, and it's been done before.
Finally, I don't really care about the magic being mystical - magic is supposed to be mystical and unexplainable. That's what makes it so cool. It's the same as horror movie villains. You explain their backstory, the magic is gone. Yes, there seems to be no real stakes, but that only force the writers to come up with more creative ways to have illusionary stakes.
Movie comment on Creepshow 3
MemphisRyder
What a piece of crap. An utter waste of time that destroyed the franchise. Both Stephen King and George Romero have nothing to do with this film. Stay far away from this.Group comment on Filmspotting
MemphisRyder
Guess I'm part of the group now. :)Group comment on Anime Lovers Unite
MemphisRyder
Wow. This place is active.