More Underappreciated: Captain America: Civil War or Watchmen?

  • 60 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll More Underappreciated: Captain America: Civil War or Watchmen? (38 votes)

Civil War 34%
Watchmen 66%

Well they are both polarizing CBMs for sure. My argument for either

Civil War

Well, the movie had a lot of hype and was considered really great at the time, after time passed.. people started to hate this movie enough to rate Logan and Man of Steel over it, which are mid-tier CBMs. I respect opinions but the only movie that rep got notably worse is Avengers 2012 and Wonder Woman lol.

Why it's underrated

  • It respects the source material (Inb4 Vishop)
  • It was serious and fun at the same time
  • Great action scenes
  • Introduced two characters well and finished an arc
  • good acting from everyone
  • it has a reason for the conflict and handled politics with two scenes, while not being as dark as the comic
  • well paced, constant action and showed the consequences of Hero's actions
  • 3rd act is emotional
  • well directed, no one-liners and cheesy stuff (Looking at you Professor Hulk)
  • It did everything better than BvS
  • it has a very good soundtrack

Yet, according to some it's an average film that always gets bashed like AOU nowdays. It can't even beat an Harry Potter film or a Zack Snyder film in a poll in this site. Always seen as the weakest Russo films alongside Endgame. People always downplay and say it has jokes, when in reality there are only a few jokes in the airport fight, and they don't ruin any tone, i mean the next scene we had Tony and Cap fighting in a brutal fight and the dark flashback with Howard Stark's death. One common criticism is that the movie had no "consequences" and i'll just say that:

  • The avengers are divided and the accords are law
  • Spidey is a public hero
  • Steve doesnt have his shield and quits
  • Bucky is frozen
  • Thanos is coming to a defenceless earth
  • Some people like Ant Man, Hawkeye and Falcon won't see their families
  • Half of the avengers are fugitives with the law
  • The remaining Avengers are crippled, emotionally, physically and psycothically (Wanda and Cap for example)

I still believe that this is a dark horse contender for the best CBM overall, the only one which i would put above without any doubt is The Dark Knight (for obvious reasons) and some others are in the same tier but it really felt like a comic book film and a great movie at the same time. Anyways, I think that i have talked enough about this film and why i really like it so let's move on Watchmen

Watchmen

Yes... the "talentless hack" Snyder or the "genius" that made a misunderstood movie? This is definitely the best Snyder film and while it's not good as his comic, it doesn't deserve to be called a failure or trash. Many people don't like the ending and the concept so it's a 60/40 film in this site, like MOS.

Why it's underrated

  • Amazing cinematography
  • Great acting, especially from Ozy and Roarsarch
  • Great action scenes
  • Dr. Manhattan CGI's is great
  • it showed us the reality of the superhero world
  • The opening scene is still fantastic
  • it managed to adapt a difficult storyline changing the alien stuff to Manhattan's threat
  • No quick cuts or editing issues like BvS
  • we also saw a fractured society, insane politicians and various figures with vulnerable moralities but mostly it's aganist the american spirit

The main issues are the pacing, which IMO works well as we got a lot of great scenes and while the story is long, i think that it managed characters and relationships well. I would say that this is a top 10 CBM and should be mentioned in the same breath as Iron Man, X-Men: First Class and Batman 89 in terms of quality atleast. I don't think it's in the same tier as something like IW or TDKR yet, but it's a great film.

Let me know what do you think of this and which one do you think it's more underappreciated?

 • 
Avatar image for richubs
Richubs

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By Richubs

Voted Watchmen as I don't think Civil War in underappreciated.

I actually liked Watchmen a lot while people actuary hate it.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@richubs: How it's not underappreciated? People already agreed that they preferred Man of Steel and Far From Home over Civil War and yet people compare it to weak films like Harry Potter ones or Blade or Returns which are not in that level of quality....

Avatar image for richubs
Richubs

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

The Man of Steel people are only here on comicvine. I don't think anyone widely thinks that Civil War is worse than Man of Steel.

As for Far From Home I can actually see an argument for it. Civil War does have its problems - bad editing during action scenes, convoluted Zemo plot etc.

Avatar image for mrmonster
mrmonster

22349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

If anything Civil War might be a little overrated. It has great action scenes but a weak story.

Avatar image for killbilly
KillBilly

8114

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By KillBilly

Civil War is a decent MCU movie that most people acknowledge as such. Watchmen is one of the best CBM films around that I see a lot of people dismissing simply because it was made by "Zack Snyder."

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
Ready_4_Madness

26091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By Ready_4_Madness

Watchmen is way better imo and it’s more under appreciated in real life. Civil War is more under appreciated on CV.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
Ready_4_Madness

26091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@richubs: I don’t think that’s the case with MOS tbh, I’ve personally seen a lot of people grow to like it.

Avatar image for skywalker95
skywalker95

13369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Watchmen by far.

Avatar image for richubs
Richubs

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ready_4_madness:

I still personally think Man of Steel is a subpar movie. I also don't see any new praise for the movie. Most of what I see on like it's YouTube comments are the same type of comments I saw 5 years ago, mainly from Snyder fans.

Avatar image for nevesytneves
nevesytneves

1070

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

yet people compare it to weak films like Harry Potter ones

HP films aren't weak so it's a moot point.

OT-Watchmen. Both are good but Watchmen is looked down upon a lot more and forgotten/discarded too frequently.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@richubs:

The Man of Steel people are only here on comicvine. I don't think anyone widely thinks that Civil War is worse than Man of Steel.

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/gen-discussion-1/man-of-steel-2011-or-captain-america-civil-war-201-1883002/

Barely winning to Man of Steel is one thing getting completely obliterated like to TDKR is another. Both of these films are a bit divisive aswell.

Just look the threads before, CW used to be considered on par with TDK or TDKR...

As for Far From Home I can actually see an argument for it. Civil War does have its problems - bad editing during action scenes, convoluted Zemo plot etc.

I think that FFH is solid but doesn't even come close to my top 10. Anyways I'll drop my opinion on Zemo's plan:

What part of Zemos plan required plot holes or luck? I think that the events could've happened differently and he would have still succeded.

1) Sokovia accords: They were a thing since they blamed the Avengers for the chain reaction and the movie starts with Wanda's mistake that lead to the UN accord. Now, Zemo just needed to blame Bucky, a known terrorism so the whole world would find him and he knew that Cap would 100% act no matter to save him, he just timed it well.

2) Bucky gets captured/chase scene: Yeah, he was going to get captured. This is why he stole the Winter Soldier book and knew that even if that didn't happen, he could have just sent information pointing towards Bucky so they would try to follow up on it.

3) The doctor/escape scene: What's wrong with this? Zemo was a secret agent trained in infiltration and quite smart, he has the skill and intelligence needed to impersonate him and what "coincidence" was here? He just needed to use the book and give Cap a villain that could actually chase, combined with the time limict. I mean, the UN would take time to authorize Ross' russian operation based on the claims of a terrorism. Cap would have just rectuired other avengers to help him and get into action as a vigilante. Really, the same happened in the comic.

4) Airport fight: Well, it was set-up and should've been in the movie for sure. He wasn't the main reason of the fight but he had a part on it, even if they didn't and Cap would have gotten arrested, he could've sent the tape to Tony and get him murder Bucky due to feeling betrayed by Cap and due to being very attached with his parents. They showed multiple flashbacks in the MCU that shows their relationship. This would work and split the Avengers since the leader would commit a coldblooded murder, so Zemo wins if the Avenger follows Cap (they become criminals) or if Tony gets the tape. What would happen if they signed the accords? There would be enough time and Avengers to work under time pressure.

5) Siberian fight: Yeah, he made sure that his dressup was discovered with the Hotel to get Tony show up. Even if Tony went with one or two Avengers, he would have tryed to kill Bucky and Zemo would've decleared victory. Cap would have gone aganist the accords and him and Bucky would've been arrested (in case they didn't die). So in reality, his plan getting discovered didn't lead to the release of the heroes since not signing the UN accords and acting without authorization was what got the accords in the first place.

We know that Cap would've done everything to save his best friend and the only person from his timeline left alive and Zemo is a military type leader, so of course he knew how they would act and had back-ups.

Feel free to let me know what do you think doesn't work.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@skywalker95 said:

Watchmen by far.

I thought you agreed with me a year ago that Civil War was one of the best, anyways what do you think on my breakdown?

@nevesytneves said:

@god___2:

yet people compare it to weak films like Harry Potter ones

HP films aren't weak so it's a moot point.

OT-Watchmen. Both are good but Watchmen is looked down upon a lot more and forgotten/discarded too frequently.

None of the HP films have scenes on par with Civil War's airport fight, or the sokovia accords scene or any acting performance on par with RDJ's or Evans'. Prove me wrong.

@ready_4_madness said:

@richubs: I don’t think that’s the case with MOS tbh, I’ve personally seen a lot of people grow to like it.

I also like MOS, it's solid but the only thing that stood out as fantastic were the score, the action and General Zod's portryal. The story had some pacing issues in the middle, and some stuff is dumb like the Tornado scene or some one-liners. Still a great film which has also good cinematography and Faora/Cavill's performances were solid but i can't rate it with more than a 8/10.

Being compared with Civil War or Joker is just laughable IMO.

Avatar image for richubs
Richubs

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

TDKR is a much better movie imo so I won't be surprised if it wins.

I don't think Zemo had to do all of that he should've just sent the video to Tony right away and after Tony would've been finished with Bucky Cap and Iron Man would have been divided and he wouldn't have had to do all of the other work.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@richubs:

TDKR is a much better movie imo so I won't be surprised if it wins.

It really isn't. The only thing that TDKR did better was cinematography and Bane's portryal. The story is kinda long and it had many characters, and the action was just good but nothing exceptional. They're even acting-wise and dialogue-wise.

TDKR is still great and kinda underrated but i wouldn't say is that great of a trilogy ending.

I don't think Zemo had to do all of that he should've just sent the video to Tony right away and after Tony would've been finished with Bucky Cap and Iron Man would have been divided and he wouldn't have had to do all of the other work.

Yeah but the movie needs to be interesting aswell. Anyways, I think that Zemo was an overall good villain especially in a hero vs hero movie. He wasn't the focus on the story but was a much better villain than BvS Luthor (they're similiar in planning).

Avatar image for nevesytneves
nevesytneves

1070

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

None of the HP films have scenes on par with Civil War's airport fight,

Airport fight is just eye candy that lacks any real tension. The final throwdown was much more emotional, climactic and engaging.

or the sokovia accords scene or any acting performance on par with RDJ's or Evans'. Prove me wrong.

Loading Video...
Loading Video...
Loading Video...
Loading Video...
Loading Video...
Loading Video...

All of the following are much better, and there's more where they came from. In general HP has much more layered characters and superior exploration of its themes relative to CW.

Avatar image for richubs
Richubs

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By Richubs

@god___2:

I personally disagree. I like the story of TDKR more, the overall depth of the movie more, the scene where Bruce finally makes the climb is much better than anything in Civil War. The action scenes are bad that's a negative. The ending is just spectacular, the entire wrapup at the end. The score is also much better

Well you see that's my point they should've gone with a different story where Zemo's complicated plan would not feel like overdoing and unnecessarily overcompicating things.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
Ready_4_Madness

26091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2: Joker I agree but I’d put MOS above CW, as good as it is. Zemo was just too much of a bore to watch and the airport fight should’ve been 10x better.

@richubs: oh I didn’t mean on YouTube but fair enough.

Avatar image for indomitableregal
IndomitableRegal

23935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Neither. They're both overrated.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@richubs:

I personally disagree. I like the story of TDKR more, the overall depth of the movie more, the scene where Bruce finally makes the climb is much better than anything in Civil War. The action scenes are bad that's a negative. The ending is just spectacular, the entire wrapup at the end.

Fine, I'm debating and not trying to change your mind. Anyways, TDKR's story is solid about Bruce's arc of getting into the real world again, the symbol of Batman and Bane's revolution but i felt a lot of stuff was going on. The pit scene is fantastic (I love TDKR) but i don't think it compares to the ending fight or the UN bombing scene. I also believe that CW had enough depth for a Marvel film. It's about vengance, personal stakes and politics.. it showed the consequences of their actions and how things go when they're not under control.

I liked how Nolan portrayed Bruce as a Howard Hughes figure at start and also added Catwoman to the plot, only thing is that i would have cut Talia (she was ok) and that would've improved the third act a bit more.

BB and TDK are better than CW, but TDKR's flaws prevented it from being on that level. The choregraphy ain't that good and there was some questionable stuff like cops going into sewers or Bruce getting back to gotham (kinda logic in the novel)..

Well you see that's my point they should've gone with a different story where Zemo's complicated plan would not feel like overdoing and unnecessarily overcompicating things.

Yes, and i respect that but i think that the plan is fine and works with movie-logic.

@nevesytneves:

Airport fight is just eye candy that lacks any real tension. The final throwdown was much more emotional, climactic and engaging.

What are you talking about? I enjoyed the airport fight a lot and some moments were really awesome, like Giant-Man getting big or Spider-Man or the epic start of the fight. The scenography was well done and it had a solid soundtrack. There was tension actually.

Loading Video...

It' was very fun seeing all these heroes fighting together and it hit its mark where it needed tone wise. Besides Panther and Tony, they weren't trying to kill each other (bloodlusted). I mean, they're trying to get through a non-lethal blocade of resistance. We had two or three heroes getting damaged and the team was still captured and under arrest.

Loading Video...

My point is that honestly you can't expect for people to forget about the moments they had in the past MCU films and just go for a neck-snap like Punisher's tone vigilante. I heard no jokes or quips in the chase scene so the tone of the film was handled very well. Humor when it's appropriate, seriousness when it's appropriate. No problems here.

All of the following are much better, and there's more where they came from. In general HP has much more layered characters and superior exploration of its themes relative to CW.

No, they aren't. In my opinion the MCU has far better world-building and far better themes than HP.

Loading Video...

Loading Video...
Loading Video...
Loading Video...

Iron Man is about terrorism and registration, Captain America movies are about war and security, what did the HP movie do?

-

@ready_4_madness:

Joker I agree but I’d put MOS above CW, as good as it is. Zemo was just too much of a bore to watch and the airport fight should’ve been 10x better.

The acting and action is far better in CW IMO, and also i understand the Zemo criticism (Zod is far better) but the airport fight is one of the best action scenes and in my top 10 CBM moments, no idea people are divided on it.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
Ready_4_Madness

26091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2: yeah I prefer high tier battles so MOS tops it for me, with that being said CW got the best action in the MCU imo. With the airport fight, I didn’t like the lack of tension and the way it was shot. For a film that had such great action, everything that was happening in that scene was just extremely boring imo. Now Iron Man vs Captain America & Bucky, that was an amazing fight. I got MOS as a 9/10 and CW as 8.5/10.

Avatar image for kevd4wg
Kevd4wg

17284

Forum Posts

266

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 Kevd4wg  Online

I don't think either are underapprecitaed. CW gets a ton of appreciation and on CV at the very least the consensus seems to be that Watchmen is even better. I don't even like the Watchmen movie all that much and CW I like, but it's not my favorite.

You mentioned that these movies shouldn't be compared to or put below movies like Logan or First Class, but I prefer both Logan and First Class to both movies here(Though First Class and CW is close)

Avatar image for mexcomics2078
mexcomics2078

6598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think neither is under appreciated both are decent films with their own fanbase

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ready_4_madness:

yeah I prefer high tier battles so MOS tops it for me, with that being said CW got the best action in the MCU imo. With the airport fight, I didn’t like the lack of tension and the way it was shot. For a film that had such great action, everything that was happening in that scene was just extremely boring imo. Now Iron Man vs Captain America & Bucky, that was an amazing fight. I got MOS as a 9/10 and CW as 8.5/10.

Yeah, it's about personal preference. I prefer street level fights so I prefer CW's action scenes and their actual stakes. I would rate CW with a 9/10 and MOS with an 8/10.

Logan is just another entry from new "dark" era: This dark, morbid and trash movie may take the title as most overrated film of 2017 given all the hype. Crazed performance aside, the entire effort is a one note stale piece of cinema. Anyone saying otherwise must be as secretly depressed as Wolverine or maybe just as insane. The movie felt long and actually felt like bad homework. Something to sit through just to see why there is buzz surrounding what is clearly a trash film.

@kevd4wg said:

I don't think either are underapprecitaed. CW gets a ton of appreciation and on CV at the very least the consensus seems to be that Watchmen is even better. I don't even like the Watchmen movie all that much and CW I like, but it's not my favorite.

You mentioned that these movies shouldn't be compared to or put below movies like Logan or First Class, but I prefer both Logan and First Class to both movies here(Though First Class and CW is close)

CW used to be compared to DOFP and TDK and now it's always losing to movies like ROTS, Watchmen and MOS (all of them are great but i think these films were much more divisive back in the day).

I'm not unused to my opinions on Logan being unpopular but i think that Logan is the most overrated CBM of all time. It was a very meh movie, 6/10. don't like the tone, I don't like how the film took itself and it was way too pretentious over one-dimensional villains and zero development and I don't like the pacing. The action scenes were bland and recycled from X2 and it was carried by two good actors.

I don't like to call things overrated, because at the end of the day it's all entirely subjective, but I think there are honestly better CBM's out there than Logan. TDK, Joker, V For Vendetta, Iron Man, The First Avenger, Infinity War and Winter Soldier for example. Hell, I'm expecting Wonder Woman 1984 to be better than Logan too.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
Ready_4_Madness

26091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2: loool that’s all cool with me, minor differences in opinion. I’m even watching X2 right now.

Avatar image for kevd4wg
Kevd4wg

17284

Forum Posts

266

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 Kevd4wg  Online

@god___2: Different perspectives I guess because I love Logan, and I find "pretentious" movies super annoying, but I didn't find Logan to be pretentious at all.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@kevd4wg:

Different perspectives I guess because I love Logan, and I find "pretentious" movies super annoying, but I didn't find Logan to be pretentious at all.

I still don't see this "greatness" in Logan everyone talks about. Everytime I watch it, all I can think of is how much Jackman's performance is carrying the film. The plot wasn't outstanding or innovative and was recycled off the comic, the cinematography wasn't amazing, the pacing was terrible to be honest, the villains still suck, and despite what some people say the ending wasn't great from a narrative viewpoint.

Loading Video...

Logan's and Laura's relationship was rushed and not believable, the soundtrack was average, there were no memorable set pieces, the story was itself poor and the clone stuff was pretty dumb. Imo Civil War had a better message, a far better soundtrack, a much more focused and overall better story, and much better action scenes. It also beats out Logan in the opening scene too with the Lagos fight scene.

Logan is not a perfect movie, and I still do this day cannot understand how some people think it's a film on par with something like TDK or Spider-Man 2. As far as I'm concerned, but due to the popularity of Stewart's and Jackman's characters people don't want to look past this movie. Could you explain why you think it's better than any of these films?

@ready_4_madness said:

@god___2: loool that’s all cool with me, minor differences in opinion. I’m even watching X2 right now.

X2 is great fun and has a solid story. I'd put it on par with MOS.

Avatar image for nevesytneves
nevesytneves

1070

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28  Edited By nevesytneves

@god___2:

What are you talking about?

My own opinion, obviously.

I enjoyed the airport fight a lot and some moments were really awesome, like Giant-Man getting big or Spider-Man or the epic start of the fight.

Those moments are "cool" but they don't serve to make me really care about the scene as a whole or get me invested in the characters themselves. It doesn't help that neither SM or AM really feel like they warrant a place there. It comes across as disjointing and irritaiting to witness them in a conflict between friends who know and care about each other in ways they clearly don't.

The scenography was well done and it had a solid soundtrack.

It looks nice from a visual perspective, but it lacks any real emotional weight. Both this and your above points don't actually address my complaints, which have nothing to do with the awesomeness of the scene, but its stakes and tension.

There was tension actually. It' was very fun seeing all these heroes fighting together and it hit its mark where it needed tone wise.

It doesn't really hit its mark tone wise though. None of the characters bar Steve/Bucky and Tony/Tchalla are actually taking this seriously, and they should be given they're squaring off against friends because they've been forced to pick sides. Instead of coming across as meaningful, it just feels empty because of the number of quips and complete lack of tension.

My point is that honestly you can't expect for people to forget about the moments they had in the past MCU films and just go for a neck-snap like Punisher's tone vigilante.

That wasn't my expectation, which was for the scene to have a suitable amount of weight for what it was. It didn't.

Humor when it's appropriate, seriousness when it's appropriate.

Not really. One of my complaints with the movie (which don't get me wrong, I like) is the lack of tonal consistency. As shown in the airport scene, moments aren't always treated how they should be treated, and are in stark opposition with other scenes tonally, which is a damn shame, because the movie shines in its more emotionally resonate sections when they're played with the right effect.

No, they aren't. In my opinion the MCU has far better world-building and far better themes than HP.

I don't think there's any such thing as "better" themes within fiction (staying in the boundaries of reason that is), however I do think there are differences in the quality of the execution of said themes. For example:

Iron Man is about terrorism and registration, Captain America movies are about war and security, what did the HP movie do?

I don't think IM or CA really execute these themes with the same proficiency as HP did with its ideas. HP's characters are so relatable and strongly tethered to the themes of love, hatred and death that they become easier to connect with than anything from the MCU imo.

Avatar image for kevd4wg
Kevd4wg

17284

Forum Posts

266

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 Kevd4wg  Online

@god___2:

I still don't see this "greatness" in Logan everyone talks about. Everytime I watch it, all I can think of is how much Jackman's performance is carrying the film. The plot wasn't outstanding or innovative and was recycled off the comic

I mean... yeah. The plot of the movie isn't great, it's a very simple, character driven movie and that's why I like it so much. It has some great actors in great moments and a simple story, I don't think it needs a super complicated story. Personally I think it's really cool how they very much stuck to the story of OML, while also telling a completely different, independent story with the characters. Showed a real love of the source material imo.

the cinematography wasn't amazing

It wasn't the best out there, but I would say it's pretty damn good. I thought the cinematography was a good bit better than Civil War.

the pacing was terrible to be honest,

Have to disagree entirely here. Nothing kills a movie for me like bad pacing, if a movie has bad pacing I just won't like it(I think Watchmen has mediocre pacing at best btw). It's not a super fast paced movie, but I don't find that it ever drags and it plods along pretty consistently, never staying at any one moment too long.

the villains still suck,

Definitely a fair critique, but having a generic or faceless villain doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the villain as long as the villain still poses a threat/is menacing, which I feel like the Reavers and X-24 fulfilled pretty well.

nd despite what some people say the ending wasn't great from a narrative viewpoint.'

I have to disagree, I think it's a great closeout to the X-franchise as a whole and there's probably some level of bias/nostalgia for me there since the original X-men movies were a large part of my childhood.

Logan's and Laura's relationship was rushed and not believable, the soundtrack was average, there were no memorable set pieces, the story was itself poor and the clone stuff was pretty dumb. Imo Civil War had a better message, a far better soundtrack, a much more focused and overall better story, and much better action scenes. It also beats out Logan in the opening scene too with the Lagos fight scene.

I disagree with all of this, but again these aspects very much come down to personal preference. I think Logan honestly stomps in most of these aspects like action, set pieces, soundtrack, and 100% opening scene.

Logan is not a perfect movie, and I still do this day cannot understand how some people think it's a film on par with something like TDK or Spider-Man 2. As far as I'm concerned, but due to the popularity of Stewart's and Jackman's characters people don't want to look past this movie. Could you explain why you think it's better than any of these films?

I mean that kinda is why it's that good. It's a very character driven movie based around well written characters portrayed by great actors. There's obviously more to Logan than just that, but that alone puts it above the vast majority of CBMs to me. I also think it has fantastic pacing, and honestly some of my favorite action in any cbm movies, as well as being probably the most emotional comic book movie. The only CBMs I would compare to Logan are ITSV and TDK tbh.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@nevesytneves:

Those moments are "cool" but they don't serve to make me really care about the scene as a whole or get me invested in the characters themselves. It doesn't help that neither SM or AM really feel like they warrant a place there. It comes across as disjointing and irritaiting to witness them in a conflict between friends who know and care about each other in ways they clearly don't.

Spider-Man and Ant-Man are here for helping, it's not a very hard question.

It looks nice from a visual perspective, but it lacks any real emotional weight. Both this and your above points don't actually address my complaints, which have nothing to do with the awesomeness of the scene, but its stakes and tension.

What are you talking about? Cap's team is the team to deliver the first punches. They only want to get to the quinjet so they can avoid stopping Zemo. They aren't there to fool around.

It doesn't really hit its mark tone wise though. None of the characters bar Steve/Bucky and Tony/Tchalla are actually taking this seriously, and they should be given they're squaring off against friends because they've been forced to pick sides. Instead of coming across as meaningful, it just feels empty because of the number of quips and complete lack of tension.

Rhodey was hurt, Falcon was hurt, the team was arrested, Iron Man was getting hurt, T Challa was trying to kill Bucky. I think that they clearly took it seriously.

That wasn't my expectation, which was for the scene to have a suitable amount of weight for what it was. It didn't.

Already addressed this.

Not really. One of my complaints with the movie (which don't get me wrong, I like) is the lack of tonal consistency. As shown in the airport scene, moments aren't always treated how they should be treated, and are in stark opposition with other scenes tonally, which is a damn shame, because the movie shines in its more emotionally resonate sections when they're played with the right effect.

No, the humor was sprinkled throughout very well. Especially with Giant Man and Falcon. The jokes were so few that when they showed up, they were funny. The tone was still serious, because they were getting hurt and the 3rd act (and the airport fight) had consequences.

I don't think there's any such thing as "better" themes within fiction (staying in the boundaries of reason that is), however I do think there are differences in the quality of the execution of said themes. For example:

They're actually better because they have good acting, directing, care about the characters, good action scenes, and have great themes. All of this while following a long storyline.

I don't think IM or CA really execute these themes with the same proficiency as HP did with its ideas. HP's characters are so relatable and strongly tethered to the themes of love, hatred and death that they become easier to connect with than anything from the MCU imo.

Harry Potter doesn't have any "deep or complex characters". Voldemort? Yeah, just a killer. Dumbledore? Ooh yikes. Harry? Big step down from what he was in the first movie. MCU films are far superior in terms of quality and world building imo.

Avatar image for solo788
solo788

1539

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I enjoy both movies, but probably would rewatch CW on a more regular basis. That being said, between the two, Watchmen is definitively more underrated. I enjoy CW more but it gets it due praise whereas watchmen usually sits more obscurely (personally though, I would have kept Rorschach calmly letting the guy die then freaking out. In my opinion that is more of a acceptance of his personal change then a potential one off rage moment)

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@kevd4wg:

I mean... yeah. The plot of the movie isn't great, it's a very simple, character driven movie and that's why I like it so much. It has some great actors in great moments and a simple story, I don't think it needs a super complicated story. Personally I think it's really cool how they very much stuck to the story of OML, while also telling a completely different, independent story with the characters. Showed a real love of the source material imo.

There's not much that compelling about Logan's story. It's fairly standard and requires everyone to randomly become idiots whenever Wolverine is around. The characters are one-dimensional and there's no message and stakes. It doesn't seem great for something considered a "great CBM". And about acting yeah, Logan has solid acting but it only has 1 great performance which often tends to be the only reason why the film is talked about.

It wasn't the best out there, but I would say it's pretty damn good. I thought the cinematography was a good bit better than Civil War.

No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided

It's fine and this is something called personal preference but these shots looks far better than Logan's scenes for me.

Have to disagree entirely here. Nothing kills a movie for me like bad pacing, if a movie has bad pacing I just won't like it(I think Watchmen has mediocre pacing at best btw). It's not a super fast paced movie, but I don't find that it ever drags and it plods along pretty consistently, never staying at any one moment too long.

I understood the movie completely and I understand your point, but I just don't like what it was going for, I thought it was a sub-par film from what I enjoy. It took ages to move the plot until the clone showed up, and it had constant exposition.

Loading Video...

Civil War was fun and exciting, it didn't take itself too seriously, while having deeper themes.

Definitely a fair critique, but having a generic or faceless villain doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the villain as long as the villain still poses a threat/is menacing, which I feel like the Reavers and X-24 fulfilled pretty well.

I kinda agree with this, but a good villain helps the movie.

I have to disagree, I think it's a great closeout to the X-franchise as a whole and there's probably some level of bias/nostalgia for me there since the original X-men movies were a large part of my childhood.

I understand your point but Logan is a movie that is targeted toward a select audience of people who are into depressing movies and I'm not in that audience. I prefer X2 or DOFP which are character-driven and have much better themes and villains.

I disagree with all of this, but again these aspects very much come down to personal preference. I think Logan honestly stomps in most of these aspects like action, set pieces, soundtrack, and 100% opening scene.

I understand, but I don't see how action scenes or soundtrack are debatable. Civil War has some of the best and most creative fights in CBMs and has an emotional third act. The movie changed many locations, and the Siberia and Lagos scenes are much more interesting than a forest or some desert for me. I like Civil War more because it allowed many characters to shine and end a story, it has great action, great themes, great locations, it's well paced and also good acting for an MCU film. It feels more "complete" than a movie based on a single character, this is why i'd also take Civil War over Joker.

About your movie, let me say it again: I've always felt that if you took Jackman's Wolverine away you'd be left with a hollow film. Charles and Caliban felt forced in my opinion and their characters wasn't done justice. Pierce wasn't given much time to explore his motivation and the set up for the clone was garbage. The bright spots for the film excluding Jackman will always be the berserk scene and some shots. Other than that the film is just there for me.

I mean that kinda is why it's that good. It's a very character driven movie based around well written characters portrayed by great actors. There's obviously more to Logan than just that, but that alone puts it above the vast majority of CBMs to me. I also think it has fantastic pacing, and honestly some of my favorite action in any cbm movies, as well as being probably the most emotional comic book movie. The only CBMs I would compare to Logan are ITSV and TDK tbh.

Sure it has a character arc, but so does every film. What matters is execution and particularly the 3 films I mentioned (Civil War, TDK and X2) execute their themes better. I still do this day cannot understand how people consider it some groundbreaking masterpiece in film making, especially when you compare to something like TDK. But we all have your personal opinions.

Loading Video...

I think seeing a man fighting over an ideology or over personal stakes against a friend is much more emotional than a man dying to a clone. Don't get me wrong, Logan's death was emotional but only because his character was built between the earlier movies. In the film, Wolverine does nothing except act out of character compared to DOFP and helping Charles. Now, let me explain my reasoning why TDK is better than Logan;

The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight is so much better than Logan, that it's not even funny. The movie had better pace, a much better villain, a better and more coherent story, better pacing, better establishment, better soundtrack, better cinematography. Literally everything. First, second and the third act of TDK was easily better.

The Dark Knight took its time to develop its story properly. The first scene introduced the Joker and the state of Gotham, after it properly introduced every important character in the first part of the movie by showing them (court scene, mob scene, signal scene) explaining what they were doing, or was a layed foundation about what the movies was going to be about. Unlike Logan which basically had to rely on its previous movies, it told us nothing about Caliban, nothing about Wolverine and nothing about the villains. Just goes to show how better foundation TDK has.

Logan's beginning was so slow and boring. It was hard to enjoy the movie due to nothing happening. The movie just showed Charles' being in a bad condition and Wolverine living an hard and sad life. First you have Caliban which added nothing to the plot, then five minutes later you have X23 poorly handled introduction, five minutes later after that you have Wolverine being framed, ten minutes later you have Caliban appearing and adding nothing to the plot, 15 minutes after that you have some backstory and the highrise scene and then you have the final 30 minutes of the movie, which completely rushed the clone and Charles' anti-climatic death. The whole thing was rushed due to the extreme small amount of events happening in the movie. Hell, we got more action in the end which was the only good part of the movie.

Anyways, the characters in TDK were so much better and got established way better than the Logan characters. TDK actually focused on being a good movie and a movie of itself rather than a conclusion to a messed up timeline.

TDK also had characters with motives and better development than anyone in Logan. Harvey Dent, Joker, Gordon, you name it. Harvey dent's war against crime was perfectly explained and so was his transformation of becoming Two-Face. ''You either die the hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain''. That line is literally better than every single line in Logan considering that it had a lot of reasoning for Harvey becoming Two-Face. He "lived enough" as Harvey basically.

Harvey was a hero, he was a symbol of Gotham and the white knight. He become a villain after losing his entire world, his girlfriend and the lack of hope with the system after being betrayed by the police. He had a simple plan, he wanted revenge against the same people he accounted of being guilty of pain he did. And he wanted the same people he accounted of being guilty to feel the pain he did. His character was well written and well acted, and was a contrast to Gordon and Batman. This alone tops Logan's relationship with Charles and it's not even the best in the movie.

Loading Video...

We had Joker and Batman, that was another contrast that made the movie great. Joker was properly introduced as the man who wanted to bring chaos, anarchy, imbalance and try and prove that people are bad, cruel and that they show their true form when something high is at stake (boats scene) that being that humans only care about themselves and have disregard for other human beings when they're in danger, and also that they are very easily corruptable.

Joker tried to corrupt everyone, from Batman to Harvey and succeeded. Batman on the other hand tried to prove otherwise. He tried to prove that man and the system was good, to bring order and peace while tackling important themes like registration and security,, he tried to prove that there's more good than bad.

Loading Video...

''You just couldn't let me go, could you? This is what happens when the unstoppable force meets an immovable object. You truly are incorruptable''. This line pretty much summed up the movie and their relationship, and showed that they were two sides of two completely different coins. The Joker philosophy makes him more interesting and complex than any character in Logan because it can actually be applied in unquie ways to human psychology and society's perception of morality and hope.

Then there's the story of people comparing both films.. Seriously, one man driving a car and fighting, in what's supposed to be an emotional movie but can't even be taken seriously due to the massive amount of nonsensical characters.. The stakes made the whole thing ridiculous, especially when we don't care about Laura or the mutants, that's why Civil War and TDK are much better movies than Logan, IMO. Both Civil War and TDK had much better storytelling and both of the movies actually took their threats seriously. Not to mention that the Joker was a much, much, much better antagonist than Pierce. Hell, Joker and Harvey Dent/Two-Face in TDK are better characters than every single character in Logan combined. And same applies to Iron Man/Captain America in CW, their relationship and ideology was well written.

Loading Video...

Both CW and TDK brought forth an amazing message, that being that even the greatest of us can be corrupted, and that when things out of control we need registration, security and identification. What did Logan bring? I kind of failed to see what the message of the movie was due to the unnecessary amount of flaws the movie had. Logan still remains the most overrated film of all-time filled with flaws no one ever wants to talk about.

Conclusion: Both TDK and CW had better story-telling, better characters, better story, better message, etc. I could keep on going as for why Civil War is a far superior movie to Logan (and anything FOX related), but I think you've gotten the point. Opinions are opinions, and you may have enjoyed Logan more, but there's literally no contest for which movie had better storytelling and characters. Both TDK and CW are deep movies that requires someone to have good understanding. Logan? Not so much.

Avatar image for mutant1230
Mutant1230

8386

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

If anything Civil War might be a little overrated. It has great action scenes but a weak story.

What did you not like about the story?

Avatar image for mrmonster
mrmonster

22349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrmonster said:

If anything Civil War might be a little overrated. It has great action scenes but a weak story.

What did you not like about the story?

My two main problems are.

  1. How absurdly overcomplicated Zemo's plan is.
  2. The Sokovian Accords being introduced and pretty much tossed aside once Bucky became the main focus. Like, why make them such a big deal in the beginning of the movie if the main conflict would be about Bucky anyway?
Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrmonster: I kinda explained the Zemo plan and why the movie is well written.

The Sokovia accords were vital even before, in the scene Bucky was arrested they were talking about them. After that, it was both the accords and Bucky because people who went with team Cap were criminals.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@wolverinebatmanftw said:

Logan is underrated and on par with TDK trilogy, Civil War is overrated.

Logan is FOX's version of Ang Lee's Hulk. Artsy farts crap from people that don't know the source material at all nor care about the genre.

Avatar image for mutant1230
Mutant1230

8386

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#44  Edited By Mutant1230

@mrmonster said:
@mutant1230 said:
@mrmonster said:

If anything Civil War might be a little overrated. It has great action scenes but a weak story.

What did you not like about the story?

My two main problems are.

  1. How absurdly overcomplicated Zemo's plan is.
  2. The Sokovian Accords being introduced and pretty much tossed aside once Bucky became the main focus. Like, why make them such a big deal in the beginning of the movie if the main conflict would be about Bucky anyway?

Can't say I disagree with those criticisms. Especially the second one, the Sokovia Accords literally had no impact on the MCU outside of the beginning of Civil War. Literally none.

Avatar image for nevesytneves
nevesytneves

1070

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

Spider-Man and Ant-Man are here for helping, it's not a very hard question.

I'm not questioning their presence from a logistical perspective but a narrative one, given they aren't important to the story in the grand scheme of things, nor are they relevant to the core conflicts. You can pretty much remove them from the film and nothing changes.

What are you talking about? Cap's team is the team to deliver the first punches. They only want to get to the quinjet so they can avoid stopping Zemo. They aren't there to fool around.

I never said they were there to fool around, I said the scene lacks stakes or tension and is laced with far too much humour.

Rhodey was hurt,

Which had nothing to do with the level of seriousness of the characters, but is due to a slip up by one of them.

the team was arrested,

This doesn't really manifest in any long term consequences. Nor does it disprove the idea that the fight was far too light hearted throughout.

T Challa was trying to kill Bucky.

I barred him from my initial statement, so mentioning this was unecessary.

Falcon was hurt, Iron Man was getting hurt,

Not really.

No, the humor was sprinkled throughout very well.

Eh, no. Choosing to place it in a scene that should be tense and exciting reduces its impact and makes it feel jarring and disjointed.

the airport fight had consequences.

Covered above. Not only are the consequences small, but they aren't keenly felt due to the poor use of humour throughout the sequence. Even if I were to concede to the abundance of consequences, it wouldn't disprove my initial point, which is that certain scenes are framed badly tone wise, regardless of what damage they bring on the characters. In fact, a huge amount of poor results would prove my point about lack of tonal consistency, we go from a light hearted fight scene to its heavy consequences far too rapidly.

They're actually better because they have good acting, directing, care about the characters, good action scenes, and have great themes. All of this while following a long storyline.

Generally speaking this isn't true of the MCU. The CA trilogy is one of the few exceptions. However it mostly applies to HP across the board.

Harry Potter doesn't have any "deep or complex characters".

Snape, Draco, Sirius, etc etc. Shall I go on?

Voldemort? Yeah, just a killer.

Having a villain without depth or complexity isn't necessarily a bad thing. Not every piece of fiction has to have a layered antagonist with a tragic backstory. Voldemort is fine (though better in the books), and serves his purpose narratively.

Dumbledore? Ooh yikes.

Dumbledore is complex, but given the lack of any real argument here I'll hold off on explaining why until I've clarified your issues with the character.

Harry? Big step down from what he was in the first movie.

Not really. Harry is 100% a complex character. He has clear flaws (anger, compassion to a fault that overrides his better judgement etc etc), all of which manifest in narrative consequence, yet despite the trauma he's been subject to remains largely pure of heart. There's a range to him and he develops, matures and grows across the course of the series, just like any good protagonist does.

MCU films are far superior in terms of quality and world building imo.

Most MCU films are bad quality wise imo. They're not terrible, but really serve no purpose other than passing a couple hours of time. I tend to want more than that from movies, but if you like that I won't critique you. It's all subjective after all.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@nevesytneves:

I'm not questioning their presence from a logistical perspective but a narrative one, given they aren't important to the story in the grand scheme of things, nor are they relevant to the core conflicts. You can pretty much remove them from the film and nothing changes.

Spider-Man's whole purpose was to non-lethally and with minimal violence, incapacitate the defecting avengers. Tony's dialogue talks about webbing, and Scott was here because he wanted to join in a team. So both were logical from a narrative viewpoint.

I never said they were there to fool around, I said the scene lacks stakes or tension and is laced with far too much humour.

Cool, and I think the stakes were high enough and the humor was perfect handled.

Eh, no. Choosing to place it in a scene that should be tense and exciting reduces its impact and makes it feel jarring and disjointed.

I already addressed this point, and the reason why they couldn't automatically go out of character. And you didn't counter the consequences.

Covered above. Not only are the consequences small, but they aren't keenly felt due to the poor use of humour throughout the sequence. Even if I were to concede to the abundance of consequences, it wouldn't disprove my initial point, which is that certain scenes are framed badly tone wise, regardless of what damage they bring on the characters. In fact, a huge amount of poor results would prove my point about lack of tonal consistency, we go from a light hearted fight scene to its heavy consequences far too rapidly.

You're still talking about a few jokes? I already explained why the jokes didn't ruin the tone and the consequences the battle had. Also, you can't tell me that you did not enjoy a big and fun battle between characters we care and know since years.

Generally speaking this isn't true of the MCU. The CA trilogy is one of the few exceptions. However it mostly applies to HP across the board.

The Cap trilogy is fantastic and only 2nd to The Dark Knight trilogy in terms of CBMs. Also, no HP movie is even comparable to TWS or CW in terms of quality.

Snape, Draco, Sirius, etc etc. Shall I go on?

None of these are complex or interesting as Captain America, Iron Man, Alexander Pierce and I could go on.

Having a villain without depth or complexity isn't necessarily a bad thing. Not every piece of fiction has to have a layered antagonist with a tragic backstory. Voldemort is fine (though better in the books), and serves his purpose narratively.

I agree on the first argument, but I disagree on the 2nd. Voldemort was quite annoying especially after he does the same thing movie after movie.

Dumbledore is complex, but given the lack of any real argument here I'll hold off on explaining why until I've clarified your issues with the character.

He was poorly acted and poorly written after being recasted. And how he is exactly "complex" ?

Not really. Harry is 100% a complex character. He has clear flaws (anger, compassion to a fault that overrides his better judgement etc etc), all of which manifest in narrative consequence, yet despite the trauma he's been subject to remains largely pure of heart. There's a range to him and he develops, matures and grows across the course of the series, just like any good protagonist does.

Based on what? All he does is make mistakes and wait for the bit fight. You call that comparable to Cap? The guy who lost everything, went and saved his friend, has a political and war ideology, and wielded Mjolnir? I agree that Harry is a good character but he's as one-dimensional as Frodo.

Most MCU films are bad quality wise imo. They're not terrible, but really serve no purpose other than passing a couple hours of time. I tend to want more than that from movies, but if you like that I won't critique you. It's all subjective after all.

Fair enough, I have no problem in saying that there are a few average MCU films but the best ones are amazing. Especially TWS, CW and Iron Man.

Avatar image for deactivated-60758db60e021
deactivated-60758db60e021

9525

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

Okay, Toker. I see you haven't deactivated this alt yet? How long do you plan to keep it?

Avatar image for deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3
deactivated-5f60c4e528bc3

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@wolverinebatmanftw: What alt?

Why'd you tag me then, to bait me and to start another page long argument about Logan or Villenueve? Classic, you barely have any counter arguments lol.

Avatar image for deactivated-60758db60e021
deactivated-60758db60e021

9525

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@god___2:

Okay, mate. I'll look forward to more of your long, angry rants about how great CW is. Not to mention the weird, borderline stalkerish obsession with forcing me into a Logan vs CW debate despite the fact that I repeatedly told you I wasn't interested primarily because you wouldn't properly acknowledge any opposing arguments.

P.S, you've made over 100 forum posts/comments and the oldest is from a day ago. You're not fooling anyone when you claim you're not an alt. Anyway, have a good one :)