IISANDERII
Member
That's because they lack any semblance of soul. In 5yrs when robots begin directing movies, they'll all look like Marvel films.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Marvel films lack cinematographic style
- Thread starter DOWN
- Start date
- Status
Imperial Bishop
Banned
Somebody's feelings are hurt.
broncobuster
Banned
i thought doctor strange was very nice looking - moreso than most of the marvel films. helped that the sets, costumes and cgi work was stellar. same dp as guardians (which, despite you using it as an example in the op, i remember being a fairly pretty film) and age of ultron.
the juxtaposition with the shots of his hands before and after the surgery were very well done in my opinion.
I feel that shot in particular highlights the problem. Conceptually interesting, amazing special effects, but it looks so lifeless and dull.
Sshhhhh, no. Everyone loves them.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
You're not wrong. It's too bad Edgar Wright couldn't have stuck around and gone batshit in the editing room.
PanSexual_Peacock
Member
It's because the lighting is flat. No semblance of shadows or contrast. Looks like almost no post work was done on the footage.
TheGreatDirector
Banned
This is actually the issue that needs to be addressed​. The dialogue heavy scenes that account for at least 60% of every Marvel movie are framed in such boring drab ways that lack any visual draw.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDUCKCpRyrU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaz6nxyQA28
Ignoring the de-aging cgi in the second scene look at these two scenes from the MCU. Notice the lack of two-shots in the Ant-man scene. Look at the abundance of shooting actors that are talking in both movies to be shot from a frontal angle medium shot. There's little creative positioning of the camera when focused on a person delivering dialogue.
Sad Affleck
Member
Such a wonderful scene, I love it to death.
Completely disagree. Many pictures in this thread have explained why. They're not top of the class but saying they lack cinematic style is a bit of hyperbole.
If I were to compare them to the next closest thing, Snyder's DC movies, I would say that those do have a more "cinematic style." And yet, I personally think the majority of Marvel's movies still look better.
(Now if we were to compare it to Nolan's Batman films, my answer would be different.)
If I were to compare them to the next closest thing, Snyder's DC movies, I would say that those do have a more "cinematic style." And yet, I personally think the majority of Marvel's movies still look better.
(Now if we were to compare it to Nolan's Batman films, my answer would be different.)
Man, I don't know how anyone can look at that shot, especially in motion, and think it looks lifeless and dull.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Yep. They all blur together for me, except for GotG, minus the final battle--which went full Marvel.
There's an argument for Avengers and maybe Spider-Man: Homecoming (from what I've seen so far) but everything else has been fine. They haven't been amazing but definitely above this TV-level argument I see thrown around. I don't even know what that means when most TV shows worth their salt have pretty good cinematography.
I love the music in that so much and it really burns me inside that it's not available on Spotify.
Damn, I don't think Spider-Man 3 even had it's OST released.
Color grading in Mahvel's movies is indeed pretty dull, but the movies also rarely if ever have shots that make me care about em from a visual standpoint. They don't lack a cinematographic style. They do have a style. The cinematography is simply bland and uncreative.
lol
This is sadly very true.
It was too compressed, but if you so desire...
One looks like the real world, the other straight from a PS4 videogame.
lol
This is sadly very true.
Imperial Bishop
Banned
It's too bright. Needs to be 10x more darker with low contrast.
That too. Good TV shows have excellent cinematography. Breaking bad and Sherlock and Mr. Robot and so on. It's like the "It reads like fanfiction" comment made my people who never read fanfiction. It's a really ignorant comment.
Glass Rebel
Member
I agree, needs more instagram filters. Turn up the contrast up to 11 and shoot everything at night while you're at it, too.
Reptars Revenge
Member
I wouldn't change the MCU for anything. What a ride. Truly remarkable what they accomplished in a cinematic universe without the X Men, Fantastic 4, and originally Spiderman.
Frozenprince
Banned
You're right, we need more films like Thor 1 where it was "Dutch angles the movie".
The only Marvel movies that stick out in terms of cinematography are Guardians of the Galaxy and The Winter Soldier. Everything else seems flat. I was surprised how poorly Civil War looked compared to the Russos's first film.
Marvel really shouldn't have fucked up the deal with Edgar Wright.
And as much as people like to shit on Snyder's films for DC, I'll argue he's a better cinematographer than a director.
Marvel really shouldn't have fucked up the deal with Edgar Wright.
And as much as people like to shit on Snyder's films for DC, I'll argue he's a better cinematographer than a director.
To Far Away Times
Member
This is why no comic book movie has come close to being as good as Spider Man 2.
Spider Man 2 is what happens when a very talented director has creative freedom and leaves their personal imprint all over a film. It feels like a passion project with a gigantic budget, and it's something I haven't seen with any other comic book movie.
I don't think that movie could be made the same way today, with those ridiculous zooms and intentional schlock and cheesiness.
Spider Man 2 is what happens when a very talented director has creative freedom and leaves their personal imprint all over a film. It feels like a passion project with a gigantic budget, and it's something I haven't seen with any other comic book movie.
I don't think that movie could be made the same way today, with those ridiculous zooms and intentional schlock and cheesiness.
George Oscar Bluth II
Banned
Only partially. Mostly digital IIRC.
Two completely different settings.And before somebody calls "Oh you want them to go Snyder style" don't forget there was a filmaker who already acomplished the perfect balance with an iconic marvel character
Meanwhile, in 2017
What TV show is this? Supergirl?
DC marks, when will they learn
NaDannMaGoGo
Member
For real, Raimi made it work so well.
BvS is literally this, but it was Zack Snyder instead of Sam Raimi
Sibersk Esto
Banned
Amazing Spider-Man 2 ripped this shot whole hog from a Raimi movie
Of course, it's still the Amazing Spider-Man 2 so...
you're forgetting one important differenceBvS is literally this, but it was Zack Snyder instead of Sam Raimi
Sam Raimi is talented.
That's what I mean, they're both 100% products of their passionated director. But, you know, Zack is not for everyone.
broncobuster
Banned
I can say the opposite. Motion has nothing to do with it. And I'm not type to say all Marvel movies suffer this problem. I mean, I'd go to bat for Iron Man 3 and say it's a nice looking movie. Not even die hard MCU fans defend Iron Man 3!
that's harsh. Snyder is definitely talented
Glass Rebel
Member
BvS is literally this, but it was Zack Snyder instead of Sam Raimi
WB didn't even let Snyder release his version of the film until the BluRay release.
Raimi is a great filmmaker that understands the material and respects it while imparting his own vision.
Yes! Exactly! I believe this is why people say the movies feel like they're made on an "assembly line" despite everything else about them being fairly visually creative.
Killer Queen
Banned
I think this is the reason I can't love any Marvel films that aren't Iron Man 1, just couldn't put my finger on it.
I remember seeing clips of the Avengers on TV and it felt like a Dawson's Creek episode. I don't know what lensing they used, but it was horribly drab.
Guardians is still my favourite but that's because of the humour, and the VFX artists are the real fucking heroes there.
stuminus3
Member
Hey, I never said I liked it. But lowest common denominator and all.
Hell, when I think of the Raimi Spider-Man films, this bad CG is one of the first things that come to mind.
https://youtu.be/ouG3PqGxTmM?t=18s
And before you say it, this was bad when it came out.
The budget nor the tech at Sony were there for that sequence.
Raimi's visual style saves it, but yeah, the CGI isn't good.
The VFX of Spider-Man 2 are overall the best of the three films.
They are shit because they are made such that everyones love them.
They are checklist films.
Punchlines, obligatory references to previous films, obligatory introduction to next films, and so on
They are good consumer products, you can not deny.
Secret Fawful
Member
I don't understand the problem with dutch angles. Oh, I get it, because Battlefield Earth did it, so any movie doing it is bad now.
Look, dutch angles can be stylish and can work toward creating a certain atmosphere in a movie. Watch Touch of Evil and come back and tell me it's bad because it used dutch angles. That said, Thor used them simply to add some visual flair to the movie, and I don't see the problem.
Look, dutch angles can be stylish and can work toward creating a certain atmosphere in a movie. Watch Touch of Evil and come back and tell me it's bad because it used dutch angles. That said, Thor used them simply to add some visual flair to the movie, and I don't see the problem.
- Status