Why is MARLEL so lazy? How do they keep getting away with it?

Why is MARLEL so lazy? How do they keep getting away with it?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hpWYtXtmEFQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

they do it first and watch the competition fall over themselves trying to copy how lazy marvel is

I expect many a webm of that TV series big battle

Really? You don't know why?
Their retarded fans will eat up anything

JUST

because their products were never bad. The sooner you accept it the better.

...

Mcdonalds food is consistently not bad, but that doesn't make it good.

...

>fat beaner Captain America
haha

The first phase was good. And carries them until today.

Now they keep telling the same story in every movie with different characters and worse CGI.

the justice legue photo is obviously taken on a green screen set, the only reason it's in black and white is to trick DCucks into thinking it's artistic and deep and everyone else not laugh at how lazy it looks

What does Spider-Man's director look like?

Maybe because different movies require different types of moods and cinematography? Spiderman isn't trying to be fucking film noir and the everyday overcast lighting enhances exactly what they are going for. It's a way to show contrast through the fantastic and the mundane. It really blows my mind how so many people on Sup Forums pretend they know shit about cinema, yet they don't understand the techniques used AT ALL.

if I was a producer I'd rather have a nerd direct my movie rather than a manlet with attitude like snyder tbqh

...

Then why does Spider-Man Homecoming look exactly like Civil War?

>Maybe because different movies require different types of moods and cinematography? Spiderman isn't trying to be fucking film noir and the everyday overcast lighting enhances exactly what they are going for. It's a way to show contrast through the fantastic and the mundane.
youtube.com/watch?v=hpWYtXtmEFQ

suuuuuure

Does he think he's a colonial man?

Golddigger

Because both movies are going for the same thing? It's a very common technique Marvel has successfully used since Iron Man. The realistic non-theatrical lighting and the very mundane set pieces act as a visual achor for the viewer. It makes everything feel grounded in reality, which in return enhances all the impossible, fantastic shit the superheroes do.

Do you think the guy in the nazi uniform was there for the marvel thing or did he just wander in?

>Obese girls dressed as Black Widow.

Hilarious.

Is there a lightbulb shortage in the DCEU?

>PLEASE HELP US SUPERMAN!

>no no imma hover here completely out of character because zack thinks it'll look profound and shiet

Yes well done parroting someone else's subjective opinion. Remember all the criticism about Marvel movies looking bad for which he made that illuminating video? No, neither does anyone else...

That's exactly what I'm talking about though. Creating contrast through dramatic, theatrical lighting and strong light vs dark values is the way DC and most Hollywood action movies do it. It is the standard, every director knows of these techniques. Marvel purposely wants their movies to feel like everyday life. Like you go groceries shopping on a boring, gray overcast day and you suddenly see Spiderman swinging above your head. Whether you like this particular visual technique or not doesn't change the fact that Marvel is doing it on purpose and not "because they're lazy". Dramatic, theatrical lighting is some of the easiest things in the world to achieve.

he isn't hovering he's lowering down slowly do you want him to smash into the ground with light speed

I fucking hate capeshitters. These same capeshitters praised TFA's looks (which were colorful) and will no doubt praise Rogue One's looks (which is flat and shitty like a marvel movie). These people are total zombies for Muh Brands.

>he isn't hovering he's lowering down slowly

This looks like rubber power rangers trash just as much as any Marvel shit. Muted colors doesn't make it good.

What a shitty spiderman costume

Looks like something i could get at party city for 15 dollars

>manlets and autists and fatties
>mfw DChad

Phase 3 > Phase 2 >Phase 1

so far

They are actually getting better as they continue to perfect the model.

this

It's not the costume you'll see in the movie. They CGI them all in post.

>Marvel is making their movies look boring and flat on purpose
>and that has somehow more merit than making your movie look interesting, even when it's done in and "easy industry standard"

I will never understand this. I don't know if it's pure delusion or simple fanboyism.

Do you honestly think that effect is achieved and important enough to not have your movie look interesting?

Just look at Guardians, possibly the best directed Marvel movie, and the most visually rich, I can already see that your argument will be that those movies aren't supposed to represent the mundane since they're space operas, but they're just simply well directed.

Imagine if that hype Civil War airport scene had a better director behind it with a really keen visual eye for rich colors, or anything really to make what is an already good sequence better.

Unfortunately we're stuck with the Russos for the next two movies, I can't wait for their space battles to be the most boring-looking shit ever, prolly just 50 people fighting on a rock with a generic space background.

Reminder that I really like Marvel, it's the endless droning and justifying every little mistake that makes me mad. They have faults and there's only things to gain by pointing them out.

this t b h

but I do think that people focus way too much on Civil War when criticising the MCU's visuals. Ant Man, that came before it, and Doctor Strange, that followed it, do have distinct visual styles than those of Civil War and AoU (even if I don't like Strange's very much). It's just that the Iron Man format was copy pasted to Avengers and then Civil War.

are you trying to prove something?

>"zack, we ran out of money for the batsuit, what do we do?"
>"well, there was that other film i did..."

Those sparks are the bulbs blowing.

>Look at this awesome pic I took
>Movie's shit tho

That's mostly to get rid of wrinkles and stufff. Iron man is all CG now because they couldn't be bothered to build new suits and just had RDJ wear the old ones and CGed over it.

Hello fellow DChad. May we lift another day!

fuck me he's cute

This. Although I find that when the environments are boring you focus on the characters more. Like in casinos with the complex patterns on carpets forcing you to look straight ahead. If the environments are interesting then it takes away from the characters.

MoS and BvS feel like cartoons cause their setpieces are too cgi-reliant. While Marvel also uses cgi, it's mostly for normal and believable environments. DC feels like they don't know if their movies should be realistic or fantastical and so come off disjointed and dumb (visually). TDK trilogy is better than current DC because it stuck to one thing, realism. I don't see why they didn't make MoS colorful like Smallville cause that would have been better.

>OP just found out DCEU is vastly superior to Marlel

No shit breh, that's why they are 600 millions ahead by the third movie

I'M CONVINCED

DC IS TRUE KINO

Seriously, why is Marvel doing right that DC isn't? I know Marvel is visually appealing, but maybe it's that DC tries to be the adult super hero movie that it actually backfires and makes it more Hot Topic edgy?

>I know Marvel is visually appealing

bad b8

Man, Tom looks delicious in that suit

muh dick

>I know Marvel is visually appealing

Imagine peeling it off him after a long day as you kissed each other

>i don't agree with so it's b8

Marvel movies actually look like a comic book, whereas DC more or less still has a bit of a 90s edge. It might soften. I have high hopes for Wonder Woman.

More like DC just has really fucking boring characters with boring gimmicks and powers.
Half the people in Suicide Squad were just normal guys.

>visually
>appealing

>uses two pictures that have nothing in common whatsoever
Am I missing something?

bad b8

Jesus fuck

nothing marvel has ever done is more lazy than the BvS script anyway.

I thought same thing lol.

-Hey, are you cosplaying Herr Schmidt?
-S-sure thing, buddy

Lol tryhard

slowly pulling his spider pants off to reveal his throbbing hard cock, he does that cute smile of his and then moans in that beautiful voice when lick up his shaft and take his cock head in your mouth

It looks fine and I don't see the problem. The visual works with the premise of the film. My concern regarding the movie is that whether it'll actually be Tom in the suit most of the time or CGI like in Civil War.

here is your (you)

I think it will be

I kinda hate this video because he just talks about the color correction and brings in Sicario as a good comparison. But Sicario had actual cinematography. Composition, lighting, visual poetry n shit. The Marvel movies don't have any of that ON TOP of having horribly color-correction. He's addressing a small part of the reason these movies fail cinematically.

Marvels making good movies.
DC isn't.

Also Marvel didn't trust its entire franchise with Zach Snyder

Seriously, what was Snyder's last good movie?

>Marvels making good movies.
>DC isn't.

I was questioning what qualities make Marvel movies so superior to DC's.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition

DC wanted to rush their cinematic universe and tried to rip off TDK but failed. They try to focus too much on style but also fail. Everything feels disjointed and convoluted because of so much shit thrown in. This was a problem with The Dark Knight Rises and that was addressed repeatedly when it came out. But nowadays the contrarians are out in full force and BvS can't be criticized for that.

The style is also all sorts of fucked up. Batman looks good, but Superman gets looped into his style. So we get an edgy and muted Superman that no one likes, and dumbass easy-tier Jesus imagery. 2006 Superman is better.

>Seriously, why is Marvel doing right that DC isn't?
Marvel took their time to build their world piece by piece. WB kind of panicked after green lantern fell on its face and stepped up the production schedule to cram everything in to one movie.
They tried to do too much too fast, which is a shame because batman and superman are great characters that work well together, i mean look at the DCAU for all the proof of that you need. But they sucked all the fucking joy out of both of them.
Also snyder is not the person you want helming anything. He really needs tospend a few more years as a director for hire before he gets responsibilities like that.

Critically acclaimed movie, not what you liked.

>marvels mascot is a liberal crybaby cuck

typical marvelcuck redditor.

Dawn of the Dead was great, but 300 is the stylistic answer.

yes, tom, yes
i cant take it deeper

Checked.
His only two movies i like are 300 and the dawn of the dead remake.

>Marvels making good movies.
>DC isn't.

Bizarro world

And both of those films aren't exactly recent.

>"critics"

He wants to see how deep he can take you inside him, he wants it rough and hard, he wants you to pull his hair and make him a quivering cock hungry mess

>Critically acclaimed movie

DC can't compete on tha field, nor actual good movies for that matter. Critics know who their master is

I'm not saying they need someone who makes Oscar bait to run this cinematic universe, but someone who has a track record of hits among the public. Ignore what the critics say, what does Joe Q. Public think of the film. That's basically how we have so many Transformers movies.

>all those fat slut black widows
>all those lazy agent carters
women don't really have very many superheroes

RT and metacritic validates my order.

Has Snyder made a movie that has lost money?
Underwhelming compared to expectations with BvS, sure, but not a profit loss.

>What happened to the Gotham dream?

>Has Snyder made a movie that has lost money?
I don't know. How did sucker punch do?

Thats how WB sees it, their movies might all be steaming piles of shit that nobody likes but they sure to make a ton of money anyways.
SS is possibly the worst movie of the year yet it kept it box office numbers fight for weeks. Americans will truly watch anything.

Dawn of the Dead is sort of good. Rest are trash. He is a bit like Michael Bay except Bay is aware that he is shit.

>that sterile look
>that subtle thousand yard stare to show what a shithole queens has become
ART
IMITATES
LIFE

BvS made like 900 millions worldwide, I think it's the highest grossing movie by Zack Snyder. Right now it's still one of the 30 top selling blurays

No director on the face of this earth could have made BvS a net loss with that marketing and hype behind it. They could have let Uwe Boll direct it and it would still have made at least 700 million.

Did enough people watch it so that it wasn't a complete failure? Yeah, probably. I haven't heard any news of it being a flop, but if you look at the audience score (64% on RT) and it's a grade D movie.

>the worst movie of the year
Deadpool and Trolls would like a word with you

Well memed

Snyder is really more of a music video director than a movie director.

So that's why they rehashed it and called it Ciwil War?
Or when they made Green Lantern remake and called it Dr.Strange?

300 is trash

Because it is called Batman V Superman. The movie was successful despite Snyder, not because of him.