The Trashing of a Generation

>Captain America: Civil War confirms our national dumb-down. While the mainstream media pretzel themselves over the presidential primaries, Marvel Studios has steadily accomplished a rejiggering of the American public’s cultural and political consciousness. Civil War completes this devolution in its story of superhero combat where one faction of pop icons, led by Captain America/Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), faces off against another faction, headed by billionaire genius Iron Man/Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.).

>As momentary adversaries, Captain America and Iron Man almost represent the schism that now divides American voters, politicians, and pundits. I say “almost,” because the film’s comic-book premise doesn’t inspire reflection upon the dire seriousness of our current ideological civil war.

>If anything proves the triviality of Hollywood’s comic-book franchises, it is this disregard of the class realities that truly separate Americans. Working-class poster boy Steve Rogers has no common cause with wealthy authoritarian Tony Stark; the superficial show of patriotism that binds them doesn’t erase the difference between the former’s grunt-worker sacrifice and the latter’s aristocratic expertise. It’s the ultimate sentimental cynicism when Captain America’s devotion to his dangerously conditioned childhood friend Bucky/Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) — who represents war’s emotional cost — is used to evoke ambivalence toward the military, while Stark’s authority celebrates the Military (and Hollywood) Industrial Complex.

Other urls found in this thread:

nationalreview.com/article/435036/captain-america-superheroes-dumbed-down?target=author&tid=1152026
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>Is it overreaching — or being humorless — to recognize and critique a piece of entertainment that takes America’s schism lightly? Will fanboys — or for that matter film critics — ever understand that Marvel Studios has engineered a cultural coup that prevents viewers from thinking? How did we get here?

>Since comics and graphic novels became popular as counterculture, adolescents have been encouraged to reduce mainstream politics to their own sentimentality. Thus, Marvel’s various superheroes appeal to teenage rebellion: Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Falcon (Anthony Mackie), War Machine (Don Cheadle), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Vision (Paul Bettany), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), and the others personify juvenile sensibility. They remain trivial, even as their divisions play out in serial chase scenes, explosions, and technological butt-kicking. Each one’s predicament represents a denial of the moral complexities that come with maturity. Fear of growing up is implicit in both the devious terrorist plots of supervillain Zemo (Daniel Brühl), who harbors childhood dreams of vengeance, and the supercilious wit of Tony Stark, the George Soros/Steve Jobs–type to whom the superfreaks all feel indebted. (As Stark, Downey achieves the same promiscuous waste of talent as hammy British actors of old.

>Despite the supergeeks’ arguing either against working for the restrictive capitalist government or for their own sense of doing right and correcting injustice, the fact is, nothing here has gravitas. Civil War is politics as adolescents misperceive social/global crisis. This has been going on for so long (ever since Hollywood realized the bounty to be had in cajoling comic-book culture’s ready audience; since, say, the 1978 Superman film, then 1989’s Batman) that, by now, the brainwashing is complete. The trivializing has grabbed such hold that when a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman), many fanboys, and critics, react with anger, resentment — and ignorance.

>To praise Civil War as entertainment is to accept its puerile conflicts. This is the moral reduction that has happened to American youth culture in the wake of the generational dissents of the Vietnam War. Movies as violent as the Marvel flicks are not pacifist but are proof of anti-military sentiment — such as became evident in the confused Ferguson protestations about “militarized police,” a foolish, redundant term exploited by manipulative media outlets and politicians. Civil War furbishes aggression simply to excite viewers who are as programmed as poor Bucky.

>In a similar sense, Civil War exploits recent political trends such as Black Lives Matter. Black actress Alfre Woodard (whose portrayal of a comically psychotic wench was the only convincing characterization in 12 Years a Slave) appears as a grieving mother who blames Stark — standing in for the Military Industrial Complex — for the death of her child, a promising youth with a 3.6 grade-point average. Woodard’s “Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars. That’s way out of bounds.

>This pandering passes for political relevance among non-thinking viewers. So does the film’s multiracial superhero team, especially new inductee Chadwick Boseman (superb as Jackie Robinson in 42 and James Brown in Get On Up) as the offensively named Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance. Black comics fans are an immediate target of Marvel Studios’ exploitation. Note the scene where Black Widow, played by the white, ultra-sexy Johansson, is confronted by Black Panther’s aide, a Nubian queen with fore and aft protrusions and powerful swagger. She threatens Black Widow: “Move or you will be moved!”

>This patronization is consistent with Marvel Studios’ political infantilizing. The vigilante Avengers’ inability to avoid collateral casualties when fighting the bad guys raises the global body count. These blithe depictions of tragedies precipitate the film’s basic ideological quarrel, similar to that in the powerful Batman v Superman. Yet Civil War’s evaluation of this dilemma, of what’s at stake in American politics, is petulant and trite. Stark critiques the roguish Rogers: “Even when he’s wrong, he thinks he’s right. That makes him dangerous.” This tempts a Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren–style American self-reproach, just as Sanders is the model for an early scene of Stark at MIT funding every student’s research proposal. It’s alarming — if not offensive — to see an entertainment film feed this fatuousness to juvenile moviegoers so as to shore up their political fancies.

This man is so based. Goddamn.

>No wonder Civil War’s big blow-out — half the superheroes pointlessly battling the other half in a Leipzig airport — becomes repetitious and calamitous. It’s the most pointless, decadent scene of the year so far. Directing team Anthony and Joe Russo work by-the-numbers, staging blurry, undecipherable action and rounding up extraneous Marvel characters Ant Man (Paul Rudd) and Spider Man (Tom Holland) for comic relief. It’s rebooting on top of rebooting simply because fanboys love a reboot; that’s how pathetically indoctrinated we’ve become. The Russos’ Iron Man versus Captain America competition appeals to comics fans’ sophomoric cynicism, but the head-banging among invincible beings amounts to nothing; it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation of wounded people who are torn and fighting against themselves.

>Marvel Studios shows no appreciation of what “civil war” actually means. At least the Wachowski siblings were genuinely implicated in the race/sex struggles of The Matrix (1999), but here, the Russos’ imitation of the Wachowskis’ diversity carnival doesn’t work; it’s not heartfelt theorizing, just exploitation. Without Zack Snyder’s visual wit, Marvel’s tedious, hackneyed formula costs this film’s political allegory its metaphorical heft. And a generation of filmgoers, now accustomed to comic-book pettiness, will lack the proper moral outrage. They’re ill equipped to realize how Civil War’s quasi-politics cheer our current state of incivility as a thrill ride. When everybody’s vengeful this is the trash we get.

BASED NEGRO

>cynicism

nothing in this movie was cynical

Based Armond, with a heavy does of truth, ruining the day for man-children that watch capeshit once again.

Thank you Armond.

My sentiment exactly. Thank you Based Armond for putting my thought into words so carefully chosen.

Marvel eternally BTFO but sadly they don't even know it, and that's the point he's making

Full article

nationalreview.com/article/435036/captain-america-superheroes-dumbed-down?target=author&tid=1152026

>unironicallly praising BvS and Snyder

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Oh my fucking god, can someone be this out of touch? I suppose you gotta make money somehow and clickbait is the best way these days.

>Oh my fucking god, can someone be this out of touch?

Couldn't have said it myself friend.

>The trivializing has grabbed such hold that when a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman), many fanboys, and critics, react with anger, resentment — and ignorance.

How can one man be so based?

Let's hear your opinion

Has armond ever had any impact or has it always just been him impotently ruining his name with blatant though articulate contrarianism

>B-but this is not what everyone else says, this means he is wrong!
The land of the sheeps

Contrarianism Incarnate

It's impressive.

He's a more well-written villain than anything the writers and directors he praises could ever put together.

A R M O N D

BASED
A
S
E
D

>tfw our modern "marvels" are all glib facsimiles

>When everybody’s vengeful this is the trash we get.

>Has armond ever had any impact or has it always just been him impotently ruining his name with blatant though articulate contrarianism
He gives Sup Forums's contrarian faggots a place to point out to claim legitimacy.

That's _something_.

This man's a human scalpel.

Nah, he's always just been that asshole nerd in the back of the class that's convinced everyone dislikes him because he 'says what everyone is thinking' when in truth he'd rather kill himself than speak for the masses.

Sometimes it's so off base its funny though, like this.

For the love of God, someone pull the stick out of his ass

>You'll never be as smart and articulate as based Armond, ever.

Man, in the end it's just opinions, but the way this nigga writes them. Damn. It's pretty hard to counter-act, just look at how everyone goes ''oh he's a contrarian, pay no attention'' and no one actually takes on what he writes.

Based Armond.

The entire premise of being a "fanboy" is to be a cynic

Armond has wrote about this before

Does he even have to watch the movies anymore to write his "reviews"?

I feel like one could put something like this together just from press and previews. You have a handful of references to the movie, but the bulk of it is political rambling.

>no one actually takes on what he writes
Just as with someone who insists the sky is green, there's not really anything to "take on".

2bh, at no point while watching Civil War was I reminded of any of the current events he's blabbing about. Maybe, Civil War just isn't for hi--

> it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation

TOP

FUCK

KEK

Never mind. Opinion discarded. Thread hidden.

>BLM
Trashed

The whole MCU is an embodiment of cynicism.

>Damn it, Fury, these drones represent fear, not freedom! Power without oversight is tyranny. The cost of freedom is high but it's a price I'm willing to pay. Maybe I'm too old-fashioned to belong in this world of secrets and spies, but....
>lol nevermind Nazis are behind everything imma go punch em!

>Damn it, Tony, this Registration Act represents surrender, not global safety! The cost of doing what's right is high but it's a price I'm willing to pay. Maybe I'm acting selfish by protecting Bucky and The Avengers' autonomy, but....
>lol nevermind Nazis are behind everything imma go punch em!

Critics seriously believe these are "political thrillers" creating thoughtful analogues about our modern dilemmas

Fucking Hell this society

Marveldrones will never, ever, ever recover.
Might as well leave for Reddit now and never return.

>2bh, at no point while watching Civil War was I reminded of any of the current events he's blabbing about.

Just turn off your brain bro

HAHAHAHA MARVEL BTFO

It's over.

He's Sup Forums's messiah

>Does he even have to watch the movies anymore to write his "reviews"?
>I feel like one could put something like this together just from press and previews. You have a handful of references to the movie, but the bulk of it is political rambling.

Someone should write his Suicide Squad and Doctor Strange reviews.

He's not a contrarian, he's actually pretty consistent and sticks to his guns.

MARVELFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH
A
R
V
E
L

F
A
G
S

O
N

S
U
I
C
I
D
E

W
A
T
C
H

What people get wrong about Armond is that he doesn't care about the movie themselves, the decisions that were made and the fluff that are used to "enhance" the experience.

He cares about ideas, the meaning of those decisions. He gives them a sense. He is a deep man, and we all should strive to become a bit more like him.

You are 100% right. Someone could just look at all the promotional material to figure out how thoughtless and illusionary this movie's main premise is especially when the Russos themselves parroted that political thriller talking point

BASED
A
S
E
D

MARVEL KEKS BTFO AS USUAL

The masses already have a voice.

The idiot babble of the mob.

> The trivializing has grabbed such hold that when a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman), many fanboys, and critics, react with anger, resentment — and ignorance.

All that needs to be said

Look at this capeshit faggot child and how triggered he got.

Thank you Armond!

Nah bro we need more quips and explosions

He never actually addresses the movie.

This is a political rant using Civil War as a platform.

>addresses the movie's themes and politics, even the action and costumes
>he never actually addresses the movie

But does the movie have hilarious one-liners?

Sure he does. There's just not all that much to address when the piece is as vapid as Civil War.

This the average capeshit fan.

I think it's clear that Armond considers Civil War a failure as a film, and chose to write about the context from which Civil War emerged instead.

It's not fair to see Armond's work as mere "reviews". They are essays.

He'sone of the few people with a voice that recognize that a multimiillion dollar industry cannot be just entertainment. What's being made, what's successful and what isn't, and the recurring patterns from movies to movies aren't mere coincidence. They all have meanings.
They are an expression of the world we live in. They ae the voice of a generation. As such, it's only natural to consider them inside the big picture. In his writing, Armond tries to point out what those movies represent at a core. He isn't about the pretty effects or the immediate emotional impact, he is about the big meaning of it all. The ideas at the core of things that gives them a sense and that are eternal.

Truth hurts.

Oh please. The movie was in production long before the current political climate and began filming before the race even began.

>turns out to be a contrarian shit

I wonder who didn't see this coming.

The movie's directors call it a political thriller, but now a reviewer cannot evaluate the movie's political statements?

Fuck off

>28%

it does.

That's not a counter argument against examining the film's politics

THE KING HAS SPOKEN!!

>hough White recognizes many internationally respected, cinematic auteurs such as Jean-Luc Godard (a quote from whom is centrally featured on White's Twitter page[24]), he is known for defending populist, blockbuster filmmakers as visionary movie artists, especially action-oriented auteurs such as Brian De Palma (director of mainstream genre works such as Mission Impossible; Scarface; and Carrie),[25] Walter Hill (action and Western movie director-producer),[26] Michael Bay (big-budget, sf-action director-producer of the Transformers film series),[27] Justin Lin (and other directors of multi-racial, internationally oriented The Fast and the Furious franchise),[28] and Neveldine/Taylor[29] (writer-directors of the visually edgy, low-budget Crank film series). White has frequently praised the work of Bay--maker of profitable tentpole films, which, over time, have gotten more and more negatively reviewed by American film critics[30]--over that of more critically acclaimed, art-film-styled action directors such as Christopher Nolan.[31] Such unconventional critical positions over contemporary theatrical films[32] have earned White the label of a contrarian, going against his movie reviewer peers much, if not most, of the time (for instance, his agreement with Rotten Tomatoes "Tomatometer," which aggregates professional and popular film reviews, is currently at 52%).[33]

>Michael Bay (big-budget, sf-action director-producer of the Transformers film series),[27] Justin Lin (and other directors of multi-racial, internationally oriented The Fast and the Furious franchise)

Nolan love is overstated like how Bay hate is overstated

You are so fucking mad right now, it's cute in a way

>52%
>contrarian
lol

>art-film-styled action directors such as Christopher Nolan
>dude exposition, changing aspect ratios, bland visuals, middle-brow narratives and horrible editing lmao

I'm done with this Mickey Mouse-tier soap opera drama. It doesn't help either that all the fight scenes are edited by a teenager with Tourette's and Parkinson's, it's as if they want to distract the audience from how shoddy everything looks by waving a flashlight on their face. I couldn't give a damn about any of these sterile excuses for characters. During the airport scene all the artificially-inflated conflict devolved into a child playing with one toy in each hand and bashing them together.

It's riddled with sophomoric and shallow pseudo-political ponderings that are thrown out the window when the quiptastic action starts. They completely disregard for the umpteenth time the collateral damage while they're having fun showcasing their flashy abilities.

The third act pretends to get serious when in reality it turns into a cheap heartstring manipulation revolving around "why didn't you tell me Cap waaa".

This part completely disregards the fact that Stark knows all too well that brainwashing and mental manipulation is a thing, let's not forget that he has witnessed it firsthand with Banner. There's no excuse for him to have such a sudden change of heart other than to extend the conflict for another 15 minutes of mindless violence, and leave the manchildren with the impression that they've just witnessed an intricate revenge tragedy.

All smoke and mirrors, the constant quipping is an effective tool to cloud a fanboy's mind and judgement.

Finally, what's left is an entire team of "world-class" heroes that got fooled by a man wearing a Bucky mask. Not to mention that the villain's stale trope was better executed 19 years ago when Scream 2 came out, ironically, a film satirizing this cliché.

If you don't think this is cartoonish and laughable you might be too young to post on this site.

Never again.

Armond being a Trump supporter confirmed.

>Without Zack Snyder’s visual wit, Marvel’s tedious, hackneyed formula costs this film’s political allegory its metaphorical heft
>it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation of wounded people who are torn and fighting against themselves.

>If you don't think this is cartoonish and laughable you might be too young to post on this site.
Truth.

Its scary how much Armonds opinions line up with my own

I seriously doubt you ever possessed the capabilities of operating on the same wave length as Armond.

Congratulations, your IQ isn't in the double digits.

This is like, high level trolling right?

Nobody can be this despicable can they?

>DCucks so desperate they resort to praising a NIGGER
>a N I G G E R

laughingevans.jpg

>Holocaust denying MCuck has to resort to low level racism to make a point

lel

its almost as if he browses Sup Forums

>Marvel Manbabies this buttflustered

I dont understand the need for such in depth analysis for a popcorn movie. The author seems to be seeing what he wants to see than what actually is

dubs confirm he does

He liked BvS but he hated this? Honestly this is way less based than people are making it out to be. He's not actually insightful, he's just being contrarian

He is a patrician, of course he liked the film over a flick.

>Zack Snyder crafts a story of a technologically advanced civilization that goes to war on foreign soil all for the goal of "protecting [their] people", completely outclassing the citizens and killing them indiscriminantly - using specific imagery such as the elaborate first person views and snap zooms evocative of drone strikes
>American critics pan him
>Zack Snyder releases a natural followup where in the crusade of a soldier is realistically presented as brutal, efficient, and lethal. Instead of the glossy and glamorized depiction of the troops "fighting the good fight" that American society perpetuates everywhere but errant dirty Oscar bait war flicks. Zack shows that the line isnt crossed. In war, the line never existed. Yet in the end, there is still a glimmer of hope that redemption is possible.
>American critics pan him again

Meanwhile the ""political thriller"" Captain America 2, drops its modern themes of domestic security and surveillance halfway through in favor of punching more Nazis ........ and critics love it and call it a more 'mature' Marvel film.

/thread/marvel/capeshit

lmao at your fucking life

>Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance

How does that make him any different than anyone else looking at it. You wanted to see nothing but a popcorn movie. He's just calling it like he sees it - vapid, pointless, and cynical.

In short, a popcorn movie.

Truth? Are you serious? The guy is just a huge contrarian.

Which movies?

Marvel chose to make shitty films and at least one guy is calling them out on it.

So I've been on Reddit for about 7 years now. I'm a moderator on several popular boards, including /r/Sup Forums. I will try to give you guys an unbiased, objective outlook.

Reddit's main problem is its karma system. It encourages users to post content which the majority will agree with rather than something that may be controversial (but still contributes to the conversation). Because of this, most communities become predictable and boring.

This is the lifespan of a submission on your average default subreddit:

- 1 minute in: your submission will most likely be downvoted into obscurity. The reason behind this isn't necessarily because your submission sucks, but there are other people who just made submissions and are downvoting every other new submission in an attempt to have theirs noticed quicker.

- 10 minutes in: if you managed to survive this far, your submission may start picking up steam. You'll see the first comments start to roll in. They will be mindless, vapid, and generic things like "omg i spit my coffee out after seeing that!" The reason there is no effort put behind them is that they want to be the first to post before everyone else. The sooner you post was the more likely your comment will be seen and upvoted.

- 3 hours in: whoever managed to comment first on your submission will now be the highest voted comment, regardless of how little it contributed to the conversation. Since your submission will have so many comments at this point, more people will start replying to the top comments. The reasoning behind their comment will likely be noticed quicker, leading to more karma for their account. These replies are just as vapid as the original comment. Pun chains are very common. Remember: as long as they get that reply before other people, they're more likely to get upvotes.

- anything afterwards: barely any comments are posted, because why even bother? Their comment won't be seen under the mass of thousands of other posters.

>Responds with memes

How does it feel to have even less relevance and more pleb opinions than /r/movies?

>are you serious
Mad fanboy faggot detected

Memes aside, this guy is pretty stupid.

But everyone inherently knows that Reddit is a trash hugbox and that a like/dislike system discourages an exchange of varied opinions

Why did you need to post this

Man of Steel and BvS

>He's just calling it like he sees it - vapid, pointless, and cynical.
He has threw a lot more accusations than that, claiming CW failed to do things it never tried to do in the first place. It was less like a critique of the movie and more of an opportunity to rant

It is one thing to make shitty films but the author is being absolutely pretentious by claiming Marvel is making more than just shitty films

See

Do you really think a room full of businessmen would not consider the possibility of injecting something of their own into what is surely going to be seen by millions if not billions of people?

DELETE THIS
DELETE THIS
DELETE THIS
DELETE THIS
DELETE THIS