Why are the MCU films attracting so much criticism when summer blockbusters like Raiders of the Lost Ark have always been popular with audiences. They don't have fantastic cinematography, deep characters, or innovative plots. Indiana Jones's most famous villains are just regular ol Nazis.
Name one character arc that Indiana Jones goes through that changes him in any major way throughout the entire series of movies
Other urls found in this thread:
extension765.com
twitter.com
You're right. They are similar.
But the Indiana Jones films are still executed way better than those capeshit flicks.
Maybe it's because there were 3 Indiana Jones movies over the course of 9 years, and yet there have been 14 MCU movies over the course of 8 years not to mention all of the other comic book adaptations. Aren't you tired of watching the same movie over and over and over again?
>Name one character arc that Indiana Jones goes through that changes him in any major way throughout the entire series of movies
Not important. The IJ films have 0 pretense beyond being fun adventure flicks. MCU tries have involved character conflicts but it just can't pull it off.
>But the Indiana Jones films are still executed way better than those capeshit flicks.
That and there's only three of them.
Indy movies have a grit that capeshit lacks.
so it's ok for mediocre movies to get massive amounts of praise just because they come along only once in awhile?
That's retarded.
>its because they are just dumb turn your brain off movies bro
I would also like to add that Indy is a really cool and memorable character. And somewhat an anti-hero will will kill his enemies with no hesitation.
Those films would probably have been rated R today.
(This is not relevant for the fourth one)
>14 MCU movies over the course of 8 years
>It's actually THIS fucking bad
sheeeit
Most people here that dislike capeshit probably thinks Spielberg is the worst thing ever to happpen to cinema. Until Kevin Frige came along ofcourse.
>>its because they are just dumb turn your brain off movies bro
You're not wrong. They are dumb. But they're just plain better made and that's why people like them more whether you like it or not.
Jones is a generic adventure man who, to quote Mr. Plinkett, is the epitome of what all men strive to be. MCU tries to do that, but then that idea gets bogged down in clunky character conflicts, so no one but children (who are usually looking at their cellphones during the talking parts) want to really be them.
The people that hate capeshit, hate Spielberg and Lucas as well.
MCU doesn't even tries to do that. MCU characters are generally not relatable and their motivations on the bigger picture are sketchy at best.
Indy movies are more grounded (albeit not realistic for a number of reasons) and straightforward.
>raiders of the lost ark
>don't have fantastic cinematography
I will fucking cut you
>They don't have fantastic cinematography
Pic related
>innovative plots
Look at the time. Otger films like romancing the stone goonies and princess bride were rough around the edges and smaller scale. Raiders was certainly innovative
> indiana Jones's most famous villains are just regular ol Nazis.
Tge black hat man is iconic af. We aren't even 100% sure he's a nazi just that he's german
>Name one character arc that Indiana Jones goes through that changes him in any major way throughout the entire series of movies
Indiana jones doesn't respect his fathers
Obsession with the grail and gets slowly dragged into it and slowly warms up to his dad. In the end he too gets caught up in the chase and nearly dies trying to get the grail and his fathers approval
Seriously OP u may be biggest pleb of the fuckin year
>They don't have fantastic cinematography
Objectively incorrect. I think soderbergh, on his webpage, removed the score, dialogue, and color from raiders specifically to illustrate what cinematography is.
extension765.com
Because atleast back then it was fresher in everyone's mind. Now it's a stale formula
This is the most ignorant shit I've seen posted on this board, if it's bait congratulations because I'm fucking fuming.
The Indiana Jones trilogy HAS fantastic cinematography, that mostly comes from the fact it's directed by a talented jew and not some nobodies whose first claim to fame are community episodes that have to follow the orders of a single mediocre jew to then make uninspired mediocre movies.
The trilogy doesn't have deep characters or innovative plots, but at the time they weren't massively praised by an army of drones and critics for having deep characters and innovative plots. Fuck, they weren't even harolded as the next big step for cinema that changed the entire industry, they were just excellently made, passion-driven fantastic movies.
And really, Indiana Jones' most famous villains are 10 times more memorable than blue guy sitting in throne, white space elf, or man with glasses and dead family.
You know why everyone hates the fucking 4th one? Because it's a stale-ass, mediocre as fuck work made only for money that plays everything safe and fails to make the audience feel anything genuine. Exactly, it's a Marvel movie before Marvel dominated the market.
Fuck you, yes I'm mad.
>14 MCU movies over the course of 8 years
Whoah.
Remember when they wanted Shia LeBoof to be the new Indy and create an Indiana Jones Cinematic Universe? I think when you try and make movies on an assembly line like that, it gets exhausting for some people.
This. The existence of the Crystal Skull movie shows one of these
1) the OP is a master baiter
2) the OP is genuinely one of the most retarded faggots that ever haunted this board
...
>They don't have fantastic cinematography, deep characters, or innovative plots.
are you talking about raiders of the lost ark!?
>Indiana Jones's most famous villains are just regular ol Nazis.
yeah, and it works perfectly
>extension765.com
Comfy as fuck
Not to mention that Indy was never presented as an unbeatable badass. He takes his lumps, gets the shit kicked out of him on the regular, and wins off his wits and his determination.
That's almost entirely absent from modern action films, where it's all in how much half-ass choreography you can fake people into thinking looked cool with 40 cuts per minute.
The fights actually carried emotional weight instead of empty displays of skill. It sure as hell didn't hurt that the toned down choreography lets your star get some acting time in during the fight so it doesn't feel so completely soulless.
/blog
This
If you look at the trilogy in the order of release, I think there's a subtle character arc. In Raiders, he's really no better than James Bond; just a government agent, really. In Temple, he learns to set aside his desire for "fortune and glory" to do something more noble and motivated by compassion. In Crusade, the real quest is for Indy to save his father. Not to get the girl, not to obtain fortune and glory, but to find his family.
If we see Indy change in any way, it's that his motivations become more personal and selfless as the trilogy goes on.
No its not retarded. Oversaturation is a thing. Something sweet is nice, something covered in tons of caramel and chocolate and mounds of sugar is overwhelming and sickening
Temple of Doom is a prequel, you retard.
It's also because people are finally seeing how shit they all are
Only plebs think characters have to change.
characters with arc and development are interesting, but only retards and OP can think that is a MUST