Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
St. Apathy

Who Will Wield the Shield?

Recommended Posts

I have this one !

 

In 1942, it is indeed the only one of its kind.

 

Ironman 2 however, is set 76 years later. They built a few more.

 

*grins, takes bow*

 

edit

 

* reads rest of posts, grimices, retrieves bow, walks off muttering*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the film. It's not as good as Thor, but entertaining and well-paced. Hugo Weaving is excellent, and Evans does the best with what limited range he has to work with. The aesthetics are nice and retro. Also, it contained quite a bit of set-up for the Avengers movie. I have a feeling the Avengers movie might have a challenge not feeling "crowded", while still giving the different heroes time to shine. Then again, Joss Whedon usually does well with ensembles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually liked it rather more than Thor, although that one was fun too. The cast are pretty splendid all-round, the setpieces are well-directed, and the period feel makes for a nice twist on the usual superhero formula - I've got a few concerns about the way Marvel have been building up their cinematic roster, but thus far they've done a good job of making all the films feel different, from the hyper-modern science-hero stuff in Iron Man through the myths-and-magic of Thor, and now this.

 

There are quite a few problems with presenting Captain America on film, and I thought they did a good job of side-stepping most of them. First and foremost is the fact that the WWII-era part of his story is probably the least interesting period for his character - for the myth to work, he has to be a near-flawlessly heroic, noble character throughout that period, and that's a hard sell in a hero's-voyage-to-self-actualisation origin story. I was very pleased to see that they didn't chicken out of that and go for the feet-of-clay angle after all (I was sold on their take on Steve Rogers from the moment I saw the grenade scene in the trailer, and the "do you want to kill nazis?" bit in the film was similarly spot-on) - using "he's a bit crap with girls" as a way of humanising him was a nice touch which worked well, I thought (if nothing else, it's rare to see a Hollywood action hero explicitly revealed to be a virgin, which made his final line in the film even more poignant). Taking an essentially 'perfect' character and building an entertaining story around him is tricky, but I think they managed it rather effectively.

 

Still only one female character, of course, which does little to counter the notion of comics as a sweaty Boy's Club (that's been a problem for almost every superhero film ever made, though), but Hayley Atwell did a good job with the material she was given, and at least she had a role which amounted to more than simply being The Girl. I suppose that counts as progress.

 

It's a long way from flawless - overlong, a bit awkwardly paced (the mechanics of the three-act structure were perhaps a little too clearly on display), Bucky's death was fumbled (it came at a point in the story which didn't leave time for it to really make an impact, so felt like a bit of a throwaway - it might have worked better if he'd died during the final assault on the plane), and while I completely understand it as a commercial decision, the near-total removal of Nazis from the story did somewhat undermine the otherwise well-evoked period setting, pushing it a bit too far into sci-fantasy territory for my tastes. But those are nitpicks compared to the stuff it did get right.

 

And now that they've done the origin justice, they can move on to Cap as Man Out Of Time, which is where the character gets properly interesting, for my money. I'm actually looking forward to The Avengers more than I'd have expected, and if the same people are involved, I think there's a good chance that Captain America 2 will be a solid improvement on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I just liked Thor more as a character, I'm not sure, or maybe I liked Hemsworth's acting better than Evans'? Or maybe I think (saccarined) norse mythology is more interesting than (saccarined) American mythology?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any or all of the above would explain it, really. They're both fairly comparable well-put-together, solidly entertaining B-grade blockbuster material, so any preference either way is going to be even more subjective than usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and while I'm here: I appreciate that it's at least partly because he's still actively involved with Marvel while the other two aren't (not least because one of them is 97 and the other is dead), but the way Stan Lee was credited compared with Joe Simon and Jack Kirby really, really bugged me. Don't get me wrong, Lee thoroughly deserves his customary cameo and possibly even the token exec-producer credit - his work with the character in the '60s is hugely important to the fact that Captain America is still popular enough to warrant a film adaptation at all - but the fact that he gets a highly prominent, purely honorary mention right at the start of the credits during the full-colour bit when everyone will still be watching, while Simon/Kirby are relegated to halfway through the faded-to-black scroll, long after everyone sane will have left the theatre, is some bullshit. If there's anything which should have been prominently on display immediately after the actual film finished, it's "CAPTAIN AMERICA CREATED BY JOE SIMON AND JACK KIRBY", and burying that fairly important acknowledgement halfway through the credits is insulting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a long way from flawless - overlong, a bit awkwardly paced (the mechanics of the three-act structure were perhaps a little too clearly on display) Bucky's death was fumbled (it came at a point in the story which didn't leave time for it to really make an impact, so felt like a bit of a throwaway - it might have worked better if he'd died during the final assault on the plane)

 

I thought it could've stood to be longer, myself. The events after the time jump unfold too quickly for my taste. I 'd have liked a good 15 minutes of the Howling Commandos and Bucky before the train sequence, and it could've helped Bucky's death scene to have an impact. Though I agree it'd've been better if he "died" during the final assault.

 

Kind of a shame they didn't really portray Bucky as the ruthless soldier to Steve's shinning knight as the Winter Soldier arc (which is both one of my favorite arcs in all of mainstream comics AND hinted by the makers to be the subject of a sequel) makes a little less sense without it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I thought it could've stood to be longer, myself. The events after the time jump unfold too quickly for my taste.

 

I agree. I find I appreciate the Man Out of Time Cap a little more than the WWII Cap. Which is why I maintain that the final moments of the film, with him coming to in modern day New York, could have been expanded and would have made a great intro to The Avengers film or Captain America II.

 

Having Bucky die during the final battle would have been ideal also, and really driven the emotional impact of his death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a long way from flawless - overlong, a bit awkwardly paced (the mechanics of the three-act structure were perhaps a little too clearly on display) Bucky's death was fumbled (it came at a point in the story which didn't leave time for it to really make an impact, so felt like a bit of a throwaway - it might have worked better if he'd died during the final assault on the plane)

 

I thought it could've stood to be longer, myself. The events after the time jump unfold too quickly for my taste. I 'd have liked a good 15 minutes of the Howling Commandos and Bucky before the train sequence, and it could've helped Bucky's death scene to have an impact. Though I agree it'd've been better if he "died" during the final assault.

 

I'd have liked a bit more of the Howling Commandos too, but I think they'd have been better-advised to make space for that by trimming down the first half of the film, rather than extending the final act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have liked a bit more of the Howling Commandos too, but I think they'd have been better-advised to make space for that by trimming down the first half of the film, rather than extending the final act.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved it, it really seemed like they felt the heart of the character. I liked the interplay with the female character(s) ( Did you not notice the blonde and the grandma, Mark? tongue.gif "Grandmas got a gun" ) a lot, seemed very heartfelt and genuine, especially the last scene. Atwell was very good indeed, quite believable in affection then admiration then grief. Of course [ Spoiler : I was happy to grant her the accurate shooting with her sidearm, many trained women would give a guy a nasty head wound at the same ranges 8 times out of ten, but I did scoff at the point where the .45 machine pistol on automatic was something she could handle while walking forward ] , but hey, it was a war movie.

 

Mr Jones was good, Weaving was awesome, ( Funny absence of nazis, kind of think Hitler would have been right up the Skulls arse at some point BEFORE he amassed 20 000 men under arms ) but I really liked the main man, he didn't put a foot wrong in anything, not the initial awkward striving for something only his soul was fit for, nor the initial growth into his strength, not the way he shouldered the valuable "job" he gets fitted into or the way he "accepted" the GIs amiable contempt for him as justified and something he had to just stomach for the cause, and especially the way he portrayed the point where his resolution firmed and he decided to act the part he could really play in the war. He absolutely sold me on the character, with every scene.

 

I also felt that the Bucky scene was completely in the wrong place, but I guess they put it in there to allow the great emotional scene between Cap and his lady that followed.

 

I really enjoyed that movie. I liked the Howling Commandos a lot, especially their hard bitten exteriors, not the least over done. They coukld have their own movies, and I would part with 14 bucks to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also felt that the Bucky scene was completely in the wrong place, but I guess they put it in there to allow the great emotional scene between Cap and his lady that followed.

That's a good point, actually. Wouldn't make sense for Steve to be amking dinner plans (albeit ones he knew he would never fufil) when his hetero life partner had jsut copped it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.

 

I don't mind the initial suspenson of disbelief in a comic/comic movie/anything nerdly, but I find it irritating and difficult to enjoy, when you are asked to infinitely extend that suspension. I can accept a super-serum, fine, quite easily, but why does that include me having to accept stupid unlogical posits SURROUNDING that first acceptence?.

 

 

 

A world where one man, be he genius or whatever, made a super-serum that worked, would have it replicated within a few years. Literally nothing would stop the search, not money, starving lower classes, war or peace, plague, nothing would stop the elite from granting themselves superdom. If it could be done once, that would be the spur that saw it done again, and here is the kicker, done in every possible way that existed, because myrid research lines on anything like a possible technique would have countless trillions of dollars thrown at them. People simply would not cease till they cracked it, and in the story, it was crackable by a single dude working alone in the 1930s, for fuck sake. EXTREMELY crackable, I think anyone must grant.

 

Ditto for the shield. Even its rarity would mean exactly nothing, because they would simply either make it by cyclotron, or go find where it came from. And they would not stop till they succeeded.

 

Ditto for Human Torch, A world where someone was able to make an autonomous android would see armies of them made.

 

So, I heart to see the Human Torch at the Worlds Fair in 1942, but that means a 1990 world that has a past with autonomous androids, which as a matter of fact would be a 1990 world that had ubiquitious autonomous androids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in the comics, they do try to make more supersoldiers, and each attempt is catashroic in one way or the other. People wound up of the opinion that Rogers simply had "it", and in a recent storyline, a villain group has decided to create more Captain Americas by creating more Steve Rogers, ie orphans growing up during an economic depression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...