CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR (no spoilers)

[moviePig]

Posting this from the planet Mongo to the planet Earth, orbiting its
distant sun in the Marvel universe: Although CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR
delivers plenty of vigorous f/x-fighting and repartee, it doesn't bridge
the culture gap that estranges it from us Mongols, who found its various
inter-hero duels like watching a full-contact demolition derby between
chess, Monopoly, and Parcheesi masters. (Earth board-games.) Owing to
the gap, no recommendation is offered beyond Mongo city limits.

--

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com

[trotsky]

On 5/6/16 2:27 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> Posting this from the planet Mongo to the planet Earth, orbiting its
> distant sun in the Marvel universe: Although CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR
> delivers plenty of vigorous f/x-fighting and repartee, it doesn't bridge
> the culture gap that estranges it from us Mongols, who found its various
> inter-hero duels like watching a full-contact demolition derby between
> chess, Monopoly, and Parcheesi masters. (Earth board-games.) Owing to
> the gap, no recommendation is offered beyond Mongo city limits.

mpig, you're not supposed to make your bathtub gin from the bath water
you already bathed in.

[Obveeus]

On 5/6/2016 3:27 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> Posting this from the planet Mongo to the planet Earth, orbiting its
> distant sun in the Marvel universe: Although CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR
> delivers plenty of vigorous f/x-fighting and repartee,

The first 2/3rds of the film was shot entirely with crappy action
sequences which looked like they were filmed normally, then edited to
show only every third frame so as to speed up the action. The end
result was a bunch of fight scenes that looked more like stop motion
animation. I didn't notice it as much towards the end of the film, so
either those sequences improved or I had grown numb to the lousy effects.

> it doesn't bridge
> the culture gap that estranges it from us Mongols, who found its various
> inter-hero duels like watching a full-contact demolition derby between
> chess, Monopoly, and Parcheesi masters. (Earth board-games.) Owing to
> the gap, no recommendation is offered beyond Mongo city limits.

There were 3 characters missing, 2 of whom I would have appreciated seeing.

There are two characters here providing comic relief, one of which
worked and one of which didn't. The one that didn't...every time he was
on screen I wished it was his Aunt instead.

Overall, I guess there can be a debate about which side to take in this
'civil war'. One side causes it to happen because of a closeted gay
love affair and a desire to lie to friends.coworkers rather than speak
to them honestly and ask for their help. The other side causes it to
happen because of continual arrogance as to being the only person who
knows what is right...which, by the way, is the same reason for the
conflicts in the previous outing.

Final thought...William Hurt is entirely wasted in this role and they
might as well have had Talbot fill the role.


Overall, an ok and entertaining film, but certainly not among the best
of the Marvel offerings. Stay for 2 end credit offerings.

[moviePig]

I think that what you're likening to stop-motion animation is actually
just a narrow shutter-angle (whose stroboscopic effect was maybe first
widely seen in GLADIATOR's sun-baked arena). It's still the usual
number of frames, but none has any of the motion-blur that more closely
approximates our normal vision. Personally, I prefer 'high frame rate',
which lessens the relevance of all such concerns. (I say 'shutter
angle', but non-film cameras may call it something else.)

Indeed, I didn't stay through the little-font end-credits - I take it
there's a bauble that follows them. (Btw, the post-converted 3D was
good enough to help me through my general Marvel alienation, but it
didn't raise the bar for 3D in general...)

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <572e5a06$0$11912$c3e8da3$3a1a...@news.astraweb.com>,

moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>approximates our normal vision. Personally, I prefer 'high frame rate',
>which lessens the relevance of all such concerns. (I say 'shutter
>angle', but non-film cameras may call it something else.)
>

Whatever happened to HFR anyway?
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[moviePig]

On 5/7/2016 6:05 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <572e5a06$0$11912$c3e8da3$3a1a...@news.astraweb.com>,
> moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>> approximates our normal vision. Personally, I prefer 'high frame rate',
>> which lessens the relevance of all such concerns. (I say 'shutter
>> angle', but non-film cameras may call it something else.)
>
> Whatever happened to HFR anyway?

HOBBITs only, so far. But, per Wiki:

"Other film-makers who intend to use the high frame rate format
include James Cameron in his Avatar sequels and Andy Serkis in his
adaptation of George Orwell's Animal Farm."

If nothing else, it's left me much more annoyed by the 'judder' when
movies pan. So there's that...

[Obveeus]

Really? What it looked like to me was about 5 frames per second of
filming then spend up so it ran as a sped up stream of jerky segmented
shots.

> It's still the usual
> number of frames, but none has any of the motion-blur that more closely
> approximates our normal vision.

Whatever motion blur my brain supposedly has while processing at 17
frames per second (or whatever the brain runs at) the *real* look of
motion is not for items to appear in one place, then appear in a
different place with no in-between. All the actions scenes in the first
2/3rds of the film looked like they were filmed while a strobe effect
was in play.

> Personally, I prefer 'high frame rate',
> which lessens the relevance of all such concerns. (I say 'shutter
> angle', but non-film cameras may call it something else.)

HFR...that is what made everything in THE HOBBIT look like a PBS series,
right? I don't think that would in any way solve the visual problem in
CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR since I think that visual problem was done
intentionally as a cheap way to speed up the action and make it 'look
exciting'.

> Indeed, I didn't stay through the little-font end-credits - I take it
> there's a bauble that follows them.

One in the middle of the credits and one after the end of the credits.

> (Btw, the post-converted 3D was
> good enough to help me through my general Marvel alienation, but it
> didn't raise the bar for 3D in general...)

Ah, see, that might be why you didn't notice how bad the action
sequences looked...you were looking through your 3D rose colored glasses.

[moviePig]

Heh. I noticed it, but I've come to accept it as a try - however
illogical - for a "dramatic" super-kinetic effect. In GLADIATOR, I
appreciated it as novel, but not particularly arresting since. The
strobing is independent of 'speed-up', the latter being used only to
make things more violent (which indeed looks fake, and which I'd thought
'good' movies did away with, starting with BULLITT).

[Joan in GB-W]

Saw it today with hubby, daughter and granddaughter. I think I was the only
one who had trouble with the plot. And I didn't like the jerky action
sequences. I found them hard to watch.
Had trouble understanding why the two factions of heroes were beating the
crap out of their former friends. Couldn't they have just sat down and
talked out their differences. But then, the movie would be boring. (Also
not being a fan of these heroes I couldn’t tell one from another and admit
to not really liking this type of movie.)

I believe I would have better served if I sent my family to this movie and
went to The Jungle Book instead.

[moviePig]

Seeing as how we share a few predilections..... oh, yes.

[Russell Watson]

On 5/9/2016 12:06 AM, Joan in GB-W wrote:
>

Damn! That was refreshingly honest. "I didn't like it, but then I don't
really like these movies or know anything about them anyway. Should have
done something else..."
Didn't anybody ever tell you that you're supposed to come on here and
tell those of us who DO like things you don't that those things are
trash and how fucked up we are for liking them? Did you sleep through
that session of Film Appreciation 101?

[moviePig]

You mean like calling you Marvel fans "sad old men"? Yeah, that didn't
ring a bell even with me -- even as an insult, much less an insight.

[Russell Watson]

That is a very good reason example.

[Russell Watson]

Late night post: meant recent, not reason.

[moviePig]

Hey, I take 'reason' wherever I can find it...

[Russell Watson]

Yea, verily. Like "common sense", it is so rare that it should be
regarded as a superpower. How's that for veering something on topic for
the thread?

[Lynn McGuire]

On 5/6/2016 2:27 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> Posting this from the planet Mongo to the planet Earth, orbiting its distant sun in the Marvel universe: Although CAPTAIN AMERICA:
> CIVIL WAR delivers plenty of vigorous f/x-fighting and repartee, it doesn't bridge the culture gap that estranges it from us Mongols,
> who found its various inter-hero duels like watching a full-contact demolition derby between chess, Monopoly, and Parcheesi masters.
> (Earth board-games.) Owing to the gap, no recommendation is offered beyond Mongo city limits.

http://www.schlockmercenary.com/blog/captain-america-civil-war/

"Captain America: Civil War is the best Spider-Man movie we’ve had so far."

"Dear Hollywood: STOP THAT. Those moments were plenty tense without the wobbly tilt-and-jiggle that managed to induce actual motion
sickness."

"Captain America: Civil War squeaks past my Threshold of Awesome on the strength of a great story and a strong ensemble, but only
enters the list at spot #5 thanks to the weak and trembling hands of whoever was holding those cameras."
http://www.schlockmercenary.com/pages/2016-movies/

Lynn