via Imgflip Meme Generator I'll start out that the main reason Aquaman (and to similar extant Wonderwoman) is a good movie and the other DCEU movies are subpar is that Aquaman didn't take itself too seriously. Unlike everything Snyder had creative control over. He saw Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy and walked away thinking. "You want dark, I can do dark!" not catching the myriad other things that made those movies great. Which is a lot like an old Dimetri Martin sketch where his Leonardo Da Vinci parody character thought he discovered the secret to how birds fly, so he strapped on a fake beak and jumped off a cliff. I am optimistic about Shazam for this reason. Feel free to talk about Aquaman below. Or not, and I can stop pushing movie discussions.
That's 100% true. Alas, it's its main quality. It's not a great movie, neither memorable... but it's certainly a fun flick. Do I regret the money spent to see it at theatre? No, i enjoyed it, it gave me some good laugh and some battle scenes were born to be seen on a huge screen. Do I want the dvd for my collection? No i don't think so.
That is my assessment as well. Back when Blockbuster Video existed, Blockbuster would buy lots of a DVD initially to meet early demand, than they would sell most their older movies at a steep discount. Every other week my dad and I would pounce on the "pre-viewed DVD" rack to buy the goodies. If it were still possible today to buy Aquaman on the cheap like this, I would. I'm curious. Was in the opinion of those who saw both movies, was it better than Wonderwoman, worse than Wonderwoman or equal. In my opinion the two movies were equal, but professional critics seem to act like Wonderwoman is cinematic gold, and Aquaman was okay. I think "woke" movies are getting extra bonus points unfairly. I thought Aquaman had Mera had more on screen chemistry than Wonderwoman and Steve Trevor. I thought Aquaman (and Mera) had far more interesting and character building moments interacting with human bystanders and support characters than Wonderwoman did in Wonderwoman. To Wonderwoman's credit, I think WW had better fight scene choreography. On the topic, while Aquaman was not very "woke" it was not un-"woke" either. The female characters were still strong and smart. The environment was a factor in the movie even if Aquaman dared not to mention global warming. I could make a long list of flaws that I noticed in the move, but there was only flaw that made me go "seriously?!?" That was the costuming, it was a little too campy for my tastes especially the "reverse scuba suits." I did not like that the movie said that "Atlanteans not of royal blood cannot survive in a dry environment." not for plot reasons but because the "reverse scuba suits" that the bad guys wore looked ridiculous.
They are both good movies, but far from great. Aquaman is more fun, while WW should be more serious (with humor) but fails in bringing relatable characters. Black Manta is a non credible threat, and the overabused "oh no he wasn't dead, he's still alive" it's just a negative point.
In my opinion it's not a bad thing to have a villain who is the underdog. The hero doesn't always have to be fighting a stronger foe to have a good story. Also, underdogs fight dirty and attack at unspected times. BUT I think I know what theyh are really doing. Black Manta is not being set up for Aquaman 2, Electric Eel Boogaloo. Black Manta is being set up as a C-list villain for a future Justice League movie. Hopefully they will recast Lex Luthor by then, but Black Manta was originally a member of the Legion of Doom and Warner Brothers seems to be shooting for a 21st reboot of that concept and there has to be at least one foil for Aquaman in a Legion of Doom even though Lex Luthor, Deadshot, and the like are all far more interesting than Black Manta.
Saw the movie recently. Overall it was pretty good, I enjoyed it more than Justice League and way more than Batman v Superman. Ton of CGI to make the world work, and I felt like aquaman kept swapping between "fun-loving jock" mode and "my dad taught me about this random piece of knowledge" during the movie, felt a bit jarring. But overall his character and the supporting cast made a decent movie that was watchable, but nothing that made me want to go out and buy the movie when it hits the shelves. I did enjoy Wonder Woman more, but I may have been a bit biased because she was totally my type . Then again, I didn't care for the love story between her and captain kirk, because it felt kinda forced and honestly needless for the story arc (she could only beat ares because of the power of love??? really ). Aaaand it was basically a carbon copy of the Captain America movie. I think it would have been better if they had just left Ares out of the movie entirely, and had Wonder Woman do some serious growing up/crisis of faith when she found out that there was no evil supervillain making the humans do these terrible things, and that some people are just terrible after all. I was wondering how the gill-breathers were able to breathe on land, but it was a little weird. Didn't break my suspension of disbelief for the movies though; for the sea-dwellers we are the ones who live in "outer space." The non-pressure alone would kill them unless they were superhuman like aquaman or his mon. I did love that one scene where she jumps up out of the trench and takes on the entire German army. ...but then again now that I think about it, how much do we really see her slaughtering her way through the German army in the first place? Was it more "mindless goons" or actual human beings like in For Whom the Bell Tolls? I bed if she read that book it would also give her a crisis of faith. I did appreciate this. There was some "humans pollute the oceans" in the movie, but it was relegated to a tool used by the evil Atlantean nobility who is trying to start a war to consolidate their own power. I feel like this theme was a bit more overt in the comics, like that one time Aquaman sends tsunamis to knock out all the major cities on the coastlines, invades, kicks all the humans away from 100 miles from the coast, and then rules the world. I think Namor from Marvel did this too. Also in my opinion, Aquaman < Namor. And he looks like spock.
I admit I haven't seen Aquaman (as DC in general isn't that interesting to me), but this thread is pretty interesting to me. I don't mind spoilers either so it doesn't detract from the movie should I ever see it (I probably will once it is on Amazon Prime or something). Y'all seem to agree that the movie not taking itself too serious is a good thing (and I do that, too, until a certain point.) I wonder what causes that. If we compare it to Marvel, is the difference basically like the one between Guardians of the Galaxy (not very serious) and, say... Thor (a lot more serious, although Marvel movies always have funny elements to them, too)? It also makes me wonder: where is the point at which it becomes negative? Batman and Robin and Batman forever were not taking themselves too seriously, and they were kinda hated by many fans (I enjoy both btw, because they are so weird and funny), and the Adam West Batman is seen by many as an insult because it isn't serious. Because Batman is serious business or something. We have entered an age in which serious super hero movies seem to be en vogue. But they aren't allowed to be too serious! (Such as having a theme that includes or mirrors real world problems or issues). So maybe Aquaman is just one step down from seriousness again, to avoid controversy? And is that a good thing? I don't know about DC comics, do they have the same long history of having real world issues and politics in them, like Marvel has? (Btw. that's very interesting as many fans insist that fantasy/scifi comics/movies should not include such things, while they were an essential part of Marvel right from the beginning, as is easy to proof with Stan Lee quotes of, like, five decades).
I cannot find the video of it but Dimitri Martin did a sketch where he pretended to be Leonardo Da Vinci being stupid. At one point he said, by studying birds I have finally unlocked the secret of flight. Then he strapped on a fake beak and jumped off a cliff... The joke being a logical person would know that the wings are involved in flight, not beaks. The Christopher Nolan Batman movies were brilliant because they were well written and well directed, but Zac Snyder saw them and thought "Ah! These movies were popular because they were dark....I bet I can go darker and more serious!" That's the equivalent of watching a bird fly and think it was the beak that enables flight. His Superman movie was lackluster and Dawn of Justice was a steaming flop. I don't know who took over, but whoever took over creatively saw the popularity of the Marvel franchise and thought "These movies were popular because they have serious plots but have lots of jokes. I can do that." Then you had Justice League and the steaming flop that was Suicide Squad (though due to unique circumstances, Suicide Squad failed on every single level, not just one critical place). That is sort of like that webbed feet is how a bird flies. Jokes can be good or bad, but when you focus on jokes (or seriousness, or SJW traits, or special effects) instead of focusing on a good story the movie suffers. Beyond that, a big meat head in an orange leotard that can talk to fish and is fighting his half brother for the control of a rainbow colored magical sea kingdom is ultimately a little out there so it's good not to be deadly serious about it.
OMG that's hilarious! But isn't the same true for a dude that dresses like a bat? Or some dudes and ladies that fly around in space ships that don't follow the laws of physics, with a huge guy in an ape costume as their co-pilot? Or a guy that spins a hammer to fly? Hmm.... maybe Marvel really is the one getting this right after all.
That is why Thor 2 is by most accounts, among the worst MCU movies and Thor 3 was pretty good, at least in the middle of the MCU pack. Thor 2 was very dark and Thor 3 was very light hearted. The Christopher Nolan Batman movies are not superhero movies. It's a crime drama and psychological thriller with philosophical overtones that happens to have a superhero in it. This video really sums up my thoughts on the superhero genre...
Didn't care for Thor 2, it was boring. Thor 3 had the psychedelic color schemes that I was expecting from a Thor movie: finally here was Thor, the alien, fighting aliens in the cosmos. My gripe with that movie was they smashed it together with World War Hulk, which would have made an awesome movie in its own right. But Marvel is too afraid to make another Hulk movie because they haven't done well before. You have a point there. Kind of like how Star Trek was used as a critique of society in a sci-fi setting, comics have been doing that for ages. Aquaman/Namor were foils for a surface world that was polluting the oceans all the time. Lots of examples out there. Maybe it has to do with these movies being marketed to a mass market, instead of just the comic "niche" nowadays?
Star Trek is a good example. They made things like sexism, racism, different world views and political systems their topics, transporting it to the future and using their universe for abstraction of the issue, sometimes more sometimes less. Classic Science Fiction stories do that as well. Stanislaw Lem for example lived in a communist country, so he disguised his criticism of the system as Sci-Fi. But Huxley, Dick, Wells, Orwell, Clark and some others did the same thing. And yeah you might be on the right track there. Back then Sci-Fi was niche. When SciFi got more mainstream some of it became more ...shallow.