F4 movies are atrocities.
[Reply]

Shows you the bias, I read somewhere that a critic felt SS was worse than the latest version of F4. That F4 was literally the worse movie i've ever seen.
[Reply]

The Marvel movies are (your words) consistently good.
The DC movies have sucked ass.

How you get from that to "but a lot of the rave reviews for Marvel are blowing sunshine where it normally don't" is probably fascinating, but the plain truth is that the Marvel movies are good and the DC movies aren't.
[Reply]

Agreed. That last FF movie (which ironically opened on this same weekend a year ago) was complete garbage. It also had a ton of bad editing decisions
[Reply]

I always find it hilarious when people with zero experience say they're going to purchase Final Cut Pro or Sony Vegas 14 or Premiere and become "an editor".

Uh, there's much more than video editing software to media of any type, whether it's a Feature Film, Documentary, Reality TV, Single or Multi-Camera TV and so on. There's this thing called "feel" and "instinct", not just chopping together a bunch of scenes.

And the crazy thing is that most of the editors that I know can't even really describe their process. One friend does blockbuster trailers, a few more do Reality, one's been at ABC/ESPN since 1979 and used to cut film back in the day, then worked on Avid, then Final Cut, then back to Avid.

But when asked to actually describe the job, it's a whole lot of "Well, I felt that this worked here and that worked there and we were able shape it from that point forwards".

I had neighbors in a small 12 unit townhome community back from 2000-2003 that turned a janitor's closet (it was literally like 10'x12', tops, maybe smaller) in the building into a video editing suite. I used to hang out with them at night just to watch them edit game trailers and movie trailers. It was a complete blast.

Now, they're the Co-Presidents of Ant Farm, one of the largest post houses in the world. They're uber successful but it's because they know what something should become, not because of an Avid rig.
[Reply]

"Good" is a relative term. Most hover in the B range, and I specifically mentioned consistent because Marvel hasn't turned out many duds so they get that credit, but good is not great. Let's not pretend Marvel Studios is mirroring a run like Miramax did in the 90s.

Age of Ultron was a big disappointment for me, because I dig on Ultron and the movie version was lame. Spader voicing him was the only awesome thing they did with the character. Fox's version of Quicksilver makes Marvel's look atrocious.

As for DC, I think MoS is a good flick, BvS UC I liked a lot. The Nolan Trilogy is fantastic.

So, yes, Marvel is being cut more slack for their consistency, and WB is not doing DC any favors meddling. Disney wisely kept more hands off and it has been rewarded.

I was eager to see SS, so knowing what went on and the mixed reviews to put it nicely is disappointing. Hopefully Strange delivers in November.
[Reply]

Awesome. Yes. Editors are rarely given the limelight or due credit. It's a perfect description of blending technical savvy, storytelling and gut instinct of someone who has a creative mind and eye for taking jumbled mess like a jigsaw puzzle.
The extraordinary ones can take the puzzle pieces of what was originally some boring picture, cut the pieces individually to refit them together and turn out a totally different, unique, and phenomenal picture unlike what was expected.

Ask Spielberg if he values his Editors.
[Reply]

I have an old buddy, who was married to the VP of legal at Paramount (now she's at Uni) that edited all of the Farrelly Brothers films and was brought in to edit on Spielberg's "Minority Report".

Even though powerful editing systems like the Avid Composer and Media stations existed, Spielberg required his films (at least up until that point) to be edited, by hand, on a freakin' Moviola!

I have a close friend in my neighborhood that's 92 years old. He won several Clio awards for editing back in the late 60's and 70's (I've seen the awards in his beautiful home that has a view of the entire city) and his wife was a Hall of Fame, Oscar winning editor from the 60's through the 90's. Unfortunately, I never had a chance to meet her, as she passed from Alzheimer's about 9 years ago and was in a home for years before that.

But man, the stories!
[Reply]

Hulk got only 61%, Spider-man 3 got only 63%, Thor: The Dark World got only 66%, and The Incredible Hulk got only 67%, so it's not as if reviewers have been just blowing Marvel about every movie. Every one of those movies is better than MOS and BvS, so it makes sense that they'd be rated higher, but they were at the bottom of "fresh" ratings, which is certainly not blowing sunshine.

Still, MOS got 55% at RT, which is in the sort of range you'd expect from a movie that was a failure, but not a terrible failure, which is really about the most generous anyone can rate that film without absolutely selling their soul. BVS was a steaming pile of shit, and got a better rating (27%) than it deserved.

And the Nolan trilogy isn't really the subject here, but they got the kind of reviews they deserved.
[Reply]

There is no way that Spiderman 3 is better than MOS or BVS. Spiderman 3 was so fucking bad they had to reboot the franchise.
[Reply]

BvS is absolutely fucking terrible. It's not quite Catwoman bad, but it's in that ballpark. Rating it above Spiderman 3 is insanity.
[Reply]

Spiderman 3 is Fantastic Four bad. It was so bad Toby Mcquire is still fucking looking for work. It completed crippled the entire fucking Spiderman franchise single handed. And BVS is not absolutely fucking terrible.
[Reply]

If spidey 3 is better than BvS in your opinion, we can't have this conversation.
[Reply]

LOL People hated Peter Parker dancing but I loved that shit. Cracked me up.

Movie was bad though.
[Reply]

UE smokes both Hulk films, both Thor films, the last two Iron Man films, Spidey 3, the rebooted Spidey and the first Avengers film.

Disney pays more to the critics than Warners.
[Reply]