• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Captain Marvel (2019)

Transformers made money too and Britney Spears sold albums.
And? Your apparent dislike for these things doesn't keep them from being a) runaway successes of substantial import in their respective industries that b) never actually fit the definition of low-budget sub-par content in the first place.

Recognizing that things aren't for you is entirely different from denying what significance they demonstrably have.
 
Wonder Wonder was a generic B movie. Nothing more. It won't take much to be a better movie than the Captain America wannabe.
I think your definition of B movie must be very different from mine. When I hear B movie, I think of a movie with a tiny budget, a no-name cast, and an unknown director, that was not released by major studio. Whether you enjoyed it or not WW is pretty much as far from that as it is possible for a movie to get.
 
The $800M+ box office, almost as large as BvS's and $100M+ larger than JL's on a much smaller budget, refutes the idea that WW was "nothing more" than "a generic B movie."

So many of Marvel's superhero flicks miss even by the "generic B movie" standard. Some old B movies had pretty good scripts, after all.
 
Notice that she seems to be going through the “Tahiti” treatment. So that’s where Fury got the idea.
 
I'd argue that a greater respect for the material (on respectable budgets at least) started with Rami's Spider-Man movies, which lifted plot lines and even iconic panel compositions straight from the page. 'The Dark Knight' is what raised the profile of the genre to the point where it was proven to be more than just light popcorn fare.

As much as I do like 'Watchmen', I think it's financial disappointment had a decidedly mixed impact on future films, especially since it's production came on the back of '300' and 'Sin City' and their sequels had disappointing returns too. As for faithfulness...while Watchmen certainly looked the part, I'm not sure Snyder ever really grasped the thematic underpinnings of it all.

Raimi's stuff hewed a little closer to the source material than anything else of the time, but it was still massively hollywoodized, imo. As a long time Spider-man fan, I could never get into any of them. Nothing in those movies ever felt like Spider-man.

And I'm not arguing Watchmen was super-influential. In fact, the second 'breakthrough' I mentioned may not even be properly characterized as a breakthrough at all, but as an ongoing, gradual shift towards a much better balance between source material and adaptation. And some small measure of that can be traced back to before 2008, certainly, but I would say 2008-2012 is the period in which the shift really started to become noticably widespread.

As for the respect earned by the Dark Knight, I still question whether it was ever actually applied to any superhero film other than the Dark Knight (in society in general). It may have helped people get over the 'but Superheroes aren't cool' factor (if one thinks people weren't already largely getting over that, anyway), but the next film I can think after TDK that was truly taken seriously, rather than just enjoyed, on a similar level is Black Panther, almost a decade later.
 
I mentioned Watchmen to my wife yesterday.

She was completely blank about the entire subject.

I'd rather force her to read the book than the watch the movie, but truthfully she is likely to do neither, if I press the matter.
 
Last edited:
So many of Marvel's superhero flicks miss even by the "generic B movie" standard. Some old B movies had pretty good scripts, after all.
Regardless of your opinion of their quality, they're pretty far from B movies. B movies were lower budget films often paired with higher budget films in the old days of theater going before the blockbuster era began in the late 70s. It's not really a description of quality because many were actual good like The Incredible Shrinking Man. They were just lower budget films put out by a studio. They still basically exist today but it's more stuff like Syfy original movies, any Troma film and James Gunn's pre-Marvel films. Some are good, some are bad, some are cheesy good or so bad that they're good. The worst of it usually ended up on MST3K, but it's mainly budget thing and the market they were aiming for. So even shit like Transformers: The Last Knight isn't a B movie, but a good movie like Slither would be.

DC movies wouldn't be either.
 
I heard that a lot of mid 20th century Americans went to the movies just to take advantage of the air conditioning, so a double feature is a good draw, even if the b-movie wasn't.
 
Regardless of your opinion of their quality, they're pretty far from B movies. B movies were lower budget films often paired with higher budget films in the old days of theater going before the blockbuster era began in the late 70s. It's not really a description of quality because many were actual good like The Incredible Shrinking Man. They were just lower budget films put out by a studio. They still basically exist today but it's more stuff like Syfy original movies, any Troma film and James Gunn's pre-Marvel films. Some are good, some are bad, some are cheesy good or so bad that they're good. The worst of it usually ended up on MST3K, but it's mainly budget thing and the market they were aiming for. So even shit like Transformers: The Last Knight isn't a B movie, but a good movie like Slither would be.

DC movies wouldn't be either.
I think that's a pretty good idea of what would be a B-movie today.

However, I don't believe that The Incredible Shrinking Man was produced or released as a B-movie. If it it was, that would be news to me. It had a generous budget for the day, it received top billing on release, and the director, Jack Arnold, had been the director of well-known and successful sci-fi/horror/monster movies.
 
And anyways, lots of big name directors loved B Movies. They felt they could get away with stories and ideas and themes the bigger studio films couldn't because they were beneath notice and consideration by the Studio Bosses and Committees.
 
Regardless of your opinion of their quality, they're pretty far from B movies. B movies were lower budget films often paired with higher budget films in the old days of theater going before the blockbuster era began in the late 70s.

Nonetheless, B movies were generally competently scripted because audiences expected more traditionally logical narrative in American commercial films two generations ago. This isn't generally true of current superhero films.

People often overstate things in these forums. I've read literal nonsense such as descriptions of network television shows as "fan films." :cool:
 
Notice that she seems to be going through the “Tahiti” treatment. So that’s where Fury got the idea.
I seriously doubt that was a conscious connection made on the part of the film makers. It is however a very fortuitous coincidence that as it turns out, lines up quite well...that is assuming Fury is even made aware of any of the details of what they put Carol through.
 
Nonetheless, B movies were generally competently scripted because audiences expected more traditionally logical narrative in American commercial films two generations ago. This isn't generally true of current DC and Fox films.

Fixed.
 
I think that's a pretty good idea of what would be a B-movie today.

However, I don't believe that The Incredible Shrinking Man was produced or released as a B-movie. If it it was, that would be news to me. It had a generous budget for the day, it received top billing on release, and the director, Jack Arnold, had been the director of well-known and successful sci-fi/horror/monster movies.
It was a B movie, it’s just one of the best ones.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top