Captain America: Civil War - Final Trailer

Status
Not open for further replies.
CW is going to benefit so much now from BvS. As long as it's good, people will see this multiple times to wash the taste of BvS out of their mouths.
 
For such a supposedly big film the locations and sets look so incredibly bland, i hope they are keeping alot back.
 
Not a bad TV spot at all. TV spots are designed to target those people who don't even know another Captain America movie is coming out, and listing the heroes, as stupid as it sounds here, is one of the biggest way they'll get those people to be interested in the movie.

So, yeah, all wrong in tone, the lines come off super trite, but all done to make the plebeians feel familiar.

Now they need to do a Captain America TV spot, and an Iron Man TV spot, really push the 'who's side are you on?' thing over the next month. Make that the casual conversation about the movie, get those hashtags flying around out there, etc.
 
Judging by that TV spot, sounds like they're still heavily restricted when it comes to promoting Spider-Man in the promotions still. Even if they dont want to spoil his role, they could have easily slipped in a brief shot of him from the trailer 2 footage, but they probably had to sign some sort of deal just for that specific trailer and it doesn't apply to the tv spots/posters and such.
 
For such a supposedly big film the locations and sets look so incredibly bland, i hope they are keeping alot back.

This is something that has bothered me since TWS. The Russos seem to like their grey and blue concrete-city backdrops and I just can't figure out why.

Like, I understand the purpose of grounding the events a bit in TWS, that it takes place in a small chunk of city, and there's just a couple of scenes where they try to add variety to the visuals, but I think they could be doing something more with it. They are certainly technically gifted enough to push it a little bit.
 
This is something that has bothered me since TWS. The Russos seem to like their grey and blue concrete-city backdrops and I just can't figure out why.

Like, I understand the purpose of grounding the events a bit in TWS, that it takes place in a small chunk of city, and there's just a couple of scenes where they try to add variety to the visuals, but I think they could be doing something more with it. They are certainly technically gifted enough to push it a little bit.

Budget and time constraints would be my guess. All the MCU films suffer from it in some form. You probably can't always allow your DPs the time necessary to frame a really nice picture for every scene, every take, when you have all these dense visual effects to shoot and a dozen actors to wrangle. Style takes a backseat to that stuff when they're cranking these movies out three times a year, even though they're not all direct sequels. They're probably always crunching for time.
 
Judging by that TV spot, sounds like they're still heavily restricted when it comes to promoting Spider-Man in the promotions still. Even if they dont want to spoil his role, they could have easily slipped in a brief shot of him from the trailer 2 footage, but they probably had to sign some sort of deal just for that specific trailer and it doesn't apply to the tv spots/posters and such.

Why can they not advertise Spiderman?
 
I was thinking about the MCU cinematography earlier. None of the shots really stand out as telling a story in the frame, just the DP saying "oh put it here".
 
Budget and time constraints would be my guess. All the MCU films suffer from it in some form. You probably can't always allow your DPs the time necessary to frame a really nice picture for every scene, every take, when you have all these dense visual effects to shoot and a dozen actors to wrangle. Style takes a backseat to that stuff when they're cranking these movies out three times a year, even though they're not all direct sequels. They're probably always crunching for time.

I understand they are shot flat and efficient, but this I'm talking about is a step beyond the art. Once you have the constraints there is still another choice to be made, and that's where my uneasiness lies. They got the guy from District 9 for these 2 movies. They are going for something, but it bothers me a bit.

Will have to wait and see CW to get more of a sense of what it is.
 
I still have this strange feeling that this movie is hiding some crazy plot stuff. The Russos calling it a psychological thriller has me wondering.
 
You know what gets me is when some try to accuse the cinematography of Marvel movies as if they look like a TV show. Heck I've seen people accusing the same thing towards Civil War's trailer.

Fuck, now I can't wait till Doctor Strange releases to see how batshit insane they go with the cinematography.
 
Well, Joss Whedon isn't really the most visual of directors; his thing is juggle characters. Even the most iconic shots on both Avengers movies are actually character moments; say, Hulk's "I'm always angry" and overall Ultron on AoU. Of course he could spice things up visually, but I think he got his priorities right.
Thor 2 might be bland story-wise, but I loved Asgard. Guardians of Galaxy is beautiful, so I don't know what's up with criticism there.

Ant-Man to me is overall not a movie with good direction.
And the Winter Soldier might be a little too much on the grey side, but I think it is on purpose and it works because makes the whole thing look more like a spy movie than a superhero movie.
 
The "looks like a TV show" is just a talking point.

Someone said it, it sounded scathing enough and partially true that it kept being repeated until it became the norm. A blanket criticism that could be levied at any Marvel movie because it also helped follow the other narrative: that they are all and look the same.

Not worth it to think about it much. I agree that there are visual directors out there that do stuff Marvel doesn't touch or even attempts for many reasons, and that's fine, but arguments could be made without being as reductive. It's just most people aren't interested in those, hence talking points.

In any case, I think -however sporadic- there are some pretty good shots and we could probably make a conversation out of that at some point.
 
Probably some terms issues with sony. Who knows.

There are Civil War toys out at Target now and there's not even a Spider-Man to be seen. Only the Spider-man toys from the Animated series. It's very weird. If love to know the full details.
 
There are Civil War toys out at Target now and there's not even a Spider-Man to be seen. Only the Spider-man toys from the Animated series. It's very weird. If love to know the full details.

Pretty sure Marvel has the merchandise rights to Spider Man. I wouldn't be shocked if they have MCU Spider man toys starting in April.
 
There are Civil War toys out at Target now and there's not even a Spider-Man to be seen. Only the Spider-man toys from the Animated series. It's very weird. If love to know the full details.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a delay in MCU Spider-Man toys due to how late in the game he was finalized.
 
The "looks like a TV show" is just a talking point.

Someone said it, it sounded scathing enough and partially true that it kept being repeated until it became the norm. A blanket criticism that could be levied at any Marvel movie because it also helped follow the other narrative: that they are all and look the same.

Not worth it to think about it much. I agree that there are visual directors out there that do stuff Marvel doesn't touch or even attempts for many reasons, and that's fine, but arguments could be made without being as reductive. It's just most people aren't interested in those, hence talking points.

In any case, I think -however sporadic- there are some pretty good shots and we could probably make a conversation out of that at some point.

I'm all for criticism heck I even acknowledge the fact that MCU has lackluster villains with the exception of Loki. However, when the same argument of "they all look the same" comes up it gets a bit tiring. I mean how does a movie like Guardians of Galaxy look the same as any other Marvel movie? If you're trying to say they're the same because of the quirky humor I could see that. Although it's not like they haven't gone with a serious tone for example Winter Soldier had a serious tone. I even have a bit of criticism on how Tony Stark's character was kinda changed from Iron Man 3 for Whendon's sense of humor in Ultron.

Plus Doctor Strange is coming out and that should fill your appetite for some great cinematography considering how wacky Doctor Strange is. They can definitely go all out with the visuals there.
 
There's only like 33 days left till the premiere. I'm not hyped though, which is probably good after my disappointment in Age of Ultron.
 
Getting burned on BatvSupe has me nervous. Are these sorts of things normally predictive? Or are they like the early reactions for BatvSupe in that they were good because a lot of hype, but then reviews had the truth?
I don't know why Batman V Superman would have any bearing on this movie. The last movie Snyder put out wasn't very good and the last movie the Russo's put out was amazing.
 
Getting burned on BatvSupe has me nervous. Are these sorts of things normally predictive? Or are they like the early reactions for BatvSupe in that they were good because a lot of hype, but then reviews had the truth?

For comparison, I don't think AoU ever get positive testing news.
Winter Soldier did though.
 
I don't know why Batman V Superman would have any bearing on this movie. The last movie Snyder put out wasn't very good and the last movie the Russo's put out was amazing.

They're obviously not really related. But my irrational brain is taking one disappointment and becoming more concerned about possible future disappointments. I just don't want to let myself get hyped up, and I don't know what kind of track record test screenings have, so I asked.

For comparison, I don't think AoU ever get positive testing news.
Winter Soldier did though.

That makes me feel better. But the real worry is bad movies that get good test screenings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom