LotR vs MCU (NOT CinemaDome)

Side debate for today.

In the latest CinemaDome, there was a lot of talk about the cinematic achievement that the Lord of the Rings trilogy is. Do you feel that the consistent quality and interweaving plots of the Marvel Cinematic Universe put them on the same level? Higher or Lower? Totally different things?

there's no real story to MCU no? LOTR is an epic.

LOTR is amazing. It's a great series that you can watch in order and get a lot out of. In that last cinema dome I said some things that maybe made people assume I don't like it... but I love it. I just like Conan a little more.

MCU has become too much of the same though. Eight different origin stories that are all kind of the same. It's like having eight different FotR films which would obviously be not only redundant but absolutely unnecessary. Marvel/Disney can just keep trotting out random heroes and sticking that origin story skin on each one and make competent films every time. That said I still think MCU is an fascinating accomplishment. Never in cinematic history have there been so many interweaving stories that work together to create a full universe. It's an incredibly unique thing and I will continue to follow it. I just won't be going to the theater for them.

I definitely went to the theater for every LOTR film.

The other big issue with Marvel is that there is no ending in sight. Like any comic book world it just goes on forever and that lack of an absolute ending leaves me in a state of flux. I can't really judge it because it is forever an incomplete product.

For example I love Lone Wolf and Cub, the comic series. But a large part of that is because of the ending. I like how it starts, I love some of the stories in it, there's some great characters and some great moments but the ending elevates the entire proceedings. Then take something like that Michael Mann film with Tom Cruise. Collateral I think it was called. Great film up until the ending and then they blow it. The entire thing is ruined by a poorly thought out and somewhat cliche ending. So a proper ending can completely change how I see a film and MCU just doesn't, and by it's very nature can't, have that.

They are very different things. LOTR is a complete story that was translated to the screen very well. So much so that I can forget about the books (which as I've said I have issues with) but with MCU, even though I enjoy it, at this point I'd rather read the comics. Something about the nature of comics allows me to judge a product a little more clearly even when it's incomplete because it feels like it's a part of the medium. Unfinished film just feels like TV. So if I was voting I'd go with LOTR but MCU is a fascinating project that I don't think get's nearly enough credit for what it's doing and what it has already accomplished.

'Consistent quality' is a stretch for the MCU, considering that we have CA:Winter Soldier and Thor in the same series.

MCU is a soap opera done with films.

Black Barney wrote: there's no real story to MCU no? LOTR is an epic.

I haven't seen even half the MCU movies, but it seems that each character's trilogy is telling a story. There is also a metaplot story primarily told in the Avengers movies and supported by the bonus scenes in the credits of the other movies. There are two bonus scenes in Doctor Strange. The first one teases the upcoming third Thor movie, while the second one sets up the premise for the second Doctor Strange movie. This is an ambitious form of storytelling that is only possible with a big, successful franchise and an organized group of writers. It's impressive and really delivers that sense of continuity that is particular to comics, but not as satisfying as the more cohesive story told by the Lord of the Rings movies.

The challenge for the MCU is the long-term. Even characters that have been around for 50 years only have a handful of great stories to draw upon, and the actors can only wear spandex for so many years before aging out of the part. It's possible that the whole thing can be plausibly rebooted due to the events of the third Avengers movie, which is clearly going to feature Thanos wielding the Infinity Gauntlet, an artifact that can alter reality on a universal scale. That would clear the way for a franchise reboot with younger actors. Also, it appears that this first (Avengers) wave of MCU is giving way to a second (Defenders) wave of characters.

yeah, maybe a story about someone's life but barely. My point is that one is an EPIC. The metaplot going on behind the MCU stuff is really weak compared to that. No gravitas, and it feels sort of like an episodic TV series more than anything.

Some of the installments are damn entertaining, don't get me wrong. It just doesn't have much depth.

I would love to see DC/Warner get away from their current stupid obsession with grimdark movies, and even back away from their misguided effort to mimic the MCU Avengers with their Justice League. Instead, it would be awesome if they put Grant Morrison's experimental and creative Seven Soldiers series on screen. In comics, Seven Soldiers was seven four-issue mini-series, bracketed by two bookend issues with the overall story. There were also numerous tie-ins between each of the minis. Each mini-series started with a sort of origin story or at least intro adventure, and ended with each character confronting a major threat. Each mini could be turned into a movie, with easter eggs tying to the other movies, followed by one movie that incorporates all the characters.

Black Barney wrote: yeah, maybe a story about someone's life but barely. My point is that one is an EPIC. The metaplot going on behind the MCU stuff is really weak compared to that. No gravitas, and it feels sort of like an episodic TV series more than anything.

Some of the installments are damn entertaining, don't get me wrong. It just doesn't have much depth.

There is a definite trade-off involved. If each movie works well as a standalone movie, then the overall story linking the movies is going to be weak. If the overall story is strong, than the earlier installments will tend to have unsatisfactory endings.+

but Fellowship had such a strong ending! I can't remember if i liked the ending to Towers though (I don't think i did, until I saw the endings to some of these dystopian future movies (Hunger Games, Maze Runner) which don't even make an attempt to have an ending, AWFUL).

RobertB wrote: 'Consistent quality' is a stretch for the MCU, considering that we have CA:Winter Soldier and Thor in the same series.

Fair point.

I guess I meant 'competently made'. I mean none of these are 'bad' films.

Here's the thing for me...I don't feel emotionally invested in any of these MCU films. It may be an incredible feat on a grand scale, but it doesn't move me at all and don't care if I miss films or not. The LotR trilogy successfully tugs at various emotions several times during the three.

The last superhero film that I felt anything for was Spider-Man 2 and that predated the MCU.

Spider Man-1 here, man. I distinctly remember thinking "I don't care about this shit anymore" after Spider Man 2. Except X-men, because they're not superheroes (but I still haven't watched the last one) and Batman (same reason). I don't care at all about MCU. I don't even care about Guardians of the Galaxy right now, but that's going to change soon because Kurt Russel.

MCU is turning into the equivalent of utility pizza. It is not the best. It is not what you really want. But it is fairly consistent, unremarkable on most nights but some nights it's better than expected. It's satisfying but unexciting.

Or maybe good vanilla ice cream. They're like that too.

Civil War was really good, but like I said, I cared almost 0% about what went on in it, what the characters were doing, and what the outcomes were. Strangely, I'm almost tired of them getting it right, I almost want them to completely bomb something just to break this streak of "high 7" films. There's only really been two superlative films, being Winter Soldier and Guardians. I haven't seen Doctor Strange yet, but it looks like it would be on the higher end of the spectrum.

As for the long con, so to speak...they have managed to make a go of SERIAL motion pictures. Which is kind of nuts, because it is all effectively the most expensive TV series every made. With multimillion dollar features as each episode. I think Lost was actually hugely influential, culturally, in getting this to work in the mainstream as it has. But that comes with all of the Lost bullshit- "hooks" that are shown but not explained later on, "cryptic" information that encourages speculation, and soft cliffhangers to string the audience along.

The Netflix stuff is really good too (I haven't watched Luke Cage though), but I don't know how long that "DARKNESS DARKNESS" thing can last with it all. They need to do like a Squirrel Girl show or something.

But comparing this all to LOTR...LOTR was an EVENT. A generational, monumental EVENT. It had a proscribed duration. It came, had its time, and then took a bow. MCU, as stated here, has no end in sight, and the churn just keeps going on and on and on. Maybe by the time they get around to doing the Kree-Skrull War or a Beta Ray Bill standalone film I'll still be mildly interested.

I'm not the world' biggest fan of Lord of the Rings in any medium, but it's seems like one of the things that really gets overlooked about Fellowship of the Ring was how expertly Jackson handled the core problem of adapting the books for the screen: how do you have a bunch of adults dressed as elves and hobbits stand around talking about evil wizards and keep the audience from dying of laughter?

Some of this was achieved by improvements to special effects that made the aesthetics much more visually credible than they would have been in the past. But Jackson also really figured out how to communicate to the audience, that despite the fact that they are watching a movie about fairy tale characters fighting over magical jewelry, this was a story worth taking seriously. And all three movies sell that idea perfectly. We take that concept for granted now, but at the time it was genuinely a game changing experience.

Even the Nolan Batman movies, as strong as they are, are so defensive about their subject matter. Every single genre element has to have justification. Why does Bane where a mask? So he can breathe! Why does Batman's mask have ears that stick up? They are radios!

But Jackson figure out that if he presented the Lord of the Ring trilogy as something worth taking seriously and that actors behaved the same way, the audience would go along with it.

And without that you never get the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Marvel Studios has mastered the art of presenting fun, but goofy, ideas as being totally worthy of being taken seriously. Nobody in The Avengers points out that Captain America is dressed like an idiot and there isn't a single joke about Hawkeye being an archer after the Industrial Revolution.

And I don't think you could sell that to an audience before Jackson made the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Tough call. I think that LOTR is clearly better in every way except for some dated CGI.

But MCU is fun and is my pre-teen self's every dream coming true. Any geek who grew up despairing of the unspeakable awfulness of direct-to-video 90s comics movies can relate. David Hasselhof as Nick Fury? Sigh.....

I can't imagine wanting to watch more LOTR. I haven't even seen any hobbit movies except the first. But MCU is popcorn flicks done right.