Unit petition: analyze the "stakes creep" of sequels & prequilogies / sequilogies & reboots as us, as viewers, passing through the singularity of filmmaking technology stepping from practical effects to computer-assisted to computer. Watch and contrast entries from film properties that had releases across these eras. Discuss how storytelling can/should/must change given what's possible to show.
Star Wars (3 eras - practical, computer-assist, CGI): Darth Maul makes OG Vader look boring. This gap may be a reflection of budget and action hero / stunt double evolution. But Grievous makes Maul look boring, because Grievous is CGI and Maul is "just" Ray Park. The same spectrum applies to the space battles of OG trilogy (models on strings) vs the ILM mania in the prequels and newer ones.
Matrix (2 eras): wire-fu and the bullet time camera array were as much "practical" as they were "computer-assisted". but once Neo and the Agents were just [financially feasible] CGI assets, the fights didn't have to be restrained and so Neo fought 100 Smiths at once and flew and we had 10000 squids onscreen.
Marvel (1 era): I love 'em but the first movie of Phase 1 is a high-tech corporate governance dispute, the last movie of Phase 1 is a multidimensional alien invasion. The climactic movies of Phase 3 are a universe-wide extinction event and a time-travel heist to prevent it, respectively. How do you "reboot" that? How do audiences respond to "rebooting" the stakes to "friendly neighborhood calamities"?
And that's all without getting into the sociological elements which I think could be a whole different unit. What did viewers expect from their heros / anti-heroes / villains? What was the meaning of the Hero's Journey. etc ("looking at [Star Wars / Matrix] as similar arcs separated by a generation, and asking what the different presentations said about the zeitgeists they spoke to").
This is one of my favorite comments I've ever read on any platform. I love it and am on board for all of it.
I love especially the take about the marvel films. I was on board the stakes being Thanos blowing up the universe. But the introduction of the multiverse is just so fatiguing. Because now it's not just one universe, it's literally infinite universes. I in all seriousness cannot imagine that scale of carnage.
I'll say also, tangentially, that the multiverse concept, while it does allow a lot of room for creativity, also allows for schticky and lazy storylines. Like, once we buy into the idea that there are infinite versions of everything, why should we care as much if one person dies?
Unit petition: analyze the "stakes creep" of sequels & prequilogies / sequilogies & reboots as us, as viewers, passing through the singularity of filmmaking technology stepping from practical effects to computer-assisted to computer. Watch and contrast entries from film properties that had releases across these eras. Discuss how storytelling can/should/must change given what's possible to show.
Star Wars (3 eras - practical, computer-assist, CGI): Darth Maul makes OG Vader look boring. This gap may be a reflection of budget and action hero / stunt double evolution. But Grievous makes Maul look boring, because Grievous is CGI and Maul is "just" Ray Park. The same spectrum applies to the space battles of OG trilogy (models on strings) vs the ILM mania in the prequels and newer ones.
Matrix (2 eras): wire-fu and the bullet time camera array were as much "practical" as they were "computer-assisted". but once Neo and the Agents were just [financially feasible] CGI assets, the fights didn't have to be restrained and so Neo fought 100 Smiths at once and flew and we had 10000 squids onscreen.
Marvel (1 era): I love 'em but the first movie of Phase 1 is a high-tech corporate governance dispute, the last movie of Phase 1 is a multidimensional alien invasion. The climactic movies of Phase 3 are a universe-wide extinction event and a time-travel heist to prevent it, respectively. How do you "reboot" that? How do audiences respond to "rebooting" the stakes to "friendly neighborhood calamities"?
And that's all without getting into the sociological elements which I think could be a whole different unit. What did viewers expect from their heros / anti-heroes / villains? What was the meaning of the Hero's Journey. etc ("looking at [Star Wars / Matrix] as similar arcs separated by a generation, and asking what the different presentations said about the zeitgeists they spoke to").
CJ!
This is one of my favorite comments I've ever read on any platform. I love it and am on board for all of it.
I love especially the take about the marvel films. I was on board the stakes being Thanos blowing up the universe. But the introduction of the multiverse is just so fatiguing. Because now it's not just one universe, it's literally infinite universes. I in all seriousness cannot imagine that scale of carnage.
I'll say also, tangentially, that the multiverse concept, while it does allow a lot of room for creativity, also allows for schticky and lazy storylines. Like, once we buy into the idea that there are infinite versions of everything, why should we care as much if one person dies?