Someone on Twitter likened Loki to a really expensive version of Doctor Who, and based on what little I know of that show, I can see that. The cosmic time-jumping sci-fi plot is all nonsense and ancillary to the characters, who are elevated (more than the show deserves) by the talent.
It also reminded me of Terry Pratchett novels, which usually devolve for me into arbitrary magical/fantasy illogic three quarters of the way through deus ex machina style, but the strong characterization, the concepts, and the comedy salvages it.
great acting by Tom Hiddleston & Sophia Di Martino and excellent chemistry
Superb writing
Wonderful action and better than movie quality special effects.
Many of the other MCU shows & movies are similar in that they have a strong lead, talented villians, excellent writing, easy to understand plot and devices, and great special effects. If we go over the historical heroes and villians across MCU, the vast majority have great presence and we see some phenoms showing up even in bit roles. The MCU has really been a Cornucopia of Who's Who in Hollywood that has acting talent.
Unfortunately, Brie Larson and Teyonnah Parris are not comparable talents to Scarlett Johansson or Elizabeth Olsen, and though I think Iman Vellani is quite talented she is not as experienced as an actress yet. I view the casting of Brie Larson in the role as an epic failure that has led to the rejection of the movie, and her role. She is not comparable to the highly talented folks in the MCU, and I think the only fix is recasting the role.
Even in captain marvel she is consistent- the issue is the writing makes her a smug self-centered person with no growth other than gaining even more confidence.
Its exclusively a writing/directing problem.
The hate got directed at her because she was the lightning rod for the movie, and she had a couple of awkward interviews and made a few really alienating comments about the franchises core audience and their relation to the movie.
But she is a good actress.
It has nothing to do with 'progressiveness'. Wall St. ate Hollywood. All the major studios are run by investors who reduced everything to a game of metrics. Major studios don't 'create' movies anymore. They manufacture them. The executives running these companies have simply lost sight of the forest for the trees and are now at the throwing poop at a wall and seeing what sticks phase.
To map that to the movie analogy—Marvel isn’t making a big deal about the first Muslim super hero to make the movie popular among the 1% of the country that’s Muslim.
Some terrible shows aren't progressive at all.
There are definitely cases that people morally blame audiences as a false cover for a bad movie, but there are also people who can't enjoy great movies if they can find any progressive meaning in them and make a career about ranting about it.
>but there are also people who can't enjoy great movies if they can find any progressive meaning in them and make a career about ranting about it.
the problem is that being 'progressive', whatever that means today, shouldn't come before making a good movie when the goal is.. to make a movie.
No one would have cared about any of Kubrick's social messages if they hadn't been wrapped in spectacular cinema.
the 'life and times' are inexorably twisted into the cinema, but some people want to just sit back and watch robots shooting lasers at each other without being reminded constantly that the world is an unjust and uncivilized place outside of the silver-screen.
I think that there is a general fatigue among spectators in the cinemasphere for the burden -- which isn't to say that 'crusading in popular media' isn't an important concept, but rather to say that a fatigued audience will be less likely to lend an ear.
Its that they make something as generic and “safe” as possible, then put women, minorities or homosexual representation in the movie very late (after writing maybe) and it becomes forced.
Then when the movie bombs for being uncreative and forced they claim that it’s because of racists or misogynists. Because a few people genuinely are racists and misogynists it masks all the criticism and they can blanket deny that theres any issue.
Where do you go after Thanos wiping out half the universe with the flick of a finger? Thanos 2.0 wiping out 2/3rds of the universe? Who gives a shit. Deadpool is invincible. Scarlet Witch is basically a god. So is Vision. Loki is literally capable of time jumping at will while the universe disintegrates around him. There’s only so much you can lean on zany characters like the Guardians of the Galaxy before they jump the shark too.
All the good TV shows either ran their course (Agents of SHIELD), or were prematurely canceled like Punisher and Luke Cage during the Disney handover. Seriously, what now?
They just keep escalating with Loki. He Who Remains is another one of those deus ex villains that they’ll have to one up even further. Based on the season 2 finale I can’t even tell if they want a season 3 or if thats over too.
/rant
Not true, you just need to watch movies at home. I brought my girlfriend over to my place and showed her "Alien" and "Aliens" (she had never seen them) and she loved them. Why bother watching new junk when there's SO many wonderful classic movies you can watch instead? And you can get an absolutely huge flat-screen TV these days for not that much money. Who needs a cinema?
But I think a larger cohort of people have realised that, no, actually people were not slamming these movies because everyone is anti-progressive.
The only issue now is that Disney owns half of all media, so if you like movies or want to go on a date or take the kids to the cinema, you don’t get a seriously large variety.
Loki was truly excellent though, so they can do this; they just choose not to make complex and interesting stories and characters.