Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Digital Spy)   Seth Rogen explains why the MCU causes issues for film comedies: "Something that me and Evan talk about...is how Marvel movies are comedies. Thor: Ragnarok is a comedy. Ant-Man is a comedy at its core...That is the benchmark that people expect"   (digitalspy.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Comedy, Digital Spy, Seth Rogen, Canadian writer, production company, Film, release of his own new comedy, success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe  
•       •       •

907 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 12 Aug 2020 at 2:53 PM (10 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



69 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-08-12 9:07:50 PM  
He sounds high.
 
2020-08-12 9:20:24 PM  

Great_Milenko: Nameless_Guy: I think I understand what he's saying, but I fully disagree. I don't consider Ragnarok or Ant-Man to be comedies, per se. They're Marvel/comic book movies that have comedic elements. They added comedy to the overall premise to make the characters more relatable and to make the movies more enjoyable. At their core, though, they're comic book/action/science-fictionesque* movies, with a dash of humour.

Both Ant Man movies are light adventure flicks with comedic elements.  The character's powers fit well with the format.

I'm one of the minority who doesn't worship Thor: Ragnarok as the apex of all things MCU.  I felt it crossed the line between adventure with comedic elements into broad farce.  Almost like one of those "so-and-so Movie" parodies.  I get that space in the MCU in general is a silly place (much like Camelot) but something in Ragnarok just didn't work for me like it did in the first GotG movie.


It was the first movie where the heroes truly lost something major (Asgard). You have all these refugees, many who just watched those weird Hela zombies kill a bunch of their friends and family while they were trying to get on the escape ship. They're watching the only home they've ever know blow up. Perfect time to throw in a mediocre joke.
 
2020-08-12 9:27:57 PM  

GardenWeasel: BizarreMan: Maybe we just don't like your sense of humor anymore Seth?

I dunno. The wife and I just finished the FutureMan series and laughed the whole way though.


Preacher is great too. I don't find Seth Rogen funny as an actor, but he is still great as a writer and producer.
 
2020-08-12 9:29:27 PM  

TheWaldo: I don't consider DiscoThor a comedy, or at least not intentionally so. Just because you laugh at a line in any movie does not make it a 'funny' movie.

And just because a certain actor is considered funny doesn't mean his movie is *coughwillferellcough*

I will concur with others that the MCU brings a variety of genres and well thought out plot lines to the table. Particularly more in some of the Netflix series versus tent pole summer movies.


That's why Justice League felt so dated, and the re-release will be even more so.

"A group or people in goofy costumes punching other people in goofy costumes for two hours over a magic box" was entertaining as hell in 2012, but the first Avengers was basically a proof-of-concept.  It was dated-as-hell for 2017's Justice League.

I absolutely did not expect Avengers: Endgame to be a surprisingly funny movie with multiple "time heists."

Which is why I enjoyed the hell out of it.
 
2020-08-12 10:12:25 PM  

Great_Milenko: Nameless_Guy: I think I understand what he's saying, but I fully disagree. I don't consider Ragnarok or Ant-Man to be comedies, per se. They're Marvel/comic book movies that have comedic elements. They added comedy to the overall premise to make the characters more relatable and to make the movies more enjoyable. At their core, though, they're comic book/action/science-fictionesque* movies, with a dash of humour.

Both Ant Man movies are light adventure flicks with comedic elements.  The character's powers fit well with the format.

I'm one of the minority who doesn't worship Thor: Ragnarok as the apex of all things MCU.  I felt it crossed the line between adventure with comedic elements into broad farce.  Almost like one of those "so-and-so Movie" parodies.  I get that space in the MCU in general is a silly place (much like Camelot) but something in Ragnarok just didn't work for me like it did in the first GotG movie.


What the first GotG movie did that worked well was essentially make the galaxy the straight man to Quill's man-child-ness. Which worked well, basically saying "geez, humans are the jerks of the universe".

In the second movie, it seems like everyone is a wiseass cracking infantile jokes (hell, who thought that a god would walk around talking about taking a leak would be funny ), and it loses something in the humor department without any straight men to pay off of.
 
2020-08-12 10:12:37 PM  

Great_Milenko: No, actual comedies just suck anymore. It started when studios thought Jim Carrey and Adam Sandler were funny, and now we're stuck with Seth Rogan.


I agree with your premise, but disagree with your history. The problem is that nobody writes comedies with structure anymore.

Look, love or hate Chris Farley, Tommy Boy has a clear structure that drives the characters forward and it's the plot progression which drives the jokes. Even nonsense gags, like "fat guy in a little coat" can work in that context because they're anchored to a plot progression. Which is why even Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore worked, not because Sandler is a great comedic talent, but because the movies had a clear structure which supported the jokes.

The problem with modern comedies is that, since they're being shot on the super-cheap, they're shot like overlong improv sets. Look at Ghostbusters 2016: they just would roll camera for 45 minutes, and then cut it down to 2 minutes of "funny" in the editing room. That's not how you build a comedy! It doesn't matter how funny the actors are, if you don't have a solid plot structure driving things forward, it's never going to work. The jokes are decoration on a solid structure, they are not the structure themselves.

(There are counter-examples to this- stuff like Caddyshack, or Anchorman, but there you're dealing with lightning-in-a-bottle success, not a reliable way to build a working comedy)
 
2020-08-12 10:13:39 PM  

Trocadero: Great_Milenko: Nameless_Guy: I think I understand what he's saying, but I fully disagree. I don't consider Ragnarok or Ant-Man to be comedies, per se. They're Marvel/comic book movies that have comedic elements. They added comedy to the overall premise to make the characters more relatable and to make the movies more enjoyable. At their core, though, they're comic book/action/science-fictionesque* movies, with a dash of humour.

Both Ant Man movies are light adventure flicks with comedic elements.  The character's powers fit well with the format.

I'm one of the minority who doesn't worship Thor: Ragnarok as the apex of all things MCU.  I felt it crossed the line between adventure with comedic elements into broad farce.  Almost like one of those "so-and-so Movie" parodies.  I get that space in the MCU in general is a silly place (much like Camelot) but something in Ragnarok just didn't work for me like it did in the first GotG movie.

It was the first movie where the heroes truly lost something major (Asgard). You have all these refugees, many who just watched those weird Hela zombies kill a bunch of their friends and family while they were trying to get on the escape ship. They're watching the only home they've ever know blow up. Perfect time to throw in a mediocre joke.


It's fascinating how paradoxical Thor: Ragnarok is. The word "Ragnarok" itself means death/twilight of the Gods. Plus throw in the fact that Thor's sister is literally the Goddess of Death and you have a movie guaranteed to be really dark with a huge body count.

And yet....it's funny. Very funny. In fact, an argument can be made that it's the funniest movie in the MCU. And I still can't figure out how Taika Waititi pulled it off; how he was able to take something so grim and put so much humor in it without undermining the seriousness of Asgardian's suffering and their planet's destruction. But he did.
 
2020-08-12 10:32:40 PM  
He's kinda right.  I don't seek out "comedies" anymore because comedy is in everything, and having pure, uncut comedy... ugh, it's dated.  I have a family member who watches sitcoms with laugh tracks, and it's like torture.

Comedy works for me when it's part of something else.  The funny parts of Better Call Saul are funnier to me because they're unexpected and part of something larger.  Sure, there was nothing funny about watching Lalo's people get massacred, but it WAS funny to see Kim Wexler berate him for coming after Jimmy.  It was funny to see Jimmy threaten and bully Kevin Wachtel into a state of shocked submission.  It was funny to see poor Hector drop a cup just to leer at a nurse's butt.  There's danger and evil and disgust, but also... comedy.
 
2020-08-12 11:46:36 PM  
DRTFA- is Seth pissy that he doesn't have Taika Waititi's comedy chops?
 
2020-08-12 11:58:05 PM  
Rogen is a douche.
What he did to Preacher is a crime.
What he did to Kevin Smith is a crime.
There is only so much comedy brilliance that can come from a lazy stoned guy and only so many times it can be repeated before no one cares.
 
2020-08-13 1:32:59 AM  

Friend_Computer: DRTFA- is Seth pissy that he doesn't have Taika Waititi's comedy chops?


Maybe you should read it then.
 
2020-08-13 2:58:13 AM  
Seth Rogen ruined Paul. He had way, way too familiar a voice. I never thought of an alien when I heard it. Just Seth.
 
2020-08-13 4:40:38 AM  
Rogen's films always seem like what they probably are - him and his friends throwing ad-libbed shiat at the wall and seeing what sticks.

I've always found this to be a great explanation for why so much 'Hollywood' comedy is meh and how you could do it better if you actually understood the art of film-making.

Edgar Wright - How to Do Visual Comedy
Youtube 3FOzD4Sfgag
 
2020-08-13 6:40:47 AM  

Subtonic: TDWCom29: Bslim: Seth Rogen knows about comedy?

He's made a living as a comedian and comic actor for almost 20 years so....yes? Anyone who makes their living doing comedy (yes, even that comedian you hate and think is as funny as a baby's funeral) know about comedy.

No. I want an exception made for Jeff Dunham. Or at least re-categorization as 'low-brow performance artist'.


Now that's comedy!
 
2020-08-13 9:52:08 AM  
DO NOT SPEAK AGAINST COLORING BOOK MOVIES AND TRIGGER THE DORK WRATH
 
2020-08-13 9:57:24 AM  
Marvel movies are pretty much all retreads of the 80's buddy cop action/comedy formula.
 
2020-08-13 12:03:40 PM  

BullBearMS: Marvel movies are pretty much all retreads of the 80's buddy cop action/comedy formula.


Captain Marvel is the only one that really hews to that mold, and it's done on purpose. For a true 80s buddy cop formula, you need three things:

A) Both characters are cops (or some equivalent authority).
B) One of them is a by-the-book career professional, while the other is a fish out of water, a wild card or a screwup. The new partner is often a rookie, a member of a different agency, or a civilian. Bonus points if one of them prefers to work alone and doesn't want a partner.
C) They're forced to work together, either by orders or circumstance, to solve the same case or bring down the same criminal.

Iron Man is none of those things. Neither is Thor. Captain America owes more to the war and spy genres. Ant-Man and the Guardians of the Galaxy are the criminals. Doctor Strange could be argued to be a spirit world policeman, but he has co-workers, not partners. There's more to the buddy cop formula than just "two guys with different methods have an adventure together". The cop genre involves working within or around an organized system to accomplish an assignment, something movies like Ragnarok absolutely don't have. That one's more of a rambling roadtrip.
 
2020-08-13 1:29:11 PM  

EdgeRunner: BullBearMS: Marvel movies are pretty much all retreads of the 80's buddy cop action/comedy formula.

Captain Marvel is the only one that really hews to that mold, and it's done on purpose. For a true 80s buddy cop formula, you need three things:

A) Both characters are cops (or some equivalent authority).
B) One of them is a by-the-book career professional, while the other is a fish out of water, a wild card or a screwup. The new partner is often a rookie, a member of a different agency, or a civilian. Bonus points if one of them prefers to work alone and doesn't want a partner.
C) They're forced to work together, either by orders or circumstance, to solve the same case or bring down the same criminal.

Iron Man is none of those things. Neither is Thor. Captain America owes more to the war and spy genres. Ant-Man and the Guardians of the Galaxy are the criminals. Doctor Strange could be argued to be a spirit world policeman, but he has co-workers, not partners. There's more to the buddy cop formula than just "two guys with different methods have an adventure together". The cop genre involves working within or around an organized system to accomplish an assignment, something movies like Ragnarok absolutely don't have. That one's more of a rambling roadtrip.


Nope.  The trope doesn't require those things.

The formula is: action sequence, 'splosion, pithy quip.

That's damn near all of Marvel lately.
 
2020-08-13 3:36:55 PM  

BullBearMS: EdgeRunner: BullBearMS: Marvel movies are pretty much all retreads of the 80's buddy cop action/comedy formula.

Captain Marvel is the only one that really hews to that mold, and it's done on purpose. For a true 80s buddy cop formula, you need three things:

A) Both characters are cops (or some equivalent authority).
B) One of them is a by-the-book career professional, while the other is a fish out of water, a wild card or a screwup. The new partner is often a rookie, a member of a different agency, or a civilian. Bonus points if one of them prefers to work alone and doesn't want a partner.
C) They're forced to work together, either by orders or circumstance, to solve the same case or bring down the same criminal.

Iron Man is none of those things. Neither is Thor. Captain America owes more to the war and spy genres. Ant-Man and the Guardians of the Galaxy are the criminals. Doctor Strange could be argued to be a spirit world policeman, but he has co-workers, not partners. There's more to the buddy cop formula than just "two guys with different methods have an adventure together". The cop genre involves working within or around an organized system to accomplish an assignment, something movies like Ragnarok absolutely don't have. That one's more of a rambling roadtrip.

Nope.  The trope doesn't require those things.

The formula is: action sequence, 'splosion, pithy quip.

That's damn near all of Marvel lately.


That's an action movie, not a buddy movie.  Learn your genres so you don't look a fool.
 
Displayed 19 of 69 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.