This is an outstanding recut of the first Cap movie (which I coincidentally recently watched again). I viscerally felt Steve's anger when he chased after the bad guy in your recut version which I didn't before. This is so smart and good to keep in mind when writing.
Cap is my favorite Avenger, but if I'm being honest, I feel like it wasn't until Winter Soldier came out that his story really resonated with me and made me care about him and the MCU, and while I do appreciate the first movie, I feel like you really illustrated why it always felt like it admittedly fell a little short.
Exactly. I agree completely. The Captain America trilogy are my favorite movies of all of the Marvel movies but the 1st one is definitely the weakest. Leave the weakest. Captain America Winter soldier and Captain America Civil War the last 1 being my absolute favorite Marvel movie, I think are better but the 1st 1 is good but these flaws have merit.
This recut made me realize something though: the filmmakers didn't want that odd photoshopped Chris Evans to be the first thing the viewers saw. That's why they started with bits to peak our interest in the adventure story and bigger conflict.
Watch Agents of SHIELD. You'll love it even more than MCU. All of the characters have strong moral compass to guide them throughout the story. Something Steve Rogers is known for. Plus, they're just ordinary people trying to save the world, working from the shadows, and they are able to sacrifice their own life for greater good. What's not to like? :) Person of Interest (and possibly 12 Monkeys and Fringe) is very similar to this.
Off the top if my head: Going off of the changes you already highlighted, I would have added a scene showing Steve attempting to send letters to contact Bucky after being pushed into PR, but being unable to reach his friend, since Bucky's unit is engaged in a dangerous/secret mission. This would show Steve wanting to stay involved and relevant with both the war effort and his friend's life, but feeling inadequate or ignored on both fronts. After that, I'd add a moment showing Steve actively looking forward to performing for Bucky's unit, and attempting to see him in the crowd, so that Bucky's absence hit him at the same time as the soldiers' distain. This would highlight the dichotomy of Steve's character, as pointed out out by Bucky, that be both wants to do the right thing for its own sake, AND he wants to prove himself as worthy to others. After rescuing Bucky's unit, I would add a moment where Steve gets caught up in the admiration and praise from his fellow soldiers, maybe even a moment where Steve is physically separated from an injured and winded Bucky, before coming back to help his friend. This would show that while Steve is a good person, he is vulnerable to being swayed by the alure of adoring fans. He is not superhumanly immune to pride. The existing scene of Steve being seduced by Queen Margery, and Peggy's reaction to it, would then be mirrored in the audience, as we worry how far Steve will allow himself to be seduced by accolades. I'd add some clips in the battle montage of Steve being venerated, alongside Steve being a genuine selfless hero. In the train scene, I'd add a moment where Bucky asks Steve for the shield, the symbol of his new status, and have Steve hesitate, for just a moment, before handing it to his friend. I would NOT have this hesitation cause Bucky's 'death', but I would have Steve's guilt over his hesitation feed into his survivor's guilt, and lead to an added moment where Steve questions his own motivations, and if he is worthy of Dr. Tucci's trust. I would add a scene to highlight and reinforce Steve's sense of grief and guilt, of becoming the battlehardened soldier, who can no longer afford naive, idealistic optimism, even as he draws closer to Peggy as a way to keep a spark of that optimism alive. In Steve's final conversation with Peggy, I would add a line where the dance Steve would have, if he chose to save himself, would be at a military PR ball, where the President himself had requested an audience with Captain America.
On the subject of the 1st Plot Point, the Impossible Choice, I think the film is doing exactly what it needs to, treating Steve as a passive character. It's a huge part of the comics, and it's a huge part of this movie developing his character. He was meant to be treated like a monkey, and we were meant to sizzle with his frustration in that, up to the boiling point: when he chooses to go behind enemy lines. I think the best way for us to resonate with his frustration is to be frustrated ourselves, and the movie delivered that. If he had become an active character sooner, we would have had him becoming passive again for nearly no reason, as opposed to the "wanting to do the right thing and obey his country" motif we see him believe at the beginning of the story. That we can trail with his passivity early on through all of the early events makes his stand to do the right thing soo much stronger later. The Opening Scene of discovering a Shield in Ice is exactly what you called it out to be: "This will be important later." And I think it is necessary. It's a prologue scene (developed at the onset of end-credit scenes becoming the massive hit they are now). It is meant to be dropped and then remembered at the end, after he goes into the ice. (Imagine how boring that scene would be at the end before he is rescued and wakes up! So much suspense for what we already know is under the ice.. it doesn't work quite as well, but is necessary to arrive at him being rescued). I agree with what you're saying about the villain as it pertains to this one story, this one movie. However, Marvel movies also carry the weight of connecting a universe. A larger story happening outside of what we are seeing is one of the reasons the MCU was able to get off the ground the way it did, a lesson learned from the comics and other superhero movies that came out before Stark shows up at the bar at the end of The Incredible Hulk. It's worth noting, that 2 components of the MCU are being developed in conjunction with this story. - The 1st at the time, was the development of HYDRA. An organization that we would need to understand both for the MCU leading into CA:The Winter Soldier as well as the arcs developed in Agents of Shield. - The 2nd, was early groundwork for the then in-development Avenger's Movie, which the opening scene of finding the shield in ice also establishes. The Tesseract serves as both the portal opportunity for Loki, as well as a major weapon he uses against earth to introduce the Chitauri - As a side note, I think the villain scenes with the Tesseract drop A METRIC TON of lore that is significant to both Thor and the entire Infinity Stones arc, although arguably they might not have known that was what they were going to do with it that early on. So I agree with a lot of what you're saying, for the sake of improving a movie in isolation of the rest. I just also think that it does a lot more than what you see in this single story. Maybe, if you're going to cut some stuff out, scenes could be written to help keep so much of the essential information in. I loved your cut of Steve going after the spy.
Captain America. The first avenger is one of my favorite marvel movies, too. Reverting back to the video that you made about strong female characters. I think that Peggy Carter is one of the strongest, best marvel, female characters. She’s strong and tough, but still leaves you feeling as though she is loving and caring at the same time.
I’m amazed at how much time you take to analyze and break this all down for us-with timestamps and everything. Thank you!! I’ve been catching up on all of your past videos and they’ve been life changing. In my book, I was going to have the romance as adults be instant (bc they loved each other as kids) but through your “slow burn romance” video I realized I want to stretch it out with hand brushes and reigniting the flame slowly. You helped me write an awesome new scene with a Re-meet cute. And your three act series has also helped me write new scenes. I realize my inciting incident is different than I thought. And this video too is helping me verify that my beginning (as of now) is the right one. Thank you!!!
I agree that some scenes could have been shot with more emphasis on Steve's PoV, ramping up the mystery - but I would also like to argue in favour of at least one prologue. Admittedly the first one could easily have been cut - it's really there for fans of the original comics, who would recognise Captain America's shield and wonder what he's doing in the ice. It also links back to the previous movie, Thor, by reintroducing SHIELD, but I don't think we really needed that - they don't even exist in the 1940s of the MCU. However the second prologue is more critical since, as other commenters have said, it establishes the movie as set in a fantasy world where magical artefacts exist alongside modern technology. By contrast, starting with Steve's struggles to sign up would make it seem like a straight historical action flick. (Incidentally, this prologue is really all about introducing the Tesseract, not Schmidt - it is this macguffin that will be the focus of Loki's actions in the next movie and beyond.) Setting genre expectations is a critical function of an opening scene/chapter, and in this case it wasn't possible to do this and simultaneously introduce the protagonist, as he is completely unaware of what he's up against. It's the exact same reason Lord of the Rings opens with a prologue (which coincidentally also features Hugo Weaving!) - they introduce the viewer to an unfamiliar world and set up the external stakes for the hero - this isn't just about a war, it's about a powerful magical artefact that the villain desires above all else. Contrast this with Frozen, where Anna's conflict is inextricably tied to Elsa's magic, and therefore the opening five minutes can introduce both. Also, kids' movies have to move a lot faster to hook the viewer, whereas movies for adults can be a bit more leisurely - which is not to say that a great hook is ever a bad idea!
I agree, you articulated perfectly what I was thinking while she talked about the prologue. "It's a comic book movie! This is what they do!" They use these framing devices to establish the world and get you excited about seeing these characters that you're familiar with.
BLASPHEMY!!! LOL. 'fans of the original comics' already know he went into the icy waters for decades(1940's to 60's in comics till the iconic Avengers #4). You are correct about children vs adults attention spans to a degree, but I also feel the world building doesn't have to be told right away like LOTR which is a much more complicated backstory than WWII, which humans are familiar with, vs a made up fantasy world, coincidentally created based on Tolkien's experience in War!
I really like the analysis and as a writer myself, I am highly interested in concepts like "science of story". I think you're right about many things, thank you for your effort! :) Nevertheless, I for myself am trying to stay openminded (not saying you're not!). Writing is an art. Technically, there is no right or wrong. As there is also no right or wrong for paintings. You, my dear writers, should listen to the advice out there how to create good stories, because the advice is there for a reason. But never forget that writers are artists. You don't have to follow the rules. You can do things differently if you want to. Follow your heart and write something you truly love :)
This is the best, please continue :) The only problem I can see with this editing would be you cut out any establishment of outer boundaries of what the writers expect the audience to believe. For example, showing magic immediately in Harry Potter or showing a shot of the Imperial fleet in Star Wars before going down to the seemingly "regular" characters. That might be less of a problem, since the audience has certain expectations going into a Marvel film, but this is the value I see in the opening scene. The mysterious setting of a frozen and alien-looking spaceship, lights, and amazed scientists lets the audience accept the possibility of the supernatural happening here. But I totally agree with going deeper into his perspective on the rest! Love this video
Yes! This is why I don't watch action movies. They're all about the CGI and the action and sometimes plot, and after watching them for 2 hours, I forget it all within 2 days. You've nailed the reason, though I couldn't explain why before this. I'd rather watch a Disney movie because at least I can care about those characters.
There have been some great villains in the MCU. Loki, Thanos, and Killmonger, Wilson Fisk in the Netflix show. Sadly they're few and far between. Captain America: The First Avenger certainly would have benefitted from less villain stuff in the beginning. Steve is such a lovable character and I think they were really banking on what fans already know about him from the comics rather than trying to draw new people in, hence the reason they showed the shield in the beginning. Would've loved to have spent more time with Steve pre-serum.
The shield showing makes no sense since we fans already know what it is and this is a CA movie not The Incredible Hulk. We know we'll see it eventually so that scene did little in the overall scheme of things. They teased in Ironman 2, the shield concept. If the shield ice scene appeared in Thor, IM2 or IH it would have had more weight(though vibranium is half the weight of steel and much more durable 😜), matter of fact I'll bet that was supposed to be an end credits scene to one of the prior movies and it wasn't used, then TACKED ON to TFA last minute to justify the cost of shooting it.
When she was asking all the "what if" questions I almost expected her to ask "What if Captain Carter were the first Avenger?" (as in a reference to the marvel show "What if..."'s first episode.)
As much as I love this movie, I know you're probably going to be right. But I'm waiting for it to start in the next 110 minutes.....So if anybody needs me, I'll just be here. Staring at my screen. Waiting. You know, like ya do.
Would you be against doing another video like this? I keep coming back to it, because the new edit really does change the audience experience. Would love to see deep perspective applied to more works!
I have to say I disagree in a major way with Steve being passive early on and things just being done to him - it's clearly established that he is desperate to enlist and is rejected due to his health. He actively chooses to join the programme that ultimately selects him to be the supersoldier experiment, and the grenade scene just establishes why he's chosen. That he'd follow through on a decision he's basically already made really isn't something that needs to be repeated with it's own scene and the idea he's just passively accepting being experimented on ignores that he's clearly already made that decision.
This was exactly what I needed for my novel! I have two main characters, where the one mc had the opening scene in chapter one, but my main protagonist's first scene was in the second chapter. This helps so much!
I am writing a story, but I introduced my side character first, some published books do not introduce the protagonist until later in the first chapter, or the protagonist could be introduced in the second chapter or later. While there's nothing wrong with introducing the side character first, I realised that it may be better to introduce my protagonist first, even if I do manage to uncover the protagonist's internal conflict when he was introduced while my side character is introduced at the beginning. My problem was that when I heard the meaning of internal conflict 'why what happens matters to the protagonist', I often just come up with a reason of why it matters, but I felt something wasn't right. The whole point is that 'why what happens matters to the protagonist' the 'fear' part. I found that I messed it up quite a bit. After I got the desire, I end up on making up the fear that seemingly making sense when it is actually more beyond that. Now that I decided to introduce my protagonist at the beginning, there is a possibility that I could still mess up my story somewhere. I had to look up on other videos about internal conflict for me to have a better understanding of it. Some films seemed to be very addicting, but what makes them addictive to watch? Is it the external conflict, or the internal conflict? There are some films that seemingly interesting, but when I tried to fit it in with the 3 act story structure it sometimes gets very frustrating. There are some films I watched, such as Broken Arrow 1996, this film is interesting, I didn't seem to find the protagonist's internal conflict in the first five minutes of the film. In that film, the protagonist, Riley Hale, along with his fellow, Vic Deakins, were assigned to fly a stealth bomber, carrying two nuclear weapons, to test the vulnerability to radar and gamma ray detection. While they were in the plane, Vic Deakins attempts to kill Riley Hale but failed, they broke into a fight and Vic Deakins attempted to eject the nuclear weapons, then he ejected Riley Hale out of the plane, then he ejected the nuclear weapons. Riley safely landed. I bet that was when his internal conflict started, he wanted to get back the weapon, but he doesn't know how he would complete this task on his own, given that he wasn't familiar with the place he was landed in. At this point, someone came in to his aid, and together, they went to complete this task. The film The Next Three Days, the protagonist, John Brannen changed from a teacher in community college to a robber and murderer, just so he could break his wife Lara out of prison and stay safe because she was falsely accused of murdering her boss and sentenced to life time imprisonment and the lawyer said that there's no way he could get Lara out of prison. John's Internal Conflict seemed to be something like this. Desire: Get his wife Lara out of prison the illegal way Fear: He may fail as he had already failed to get her out the legal way Misbelief: He think it would be impossible to get Lara out of prison. I don't know if I am right in my analysis of the last two films about internal conflict, I could be wrong. I don't want to talk too much about these films here, I am merely expressing that even if a film does seem to hook the audience or have shown how the protagonist had changed, it doesn't always mean that it is character driven (there is a chance that the audience was simply hooked by the plot of these films). The Next Three days seemed to be better, though I don't know if there should be other things included in there. Please keep making videos like this one.
I totally forgot all of that other stuff was in the beginning of the film and it didn't actually start with Steve...because those things never mattered. And now that I'm thinking back, I remember putting it on with a friend and we were confused, thinking we put on the wrong movie
What I will say is comic fans would know what the shield and the hydra pin were. It's an opening made for comics fans. Almost like a different style intro, in a way. It's amazing how different it is with the deep perspective cuts.
The need to show the shield before the man, is the Shield is before the importance of the man; its relative to the comic aspect of the character. When referencing Captain America the most iconic part of Captain America is the Shield a lot is built around it. Seeing the shield in the snow and the plane is telling the final events of Cap's fate in reverse, why those two agents were there is to find the man who held that Shield. Also that symbol has changed since the comic's debut its not the great hope it once was, yet the film identifies the fallen glory they are in search of truly frozen in time for what it meant at its height, when it comes to Steve Rogers is a banner man before he is a great hero. You learn later the man is more than worthy of the task, not a great man built by the role of Captain America, they go hand in hand without one creating the other. That sequence is relative to the comics sequence, its been some time since I had the first issue and privilege of reading it. (disclaimer) I can't reference the book as I type.
I think that's some amazing analogy 🙂 I loved the film when I was younger but if it's cut the way you suggest it would be farr better! The film Panic Room is cut in a way where we're introduced to characters first and then see the antagonists. So we're already invested, even though we get an omnipresent view as an audience, which is what most film's are like. I can only think of one example of experiencing the events through a characters perspective completely. The film 1917, where we only find out what's happening next in the story when the character does. So in Panic Room we wouldn't be shown the criminals breaking into the house, instead just see and hear them as Jodie Foster's character and her daughter do. For building up tension and having an immersive experience it's amazing 🙂
I never thought about that point of view until you explained here and I definitely resonate with it, but I guess the reason why they made the movie that way is because of the audience. I have seen a few movies or shows with that idea of keeping the perspective of the main protagonist for a while and people complaining, especially when it comes to movies, that villains aren't introduced until later on so 'nothing happens in the first few minutes' which is completely untrue of course, but, as much as I would be super invested if Steve's story was covered like that (because I too was more invested in seeing that on the first watch and mainly payed attention to the villain's part because it was gonna be important later) I know for sure a lot of people would critizied that. So I guess, when it comes to villains that are 'so far' from the protagonist, movies choose to alternate both perspectives to keep viewers invested, especially in actions movies where mostly of the audience wants to go straight to the action.
I don't know if I ever left a comment here before but if not: Thank you for this! I love the Avengers and especially Cap, but I always skip over the first minutes and I didn't think about it. They are just scenes that I'm not curious to watch (for me, they are boring). After watching this video it makes totally sense to me! And I think that is the reason why so many people find Cap boring and for example Iron Man more exciting. I think I'll have to watch both movies with this things in mind again. Thank you!
I think their is many ways to rewrite Captain America, but your take on it was too good to top lol. Oh by the way this anime called Death note has a great storytelling structure you should consider review it or just watch it... Ps it's classic/beloved anime, really enjoyed your work keep it up Abbie.
Great points -- and you incidentally revealed why it is so hard to write Captain America. For example, you spoke about giving Steve options ("stay safe and be a clerk" vs "take the risk to be a super soldier"). Steve's personality is such that this wouldn't be interesting. He is such an iconic character that almost everyone knows he would never pick the safe option over his duty as a soldier. This is why Winter Soldier and Civil War were such brilliant scripts: they put Steve into positions that challenged his pure moral character and presented him with choices he would find hard to make.
2:34 While I agree that newcomers to Captain America will most likely not know the significance of the future Avenger's shield being frozen in ice, the fact that this movie was written with a heavy leaning toward the comic fans is quite clear. The comic, Captain America #1, was released in 1941. As you might have guessed, it was a staple of exemplary heroism. One that helped give kids a sense of imagination at a time when true fascists were attempting world domination (hence all the 'Hail Hydra' proclamations by a litany of bad guys). However, for the sake of teaching us all how to do this better, I do agree with you. The recut proved your point.
I love your edit much better than the original cut. We didn't get to the protagonist until 8 minutes into the movie. The first time I saw this I was thinking, "What's this story about?" I realize that is just the "Disney 5 minute" programming, but it seemed like they could have done a better job of cutting the film.
Love your perspective on this. As someone who had been a fan of Joe Johnston's Rocketeer and had seen enough Captain America material, I really wanted to love this film. But I couldn't. I liked Anthony Stark being there and some of the visual design work for the film as well as Steve's quite moments, but that was pretty much it. The movie felt very disposable for me even though I know pulp hero genre tales pumping out disposable tales is supposed to be par for the course. With this reframing of the narrative, I think this could have been much more compelling and a little sad. But at the time Marvel films weren't really allowed to be that sad without being overshadowed by jokes every other moment.
I love your take on this 🤩 I honestly think the villain scenes could have been replaced with flashback to Steves childhood, so we could get deeper into his motivation and struggles with joining the army/internal conflict. He is a wery interesting character I would like to learn more about. He is my favorite avenger ... next to spiderman 😄
Interesting video! I agree with most of what you say here, and you got me thinking, so I will attempt to be brief and offer two thoughts: -- I disagree that Steve was passive. From the beginning, we know that he's been trying to join the army, over and over. We don't get to see it begin, but we see him stand up to the bully in the theater to exemplify what he's been trying to do - to stand up to the Nazis. Everything that happened after was because of his *active persistence* to do this. The incident you mentioned - rescuing Bucky - wasn't the first time he was active, it was him coming back to himself (with Peggy's help) after his existential crisis of getting what he thought he wanted (joining the army) and finding out it wasn't satisfying. Going off to save Bucky recontextualized his goal - that of saving lives. -- Secondly, it's interesting to note that almost all the Marvel origin stories buck that Disney formula - because Marvel was world-building. Almost all the solo movies start outside in, rather than inside out - they give us a sense of the world and set the stage before introducing the protagonist, and *usually through how they're viewed* (Tony Stark, Thor, Dr Strange, Capt Marvel) before getting to actually know them. Maybe that's not as engaging, but it seems to be how Marvel wanted to build their universe, and for the most part it seems to have worked.
I’ve learned more from this channel than any other, and Abbie’s insights have elevated my writing. Second place goes to Jenna Moreci. Without these two, my book series would not be what it is. Many thanks, ladies 🙂❤️
@@unicorntomboy9736 As Abbie says, make me fall in love with/like/relate to the character(s) quickly and you’ve got it made. Setting is rarely what people focus on. It IS important, but the characters come first. Tell the story, then put the icing on the cake by making someone fall in love with the setting as well (as a secondary thing) even if they have no interest in racing. THAT would be good writing in my opinion. 🙂👍🏼
@@GarekGeo Thanks for the advice. I have learned over time that having compelling characters is the most important thing, more than plot or setting (even though those things do help too).
@UCstffmxdhRhvxP6aNB6tgVg Self doubt. Maybe he was always told he wasn’t good enough, or had an older brother who could do anything he set his mind to, and your char believes he can’t. Maybe he has delusions of grandeur on top of all that, of taking that victory lap with all eyes and applause falling to him, thereby outdoing, or at least keeping pace with, his older brother. Maybe it could be a younger brother showing him up. That’d be even worse! 😂 Better yet, look inside yourself. What do you struggle with? If you use that, then you’d be writing what you know, intimately, and your char would be all the more real. 🤔
My problem with your recut is that we have to see Redskull's evil to want Steve to succeed in stamping it out. We have to see Redskull killing Walder Frey in order to understand that threat he poses. As for the stuff at the beginning with the SHIELD agents and the finding of the plane and the shield, seeing what will happen before seeing Steve's ultimate story arc will make us care that much more for him when we see the stinger at the end when we meet Nick Fury. Thing is too we'll have plenty of films to be with Steve as the hero, but seeing his origin story in tandem with Schmidt makes us fear that much more for Steve when he is thrust from that observer, to active involvement. Ultimately this is one of my favourite Marvel films. I love Cap's arc, with the exception of where he ends up at the end of "Avengers: Endgame." I usually do agree with your analysis in your videos, but not this time Abbie. We need to see what Steve is up against to appreciate what he ultimately sacrifices. Couple that with the fact Hugo Weaving complained enough throughout the making of this film due to the makeup, he had to earn his paycheck through all the scenes he was in.
Whoa, I don't even remember the villain in Captain America, lol. And when you mentioned Prince Caspian I realized that I haven't seen it. So I went to go watch it. And here I am, a little over two hours later. It was a great movie that gave me emotions at some of the conflicts the characters faced. I watch it in a different way, noting how we were introduced to characters, and how the 3 act structure came to life in movie form. It was fun to watch and also melancholy since in a way I knew what to expect next. Thanks so much for this fun look at a different perspective for Captain America. :)
thank you, it makes so much sense! the movie would have been so much more compelling the way you show it, one cannot ignore basic story structure that has been proven to work.
It's not even funny how right you are, I also always felt there was something missing in this (one of my most watched MCU movies) movie. What you're suggesting would have kept the balance between interest in the protagonist and suspense about the antagonist perfectly. It probably would have made the antagonist seem even more ominous and his plans more sinister making cap's characteristic bravery all the more impressive
Steve is my favorite avenger by far. Captain America the first avenger, Captain America Winter soldier and then Captain America Civil War are my favorite Marvel movies. Civil War is my absolute favorite Marvel movie. Because it has so much internal conflict between people who are friends. And it shows what it means to stand by your principles no matter what. It also does a fantastic job of making Tony Stark the villain of the movie. Baron zemo is only a secondary villain to get Tony Stark to become his worst self. It is foreshadowed in Age of Ultron that ultron is kind of the worst side of Tony Stark but then you see in Captain America Civil War Tony Stark being the villain and Steve Rogers making the decision (as said by Sharon Carter at the funeral of Peggy) to stand like a tree and say no you move. To do the right thing in spite of pressure from friends to cave to convenience or safety or guilt because something sad happened. I subscribed. Got a new follower.
I agree with some of your points, but I think some of this comes down to style as well. People who go to see superhero movies expect action, adventure, and stunning visuals and the creators of those films are going to cater to that audience, sometimes at the slight expense of going deep into the character. I think Marvel movies generally do a good job of balancing character development with action, but there are different priorities from what you would see in other some other genres. Also, many fans of Marvel movies are already comic book fans and are already invested in the character. Introducing the villain later in the movie would have been a cool move and I agree that it would have made the movie more suspenseful. As for the first scene, most people, even non comic fans, are familiar with Captain America's shield, so I don't think they were worried about most audience members not making the connection. If this were a standalone film, I would agree with starting with Steve, but sandwiching the film with present day scenes was a way to connect it to the rest of the MCU and establish how it fit in. The end of the film could have done that job on its own, but the opening scene makes us wonder how Steve ended up in the ice and lets us know that his story is going to be relevant to the overall universe and not just a standalone WW2 era superhero story. As for his being a passive character, I think his choice was to join the super soldier program to begin with. By the time he was chosen to become Captain America, it had already been established that Steve was not the kind of person who would choose a military desk job. I think the reason Captain America feels a bit flat sometimes is not because Steve is passive, but because he's so single minded, so driven, and so unwavering in his personal morality that it's hard to present him with an impossible choice. Steve Rogers is lawful good, he has no moral greyness. It's really not until Civil War that he has to make some hard choices. He's so good as to be boring. The only other Avenger with such an uncomplicated morality is Thor, and the only reason his story is interesting is because we get to see him overcome his flaws to become who he is. Steve is ultimately static, he's always been good, only his exterior changes, and while that's the point, it also makes him less engaging than the other Avengers.
I would like to see your take on Train to Busan to be honest. I think it is a really, really good zombie film and it would be interesting to see you analyse it with your own biases towards what is good and what is not good
ABBIE YES!!! In the most coincidental of events, my brother and I just watched CA:TFA a few days ago, starting our rewatch of the MCU films in chronological order. CA:TFA has been my favorite of them all since I first saw it several years ago, but watching it again with a more adult perspective, I was thinking about how the two beginnings before we meet Steve is...a lot. I was talking to my brother about this and we both agreed the start of the story could be improved. Then, out of all the movies you could've analyzed, you do this one! I am very entertained by this 😂Thank you so much for such a great video! I can't imagine all the time it takes to edit these; thanks for caring about us!
I feel like editing changes could better the villain too, not just the protagonist, sometimes knowing less is more. Seeing Red Skull as an ominous threat. Because the scenes don’t do anything to expand upon the character. Unlike Baron Von Zemo in Civil War, who’s doing all he’s doing for a reason that gets built upon with each clue and each scene he’s in, Red Skull doesn’t get expanded upon as anything other than a power-hungry Hitler with no depth. So if he’s not needed in the sense of depth, showing him only from Rogers’s perspective could make him more interesting because it leaves the audience wanting more and could add more suspense, not knowing what the villain is doing next or what they got under their sleeve
It's amazing how completely different the outcome would've been I just find this video a work of a genius!! Best part is I was actually confused about the narration style I would go with, the dilemma was Third Person Omniscient vs. First Person, and let me tell you she just settled the matter right away. Every time I watch her videos I just get more and more in admiration of her work!
I think it's because Captain America is a comic book adaptation, and thus maybe the director assumes the audience are Marvel comic book fans who already understand the character of Steve Rodgers. It's partly why with the MCU Spider-Man movies we don't see Peter Parker's origin story yet again after two film series prior to it
Abbie - I thoroughly enjoy your breakdowns & insights. In fact, this video alone has given me much to consider on my own historical adventure novel that I am writing: Much like the Capt. America film I had the introduction of the antagonist and “the stakes” before the protagonist and his “desire”. (Now I certainly see why I should reconsider). Would it be possible for you to review Characters of films that were popular, but ‘appeared’ to have “flat” Arcs/Desires? • Jaws • E.T. • The Lord of the Rings Thanks for all that you do!
OMG THANK YOUUUUU!!! Idk why but I’m like proud that you are trying out this new sort of movie break down format lol. I’m so glade to see your perspective on this kind of stuff. Thank youuuuuuu
Abbie, I wonder what you think of the new hope, there for the first 15 minutes, we travel with droids and then in just 17 minutes we first meet the protagonist, Luke Skywalker. But it works perfectly. I'd love for you to make a video of it too. 🙂
that depends on who you consider the protagonist. i think there are multiple MC's in star wars usually there are three for every trilogy set of stories so Luke,Han, Leia for the original, Anakin, Padme, Obi wan, for the prequals, and Rey, Poe and Finn for the equals, with each equal having its main villlan, in a new hope its darth vader, though in the prequals its the separatists in general( but more hidden and in depth) and in the sequals its kylo ren but all these villains are having there strings pulled by the overarching villain Palpatine! its really clever if you think about it.
I totally agree! Now I understand why this movie is one of the least compelling in the MCU to me. It seems like they put the focus on the external conflict with Schmidt rather than Cap's internal conflict, which changes a lot over the film. That's why they put Schmidt in the hook and it just doesn't work as well.
I don’t honk when he reason we know he isn’t just being a passive character is : the music during the scene, the closeups showing a eureka moment ( they agree without words) and the fact that Steve had already stated this soo animately. These make up for the lack of words. This also shows that Steve was a man of few words. More action.
Actually, the doctor told Steve about Schmidt a few minutes before the whole changing happened. They also talked about why he would stay away from him and not end up like him as well.
My initial reaction to CA: TFA was that the opening had too many spoilers and no hero. We don't even see Steve as a "Capsicle" (as Tony Stark called him in The Avengers). I felt we should have seen clips from the current first scene during a brief voiceover from Fury when he first meets Cap. The new first scene would be Steve making a stand (and getting beaten up); then we cut to the ultimate bully in a shorter version of the tesseract grab, followed by Dr. Erskine's interview with Steve (and probably the intro to Stark to counterbalance Schmidt). Then we have the Red Skull's confrontation with and elimination of the regular Nazis (he's worse than ordinary Nazis, folks!) to establish his threat level. We do not need to know that he has found Dr. Erskine; we'll figure that out for ourselves later. It would be good to see Steve choose to be the super soldier, though his choice is absolutely predictable. A quibble: you talk about how passive Steve is before Dr. Erskine's death. Not quite true: during the procedure, Steve screams, and it is almost aborted, but he insists that he can take it, so he is transformed. I would also have abbreviated the "performing monkey" segment--it dragged on too long. Still, perhaps your minimalist approach to the villain wouldn't have lost anything important and would have sped up and strengthened a part that I thought limped.
I've always wondered why I didn't like this movie as much as I wanted to. Your explanation is spot on. I'd really like to see the recut version. Thanks.
I agree about cutting out the first scene, although it is meant to introduce us to S.H.I.E.L.D. I didn't remember the first part until you showed. I thought the movie was drawn out and a bit slow. I became more interested when the protagonist was introduced.
Excellent recut. Completely agree, as much as I admire Hugo Weaving. I must admit I am surprised you didn't delve into the love story. The fact that Carter doesn't seem to fall in love with him (though she obviously cares) until AFTER the transformation. I always felt the 'Impossible Choice' pinch-point you explain so well should have been Peggy Carter coming to him the night before the experiment, more clearly already in love with him (before he gets 'hunkified', and it becomes a 'touch his pecs' gag) and presenting him with the options--subtextually wanting him to walk away, and not potentially go the way of Johann Schmidt/Red Skull. He makes the choice, and she stays with him (romantically/sexually or not). A little vulnerability from her at that point (as you often discuss in your romance videos) would have made her obvious turn of interest the next day more powerful (for me), and her relief more genuine, emotional, and less 'awe-struck' and giddy. But Marvel's love stories... well... that could be a whole 'nother video. LOL
Incredible video, thank you so much for all the time and effort you put into this. I learned so much, your cut is in a different league to the original.
I'm not all the way through the video, so it's possible my opinion can change after hearing more of your points, but I disagree that the beginning scenes are unnecessary/wouldn't change anything. The first scene shows that *something great* is going to happen. The next scene with the villain shows that the stakes are even higher than anyone could guess, and that's saying something, considering this takes place in WW2. For me, those two scenes created a sense of suspense that wouldn't be there if all we focused on was Steve and his journey. You know a confrontation is gonna happen between Steve and Johann, but that tension and suspense wouldn't be there if we didn't see the villain's side of things. Okay, gonna watch the rest of the video and come back and edit this if I need to.
I would say being a passive character pretty much sums up the military experience! (as my 8 years in taught me) Lol. But then again, the military is not designed to breed empathy.
A very interesting take. I like the idea of cutting the opening scene in the frozen desert. I never remember that scene exists when I turn on the movie, and it really confused me the first time I watched it. It's an interesting scene when you know what happened, but it wasn't great enough to start the movie with. I don't know about cutting the first half of Red Skull's scenes. I guess I'm too used to seeing them to fully appreciate this idea. The first time watching this movie, I didn't know anything about the Red Skull, or the Tesseract. But those scenes gave us his goal (to rule the world himself through mystical means), the thing holding him back (Nazis), and what actions he takes to overcome that resistance (his new technology fueled by the Tesseract, that scene also showed us what new tech he has). The first half with Red Skull sets up his character as a big baddy that we ultimately want Steve to defeat. Interlacing those scenes with Steve's scenes gives us the bigger picture, helps us see there's so much more going on than just tiny Steve reading a newspaper and getting beat up in alleyways. I also have to disagree that Steve was a passive character. He chose to join the army, and especially the experiment. It wasn't a hard choice for him, and I think that's where your complaint lies. Perhaps if the choice was harder to make? I don't see how that would work though. Maybe if he'd known he was going to be on ice for 70 years, but then he might not have been so sorry for himself later, which actually might have been more interesting. I surprisingly did like the cut for the deeper POV. It was a bit a weird to my brain watching it that way just because I'm used to the original cut (I mean, how many times have I watched this in 10 years?). But it did seem more personal. And it did feel more like a mystery when taking out all the previous Red Skull scenes. It's a hard movie to recut, and I feel like there may not be a right way of doing it. There are plenty of wrong ways, I'm sure. Thankfully the movie didn't go down one of those routes.
Hearing you describe the passive character reminds me a lot of the protagonist of Attack on Titan up until it's last season. It's definetly not for a lack of writing brilliance around it's characters or story, but it always bothered me that as aggressively driven as the protagonist is depicted, often felt like he was being dragged around by the plot and the decisions of other active side characters. I think that's especially felt in the 2nd season. Anyways, totally unrelated to the Captain America movie lol but it just hit me and wanted to comment on the realization
I love doing this too in fact I was watching "Roxanne" with Steve Martin and "The Gate" with Steven Dorf. I'm not as big of a comic book nerd so I don't know the comic book cannon stuff as well as everyone else(I think its kinda silly) I only know;...uuh other stuff..and to me the comic book stuff is a little off sometimes but id have to watch the movie like 5 times in a row to be accurate...but yeah I see it too. I was always wondering why they sequenced it like that..the pacing is a bit goofy footed. Oh don't worry it's hollyweird they do this kinda thing ten times a day they did this choppy stuff on purpose. Like the "Roxanne" movie wasn't that about "Cyra-nose" he was like a bad ass musketeer and "The Gate"... well, I remember those weird little impish demon thingys talked to like Terry when he fell down the hole and the big demon thingy...if I remember right didn't it try to befriend the Steven Dorf character? like it had lines and a whole maniacal plan for the little boy and there was like a whole really interesting back story on the geode thingy I totally remember there was a lot more to that story than what was presented....but yeah I love doing this kinda thing too.🤘❤👍oh oh ok gorgeous...heres a challenge try to save the "Alien" franchise and "cloverfeild" franchises or at least try to get the cloverfeild story to make sense....love it love it see ya saturday.
A little late in the viewing and commenting, but I loved your thoughts. Almost makes me want to buy a copy just so that I can edit it into a deep pov, or at least fiddle around to make it better. Your vision of what happened after the serum scene: emotional punch to the gut. Amazing and beautiful. The little flashback . . . despite the action and questions that would have been erupting, I would have been near tears. Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and editing skills with us.
*SPOILER WARNING* : You know, whenever I watch Disney's Cruella now, I skip all of Cruella's introduction scenes because I like the mystery from the Baroness' perspective. She takes on a young protegee and at the same time a new nemesis, and the reveal of them being one and the same would be quite a twist. When I showed the movie to my cousin, I showed her my version first and then the original. She preferred my version, and was shocked at the 'twist' of Estella being Cruella. The build-up and reveal just fascinate me, and I love the film all the more for it.
the protagonist sometimes can't make a decision until something happens, unless they're clairvoyant and can see the future, the event has to occur then they can react, that is the plot has to happen, then the story of what the protagonist decides what to do in response to the event. Plot is what happens, story is how the character reacts to it.
"Captain America: The First Avenger" presumes the viewers are at least somewhat familiar with his backstory, and so already care about Steve Rogers and know the significance of his shield, the HYDRA symbol and the antagonist Red Skull. It's basically fan service. But if you haven't read the comics or watched the cartoons, you have to play catch-up, which can get very confusing. I definitely see your point and love your suggestions!
So well done @abbieemmons !! The way you recut the film was stunning and 100% better than the original (which is saying a lot since that’s my fav Marvel movie probably of all time). This was an I credit helpful breakdown of deep POV, how to really land a hook, and how to be a ruthless editor to achieve the greatest result. Keep up the good work! You’re a legend!
I like the changes that could improve the movie, but I would question one thing. The Tesseract is a vital piece to the Avengers story as a whole and becomes the central piece in the first Avengers movie. Maybe a reference and a flashback would suffice to include it
we didnt need to see the villain dig up some magic artifact and do all kinds of experiments just to make... guns... that shoot stuff... and still have to be reloaded... like every other gun. The movie woud not change if the bad guys were using rifles they bought at a pawn shop in west virginia so all the teseract scenes were omittable
Abbie, you make me view Captain America the first Avenger not in the same way again. I agreed with you, I totally love this movie. Infact, this is the only Avenger's member movie that I love. But I feel it lacking in something that I couldn't put my finger on. And after you pointed them out in this video, they all make sense now. Thank you so much Abbie. This really helps tremendously in getting to know what really matters in a story. Can't wait for the next Story Science Episode! I hope you go for Sherlock Holmes next. *fingers cross
10:30 I would argue his impossible choice was the grenade. His dream is to serve his country, and he chose to die protecting his fellow recruits instead of living to fight another day.
This is an outstanding recut of the first Cap movie (which I coincidentally recently watched again). I viscerally felt Steve's anger when he chased after the bad guy in your recut version which I didn't before. This is so smart and good to keep in mind when writing.
Cap is my favorite Avenger, but if I'm being honest, I feel like it wasn't until Winter Soldier came out that his story really resonated with me and made me care about him and the MCU, and while I do appreciate the first movie, I feel like you really illustrated why it always felt like it admittedly fell a little short.
Exactly. I agree completely. The Captain America trilogy are my favorite movies of all of the Marvel movies but the 1st one is definitely the weakest. Leave the weakest. Captain America Winter soldier and Captain America Civil War the last 1 being my absolute favorite Marvel movie, I think are better but the 1st 1 is good but these flaws have merit.
This recut made me realize something though: the filmmakers didn't want that odd photoshopped Chris Evans to be the first thing the viewers saw. That's why they started with bits to peak our interest in the adventure story and bigger conflict.
@@mallorycarpinski1160 That's quite plausible, you never know.
"fell a little short"
Skinny Steve Rogers "I see what you did there...😞"
Watch Agents of SHIELD. You'll love it even more than MCU. All of the characters have strong moral compass to guide them throughout the story. Something Steve Rogers is known for. Plus, they're just ordinary people trying to save the world, working from the shadows, and they are able to sacrifice their own life for greater good. What's not to like? :) Person of Interest (and possibly 12 Monkeys and Fringe) is very similar to this.
Man, that grenade moment makes me cry every time. Powerful. Instant reaction.
Off the top if my head:
Going off of the changes you already highlighted, I would have added a scene showing Steve attempting to send letters to contact Bucky after being pushed into PR, but being unable to reach his friend, since Bucky's unit is engaged in a dangerous/secret mission.
This would show Steve wanting to stay involved and relevant with both the war effort and his friend's life, but feeling inadequate or ignored on both fronts.
After that, I'd add a moment showing Steve actively looking forward to performing for Bucky's unit, and attempting to see him in the crowd, so that Bucky's absence hit him at the same time as the soldiers' distain.
This would highlight the dichotomy of Steve's character, as pointed out out by Bucky, that be both wants to do the right thing for its own sake, AND he wants to prove himself as worthy to others.
After rescuing Bucky's unit, I would add a moment where Steve gets caught up in the admiration and praise from his fellow soldiers, maybe even a moment where Steve is physically separated from an injured and winded Bucky, before coming back to help his friend.
This would show that while Steve is a good person, he is vulnerable to being swayed by the alure of adoring fans. He is not superhumanly immune to pride.
The existing scene of Steve being seduced by Queen Margery, and Peggy's reaction to it, would then be mirrored in the audience, as we worry how far Steve will allow himself to be seduced by accolades.
I'd add some clips in the battle montage of Steve being venerated, alongside Steve being a genuine selfless hero.
In the train scene, I'd add a moment where Bucky asks Steve for the shield, the symbol of his new status, and have Steve hesitate, for just a moment, before handing it to his friend.
I would NOT have this hesitation cause Bucky's 'death', but I would have Steve's guilt over his hesitation feed into his survivor's guilt, and lead to an added moment where Steve questions his own motivations, and if he is worthy of Dr. Tucci's trust.
I would add a scene to highlight and reinforce Steve's sense of grief and guilt, of becoming the battlehardened soldier, who can no longer afford naive, idealistic optimism, even as he draws closer to Peggy as a way to keep a spark of that optimism alive.
In Steve's final conversation with Peggy, I would add a line where the dance Steve would have, if he chose to save himself, would be at a military PR ball, where the President himself had requested an audience with Captain America.
On the subject of the 1st Plot Point, the Impossible Choice, I think the film is doing exactly what it needs to, treating Steve as a passive character. It's a huge part of the comics, and it's a huge part of this movie developing his character. He was meant to be treated like a monkey, and we were meant to sizzle with his frustration in that, up to the boiling point: when he chooses to go behind enemy lines. I think the best way for us to resonate with his frustration is to be frustrated ourselves, and the movie delivered that.
If he had become an active character sooner, we would have had him becoming passive again for nearly no reason, as opposed to the "wanting to do the right thing and obey his country" motif we see him believe at the beginning of the story. That we can trail with his passivity early on through all of the early events makes his stand to do the right thing soo much stronger later.
The Opening Scene of discovering a Shield in Ice is exactly what you called it out to be: "This will be important later." And I think it is necessary. It's a prologue scene (developed at the onset of end-credit scenes becoming the massive hit they are now). It is meant to be dropped and then remembered at the end, after he goes into the ice. (Imagine how boring that scene would be at the end before he is rescued and wakes up! So much suspense for what we already know is under the ice.. it doesn't work quite as well, but is necessary to arrive at him being rescued).
I agree with what you're saying about the villain as it pertains to this one story, this one movie. However, Marvel movies also carry the weight of connecting a universe. A larger story happening outside of what we are seeing is one of the reasons the MCU was able to get off the ground the way it did, a lesson learned from the comics and other superhero movies that came out before Stark shows up at the bar at the end of The Incredible Hulk.
It's worth noting, that 2 components of the MCU are being developed in conjunction with this story.
- The 1st at the time, was the development of HYDRA. An organization that we would need to understand both for the MCU leading into CA:The Winter Soldier as well as the arcs developed in Agents of Shield.
- The 2nd, was early groundwork for the then in-development Avenger's Movie, which the opening scene of finding the shield in ice also establishes. The Tesseract serves as both the portal opportunity for Loki, as well as a major weapon he uses against earth to introduce the Chitauri
- As a side note, I think the villain scenes with the Tesseract drop A METRIC TON of lore that is significant to both Thor and the entire Infinity Stones arc, although arguably they might not have known that was what they were going to do with it that early on.
So I agree with a lot of what you're saying, for the sake of improving a movie in isolation of the rest.
I just also think that it does a lot more than what you see in this single story.
Maybe, if you're going to cut some stuff out, scenes could be written to help keep so much of the essential information in.
I loved your cut of Steve going after the spy.
Captain America. The first avenger is one of my favorite marvel movies, too. Reverting back to the video that you made about strong female characters. I think that Peggy Carter is one of the strongest, best marvel, female characters. She’s strong and tough, but still leaves you feeling as though she is loving and caring at the same time.
Of course we have the "I can do this all day" line.
Legendary.
I’m amazed at how much time you take to analyze and break this all down for us-with timestamps and everything. Thank you!! I’ve been catching up on all of your past videos and they’ve been life changing. In my book, I was going to have the romance as adults be instant (bc they loved each other as kids) but through your “slow burn romance” video I realized I want to stretch it out with hand brushes and reigniting the flame slowly. You helped me write an awesome new scene with a Re-meet cute. And your three act series has also helped me write new scenes. I realize my inciting incident is different than I thought. And this video too is helping me verify that my beginning (as of now) is the right one. Thank you!!!
I agree that some scenes could have been shot with more emphasis on Steve's PoV, ramping up the mystery - but I would also like to argue in favour of at least one prologue.
Admittedly the first one could easily have been cut - it's really there for fans of the original comics, who would recognise Captain America's shield and wonder what he's doing in the ice. It also links back to the previous movie, Thor, by reintroducing SHIELD, but I don't think we really needed that - they don't even exist in the 1940s of the MCU.
However the second prologue is more critical since, as other commenters have said, it establishes the movie as set in a fantasy world where magical artefacts exist alongside modern technology. By contrast, starting with Steve's struggles to sign up would make it seem like a straight historical action flick. (Incidentally, this prologue is really all about introducing the Tesseract, not Schmidt - it is this macguffin that will be the focus of Loki's actions in the next movie and beyond.)
Setting genre expectations is a critical function of an opening scene/chapter, and in this case it wasn't possible to do this and simultaneously introduce the protagonist, as he is completely unaware of what he's up against. It's the exact same reason Lord of the Rings opens with a prologue (which coincidentally also features Hugo Weaving!) - they introduce the viewer to an unfamiliar world and set up the external stakes for the hero - this isn't just about a war, it's about a powerful magical artefact that the villain desires above all else.
Contrast this with Frozen, where Anna's conflict is inextricably tied to Elsa's magic, and therefore the opening five minutes can introduce both. Also, kids' movies have to move a lot faster to hook the viewer, whereas movies for adults can be a bit more leisurely - which is not to say that a great hook is ever a bad idea!
I agree, you articulated perfectly what I was thinking while she talked about the prologue. "It's a comic book movie! This is what they do!" They use these framing devices to establish the world and get you excited about seeing these characters that you're familiar with.
BLASPHEMY!!! LOL.
'fans of the original comics' already know he went into the icy waters for decades(1940's to 60's in comics till the iconic Avengers #4).
You are correct about children vs adults attention spans to a degree, but I also feel the world building doesn't have to be told right away like LOTR which is a much more complicated backstory than WWII, which humans are familiar with, vs a made up fantasy world, coincidentally created based on Tolkien's experience in War!
I really like the analysis and as a writer myself, I am highly interested in concepts like "science of story".
I think you're right about many things, thank you for your effort! :)
Nevertheless, I for myself am trying to stay openminded (not saying you're not!).
Writing is an art. Technically, there is no right or wrong. As there is also no right or wrong for paintings. You, my dear writers, should listen to the advice out there how to create good stories, because the advice is there for a reason. But never forget that writers are artists. You don't have to follow the rules. You can do things differently if you want to. Follow your heart and write something you truly love :)
This is the best, please continue :)
The only problem I can see with this editing would be you cut out any establishment of outer boundaries of what the writers expect the audience to believe. For example, showing magic immediately in Harry Potter or showing a shot of the Imperial fleet in Star Wars before going down to the seemingly "regular" characters. That might be less of a problem, since the audience has certain expectations going into a Marvel film, but this is the value I see in the opening scene. The mysterious setting of a frozen and alien-looking spaceship, lights, and amazed scientists lets the audience accept the possibility of the supernatural happening here.
But I totally agree with going deeper into his perspective on the rest! Love this video
Yes! This is why I don't watch action movies. They're all about the CGI and the action and sometimes plot, and after watching them for 2 hours, I forget it all within 2 days. You've nailed the reason, though I couldn't explain why before this. I'd rather watch a Disney movie because at least I can care about those characters.
I love this new intro. Much shorter, gets to the point quickly and snappy animation.
There have been some great villains in the MCU. Loki, Thanos, and Killmonger, Wilson Fisk in the Netflix show. Sadly they're few and far between. Captain America: The First Avenger certainly would have benefitted from less villain stuff in the beginning. Steve is such a lovable character and I think they were really banking on what fans already know about him from the comics rather than trying to draw new people in, hence the reason they showed the shield in the beginning.
Would've loved to have spent more time with Steve pre-serum.
The shield showing makes no sense since we fans already know what it is and this is a CA movie not The Incredible Hulk.
We know we'll see it eventually so that scene did little in the overall scheme of things.
They teased in Ironman 2, the shield concept. If the shield ice scene appeared in Thor, IM2 or IH it would have had more weight(though vibranium is half the weight of steel and much more durable 😜), matter of fact I'll bet that was supposed to be an end credits scene to one of the prior movies and it wasn't used, then TACKED ON to TFA last minute to justify the cost of shooting it.
I have always found marvel movies a little too plot driven for my taste, I know you're gonna be right
DC movies are even more plot driven, just like DC comics.
When she was asking all the "what if" questions I almost expected her to ask "What if Captain Carter were the first Avenger?"
(as in a reference to the marvel show "What if..."'s first episode.)
As much as I love this movie, I know you're probably going to be right. But I'm waiting for it to start in the next 110 minutes.....So if anybody needs me, I'll just be here. Staring at my screen. Waiting. You know, like ya do.
Would you be against doing another video like this? I keep coming back to it, because the new edit really does change the audience experience. Would love to see deep perspective applied to more works!
I have to say I disagree in a major way with Steve being passive early on and things just being done to him - it's clearly established that he is desperate to enlist and is rejected due to his health. He actively chooses to join the programme that ultimately selects him to be the supersoldier experiment, and the grenade scene just establishes why he's chosen. That he'd follow through on a decision he's basically already made really isn't something that needs to be repeated with it's own scene and the idea he's just passively accepting being experimented on ignores that he's clearly already made that decision.
This was exactly what I needed for my novel! I have two main characters, where the one mc had the opening scene in chapter one, but my main protagonist's first scene was in the second chapter. This helps so much!
I am writing a story, but I introduced my side character first, some published books do not introduce the protagonist until later in the first chapter, or the protagonist could be introduced in the second chapter or later.
While there's nothing wrong with introducing the side character first, I realised that it may be better to introduce my protagonist first, even if I do manage to uncover the protagonist's internal conflict when he was introduced while my side character is introduced at the beginning.
My problem was that when I heard the meaning of internal conflict 'why what happens matters to the protagonist', I often just come up with a reason of why it matters, but I felt something wasn't right. The whole point is that 'why what happens matters to the protagonist' the 'fear' part. I found that I messed it up quite a bit. After I got the desire, I end up on making up the fear that seemingly making sense when it is actually more beyond that.
Now that I decided to introduce my protagonist at the beginning, there is a possibility that I could still mess up my story somewhere.
I had to look up on other videos about internal conflict for me to have a better understanding of it.
Some films seemed to be very addicting, but what makes them addictive to watch? Is it the external conflict, or the internal conflict?
There are some films that seemingly interesting, but when I tried to fit it in with the 3 act story structure it sometimes gets very frustrating.
There are some films I watched, such as Broken Arrow 1996, this film is interesting, I didn't seem to find the protagonist's internal conflict in the first five minutes of the film. In that film, the protagonist, Riley Hale, along with his fellow, Vic Deakins, were assigned to fly a stealth bomber, carrying two nuclear weapons, to test the vulnerability to radar and gamma ray detection. While they were in the plane, Vic Deakins attempts to kill Riley Hale but failed, they broke into a fight and Vic Deakins attempted to eject the nuclear weapons, then he ejected Riley Hale out of the plane, then he ejected the nuclear weapons. Riley safely landed.
I bet that was when his internal conflict started, he wanted to get back the weapon, but he doesn't know how he would complete this task on his own, given that he wasn't familiar with the place he was landed in. At this point, someone came in to his aid, and together, they went to complete this task.
The film The Next Three Days, the protagonist, John Brannen changed from a teacher in community college to a robber and murderer, just so he could break his wife Lara out of prison and stay safe because she was falsely accused of murdering her boss and sentenced to life time imprisonment and the lawyer said that there's no way he could get Lara out of prison.
John's Internal Conflict seemed to be something like this.
Desire: Get his wife Lara out of prison the illegal way
Fear: He may fail as he had already failed to get her out the legal way
Misbelief: He think it would be impossible to get Lara out of prison.
I don't know if I am right in my analysis of the last two films about internal conflict, I could be wrong.
I don't want to talk too much about these films here, I am merely expressing that even if a film does seem to hook the audience or have shown how the protagonist had changed, it doesn't always mean that it is character driven (there is a chance that the audience was simply hooked by the plot of these films). The Next Three days seemed to be better, though I don't know if there should be other things included in there.
Please keep making videos like this one.
A solid vote for your re-cut. Much better than the original.
Abbie constantly reinvents her brand. She's never boring! Kudos!
I hadn't thought much about Marvel's structure problems, but now I can't stop after watching this.
100% agree. It's why I hate it so much when films and TV shows start with a scene and then say "24 hours earlier" or something similar.
I totally forgot all of that other stuff was in the beginning of the film and it didn't actually start with Steve...because those things never mattered. And now that I'm thinking back, I remember putting it on with a friend and we were confused, thinking we put on the wrong movie
What I will say is comic fans would know what the shield and the hydra pin were. It's an opening made for comics fans. Almost like a different style intro, in a way. It's amazing how different it is with the deep perspective cuts.
The need to show the shield before the man, is the Shield is before the importance of the man; its relative to the comic aspect of the character.
When referencing Captain America the most iconic part of Captain America is the Shield a lot is built around it. Seeing the shield in the snow and the plane is telling the final events of Cap's fate in reverse, why those two agents were there is to find the man who held that Shield.
Also that symbol has changed since the comic's debut its not the great hope it once was, yet the film identifies the fallen glory they are in search of truly frozen in time for what it meant at its height, when it comes to Steve Rogers is a banner man before he is a great hero. You learn later the man is more than worthy of the task, not a great man built by the role of Captain America, they go hand in hand without one creating the other.
That sequence is relative to the comics sequence, its been some time since I had the first issue and privilege of reading it. (disclaimer) I can't reference the book as I type.
I think that's some amazing analogy 🙂 I loved the film when I was younger but if it's cut the way you suggest it would be farr better! The film Panic Room is cut in a way where we're introduced to characters first and then see the antagonists. So we're already invested, even though we get an omnipresent view as an audience, which is what most film's are like. I can only think of one example of experiencing the events through a characters perspective completely. The film 1917, where we only find out what's happening next in the story when the character does.
So in Panic Room we wouldn't be shown the criminals breaking into the house, instead just see and hear them as Jodie Foster's character and her daughter do. For building up tension and having an immersive experience it's amazing 🙂
Amazing video as always
I never thought about that point of view until you explained here and I definitely resonate with it, but I guess the reason why they made the movie that way is because of the audience. I have seen a few movies or shows with that idea of keeping the perspective of the main protagonist for a while and people complaining, especially when it comes to movies, that villains aren't introduced until later on so 'nothing happens in the first few minutes' which is completely untrue of course, but, as much as I would be super invested if Steve's story was covered like that (because I too was more invested in seeing that on the first watch and mainly payed attention to the villain's part because it was gonna be important later) I know for sure a lot of people would critizied that. So I guess, when it comes to villains that are 'so far' from the protagonist, movies choose to alternate both perspectives to keep viewers invested, especially in actions movies where mostly of the audience wants to go straight to the action.
I don't know if I ever left a comment here before but if not: Thank you for this!
I love the Avengers and especially Cap, but I always skip over the first minutes and I didn't think about it. They are just scenes that I'm not curious to watch (for me, they are boring).
After watching this video it makes totally sense to me!
And I think that is the reason why so many people find Cap boring and for example Iron Man more exciting. I think I'll have to watch both movies with this things in mind again. Thank you!
I think their is many ways to rewrite Captain America, but your take on it was too good to top lol. Oh by the way this anime called Death note has a great storytelling structure you should consider review it or just watch it... Ps it's classic/beloved anime, really enjoyed your work keep it up Abbie.
She should do a video on The Fast and the Furious (the 2001 movie)
Great points -- and you incidentally revealed why it is so hard to write Captain America. For example, you spoke about giving Steve options ("stay safe and be a clerk" vs "take the risk to be a super soldier"). Steve's personality is such that this wouldn't be interesting. He is such an iconic character that almost everyone knows he would never pick the safe option over his duty as a soldier. This is why Winter Soldier and Civil War were such brilliant scripts: they put Steve into positions that challenged his pure moral character and presented him with choices he would find hard to make.
What is this? I’m really freaking excited 😛. Cap is my favorite
2:34 While I agree that newcomers to Captain America will most likely not know the significance of the future Avenger's shield being frozen in ice, the fact that this movie was written with a heavy leaning toward the comic fans is quite clear. The comic, Captain America #1, was released in 1941. As you might have guessed, it was a staple of exemplary heroism. One that helped give kids a sense of imagination at a time when true fascists were attempting world domination (hence all the 'Hail Hydra' proclamations by a litany of bad guys). However, for the sake of teaching us all how to do this better, I do agree with you.
The recut proved your point.
I love your edit much better than the original cut. We didn't get to the protagonist until 8 minutes into the movie. The first time I saw this I was thinking, "What's this story about?" I realize that is just the "Disney 5 minute" programming, but it seemed like they could have done a better job of cutting the film.
Love your perspective on this. As someone who had been a fan of Joe Johnston's Rocketeer and had seen enough Captain America material, I really wanted to love this film. But I couldn't.
I liked Anthony Stark being there and some of the visual design work for the film as well as Steve's quite moments, but that was pretty much it. The movie felt very disposable for me even though I know pulp hero genre tales pumping out disposable tales is supposed to be par for the course.
With this reframing of the narrative, I think this could have been much more compelling and a little sad. But at the time Marvel films weren't really allowed to be that sad without being overshadowed by jokes every other moment.
I love your take on this 🤩 I honestly think the villain scenes could have been replaced with flashback to Steves childhood, so we could get deeper into his motivation and struggles with joining the army/internal conflict. He is a wery interesting character I would like to learn more about. He is my favorite avenger ... next to spiderman 😄
Interesting video! I agree with most of what you say here, and you got me thinking, so I will attempt to be brief and offer two thoughts:
-- I disagree that Steve was passive. From the beginning, we know that he's been trying to join the army, over and over. We don't get to see it begin, but we see him stand up to the bully in the theater to exemplify what he's been trying to do - to stand up to the Nazis. Everything that happened after was because of his *active persistence* to do this. The incident you mentioned - rescuing Bucky - wasn't the first time he was active, it was him coming back to himself (with Peggy's help) after his existential crisis of getting what he thought he wanted (joining the army) and finding out it wasn't satisfying. Going off to save Bucky recontextualized his goal - that of saving lives.
-- Secondly, it's interesting to note that almost all the Marvel origin stories buck that Disney formula - because Marvel was world-building. Almost all the solo movies start outside in, rather than inside out - they give us a sense of the world and set the stage before introducing the protagonist, and *usually through how they're viewed* (Tony Stark, Thor, Dr Strange, Capt Marvel) before getting to actually know them. Maybe that's not as engaging, but it seems to be how Marvel wanted to build their universe, and for the most part it seems to have worked.
I’ve learned more from this channel than any other, and Abbie’s insights have elevated my writing. Second place goes to Jenna Moreci. Without these two, my book series would not be what it is. Many thanks, ladies 🙂❤️
I want to eventually write a short novel about motorsport, with a rookie racing driver as the protagonist. Does that sound like a compelling idea?
@@unicorntomboy9736 As Abbie says, make me fall in love with/like/relate to the character(s) quickly and you’ve got it made. Setting is rarely what people focus on. It IS important, but the characters come first. Tell the story, then put the icing on the cake by making someone fall in love with the setting as well (as a secondary thing) even if they have no interest in racing. THAT would be good writing in my opinion. 🙂👍🏼
@@GarekGeo Thanks for the advice. I have learned over time that having compelling characters is the most important thing, more than plot or setting (even though those things do help too).
@UCstffmxdhRhvxP6aNB6tgVg Self doubt. Maybe he was always told he wasn’t good enough, or had an older brother who could do anything he set his mind to, and your char believes he can’t. Maybe he has delusions of grandeur on top of all that, of taking that victory lap with all eyes and applause falling to him, thereby outdoing, or at least keeping pace with, his older brother. Maybe it could be a younger brother showing him up. That’d be even worse! 😂
Better yet, look inside yourself. What do you struggle with? If you use that, then you’d be writing what you know, intimately, and your char would be all the more real. 🤔
@@GarekGeo I was thinking about having a female protagonist. I got some inspiration from the Gran Turismo video games
My problem with your recut is that we have to see Redskull's evil to want Steve to succeed in stamping it out. We have to see Redskull killing Walder Frey in order to understand that threat he poses. As for the stuff at the beginning with the SHIELD agents and the finding of the plane and the shield, seeing what will happen before seeing Steve's ultimate story arc will make us care that much more for him when we see the stinger at the end when we meet Nick Fury. Thing is too we'll have plenty of films to be with Steve as the hero, but seeing his origin story in tandem with Schmidt makes us fear that much more for Steve when he is thrust from that observer, to active involvement. Ultimately this is one of my favourite Marvel films. I love Cap's arc, with the exception of where he ends up at the end of "Avengers: Endgame." I usually do agree with your analysis in your videos, but not this time Abbie. We need to see what Steve is up against to appreciate what he ultimately sacrifices. Couple that with the fact Hugo Weaving complained enough throughout the making of this film due to the makeup, he had to earn his paycheck through all the scenes he was in.
Whoa, I don't even remember the villain in Captain America, lol. And when you mentioned Prince Caspian I realized that I haven't seen it. So I went to go watch it. And here I am, a little over two hours later. It was a great movie that gave me emotions at some of the conflicts the characters faced. I watch it in a different way, noting how we were introduced to characters, and how the 3 act structure came to life in movie form. It was fun to watch and also melancholy since in a way I knew what to expect next. Thanks so much for this fun look at a different perspective for Captain America. :)
thank you, it makes so much sense! the movie would have been so much more compelling the way you show it, one cannot ignore basic story structure that has been proven to work.
It's not even funny how right you are, I also always felt there was something missing in this (one of my most watched MCU movies) movie. What you're suggesting would have kept the balance between interest in the protagonist and suspense about the antagonist perfectly. It probably would have made the antagonist seem even more ominous and his plans more sinister making cap's characteristic bravery all the more impressive
Steve is my favorite avenger by far. Captain America the first avenger, Captain America Winter soldier and then Captain America Civil War are my favorite Marvel movies. Civil War is my absolute favorite Marvel movie. Because it has so much internal conflict between people who are friends. And it shows what it means to stand by your principles no matter what. It also does a fantastic job of making Tony Stark the villain of the movie. Baron zemo is only a secondary villain to get Tony Stark to become his worst self.
It is foreshadowed in Age of Ultron that ultron is kind of the worst side of Tony Stark but then you see in Captain America Civil War Tony Stark being the villain and Steve Rogers making the decision (as said by Sharon Carter at the funeral of Peggy) to stand like a tree and say no you move. To do the right thing in spite of pressure from friends to cave to convenience or safety or guilt because something sad happened.
I subscribed. Got a new follower.
I agree with some of your points, but I think some of this comes down to style as well. People who go to see superhero movies expect action, adventure, and stunning visuals and the creators of those films are going to cater to that audience, sometimes at the slight expense of going deep into the character. I think Marvel movies generally do a good job of balancing character development with action, but there are different priorities from what you would see in other some other genres. Also, many fans of Marvel movies are already comic book fans and are already invested in the character. Introducing the villain later in the movie would have been a cool move and I agree that it would have made the movie more suspenseful. As for the first scene, most people, even non comic fans, are familiar with Captain America's shield, so I don't think they were worried about most audience members not making the connection. If this were a standalone film, I would agree with starting with Steve, but sandwiching the film with present day scenes was a way to connect it to the rest of the MCU and establish how it fit in. The end of the film could have done that job on its own, but the opening scene makes us wonder how Steve ended up in the ice and lets us know that his story is going to be relevant to the overall universe and not just a standalone WW2 era superhero story. As for his being a passive character, I think his choice was to join the super soldier program to begin with. By the time he was chosen to become Captain America, it had already been established that Steve was not the kind of person who would choose a military desk job. I think the reason Captain America feels a bit flat sometimes is not because Steve is passive, but because he's so single minded, so driven, and so unwavering in his personal morality that it's hard to present him with an impossible choice. Steve Rogers is lawful good, he has no moral greyness. It's really not until Civil War that he has to make some hard choices. He's so good as to be boring. The only other Avenger with such an uncomplicated morality is Thor, and the only reason his story is interesting is because we get to see him overcome his flaws to become who he is. Steve is ultimately static, he's always been good, only his exterior changes, and while that's the point, it also makes him less engaging than the other Avengers.
I would like to see your take on Train to Busan to be honest. I think it is a really, really good zombie film and it would be interesting to see you analyse it with your own biases towards what is good and what is not good
ABBIE YES!!! In the most coincidental of events, my brother and I just watched CA:TFA a few days ago, starting our rewatch of the MCU films in chronological order. CA:TFA has been my favorite of them all since I first saw it several years ago, but watching it again with a more adult perspective, I was thinking about how the two beginnings before we meet Steve is...a lot. I was talking to my brother about this and we both agreed the start of the story could be improved. Then, out of all the movies you could've analyzed, you do this one! I am very entertained by this 😂Thank you so much for such a great video! I can't imagine all the time it takes to edit these; thanks for caring about us!
This should be required reading for editors. Excellent advice.
I feel like editing changes could better the villain too, not just the protagonist, sometimes knowing less is more. Seeing Red Skull as an ominous threat. Because the scenes don’t do anything to expand upon the character. Unlike Baron Von Zemo in Civil War, who’s doing all he’s doing for a reason that gets built upon with each clue and each scene he’s in, Red Skull doesn’t get expanded upon as anything other than a power-hungry Hitler with no depth. So if he’s not needed in the sense of depth, showing him only from Rogers’s perspective could make him more interesting because it leaves the audience wanting more and could add more suspense, not knowing what the villain is doing next or what they got under their sleeve
It's amazing how completely different the outcome would've been I just find this video a work of a genius!! Best part is I was actually confused about the narration style I would go with, the dilemma was Third Person Omniscient vs. First Person, and let me tell you she just settled the matter right away. Every time I watch her videos I just get more and more in admiration of her work!
AMAZING ABBIE! 👏💖 I love your analysis on science story 😍🥺
I think it's because Captain America is a comic book adaptation, and thus maybe the director assumes the audience are Marvel comic book fans who already understand the character of Steve Rodgers. It's partly why with the MCU Spider-Man movies we don't see Peter Parker's origin story yet again after two film series prior to it
I'd completely forgotten the opening of this film! The first thing I recall was the Norway scene.
Abbie - I thoroughly enjoy your breakdowns & insights. In fact, this video alone has given me much to consider on my own historical adventure novel that I am writing: Much like the Capt. America film I had the introduction of the antagonist and “the stakes” before the
protagonist and his “desire”. (Now I certainly see why I should reconsider).
Would it be possible for you to review Characters of films that were popular, but ‘appeared’ to have “flat” Arcs/Desires?
• Jaws
• E.T.
• The Lord of the Rings
Thanks for all that you do!
OMG THANK YOUUUUU!!! Idk why but I’m like proud that you are trying out this new sort of movie break down format lol. I’m so glade to see your perspective on this kind of stuff. Thank youuuuuuu
Abbie, I wonder what you think of the new hope, there for the first 15 minutes, we travel with droids and then in just 17 minutes we first meet the protagonist, Luke Skywalker. But it works perfectly. I'd love for you to make a video of it too. 🙂
that depends on who you consider the protagonist. i think there are multiple MC's in star wars usually there are three for every trilogy set of stories so Luke,Han, Leia for the original, Anakin, Padme, Obi wan, for the prequals, and Rey, Poe and Finn for the equals, with each equal having its main villlan, in a new hope its darth vader, though in the prequals its the separatists in general( but more hidden and in depth) and in the sequals its kylo ren but all these villains are having there strings pulled by the overarching villain Palpatine! its really clever if you think about it.
I totally agree! Now I understand why this movie is one of the least compelling in the MCU to me. It seems like they put the focus on the external conflict with Schmidt rather than Cap's internal conflict, which changes a lot over the film. That's why they put Schmidt in the hook and it just doesn't work as well.
I don’t honk when he reason we know he isn’t just being a passive character is : the music during the scene, the closeups showing a eureka moment ( they agree without words) and the fact that Steve had already stated this soo animately. These make up for the lack of words. This also shows that Steve was a man of few words. More action.
Actually, the doctor told Steve about Schmidt a few minutes before the whole changing happened. They also talked about why he would stay away from him and not end up like him as well.
My initial reaction to CA: TFA was that the opening had too many spoilers and no hero. We don't even see Steve as a "Capsicle" (as Tony Stark called him in The Avengers). I felt we should have seen clips from the current first scene during a brief voiceover from Fury when he first meets Cap. The new first scene would be Steve making a stand (and getting beaten up); then we cut to the ultimate bully in a shorter version of the tesseract grab, followed by Dr. Erskine's interview with Steve (and probably the intro to Stark to counterbalance Schmidt). Then we have the Red Skull's confrontation with and elimination of the regular Nazis (he's worse than ordinary Nazis, folks!) to establish his threat level. We do not need to know that he has found Dr. Erskine; we'll figure that out for ourselves later. It would be good to see Steve choose to be the super soldier, though his choice is absolutely predictable.
A quibble: you talk about how passive Steve is before Dr. Erskine's death. Not quite true: during the procedure, Steve screams, and it is almost aborted, but he insists that he can take it, so he is transformed. I would also have abbreviated the "performing monkey" segment--it dragged on too long.
Still, perhaps your minimalist approach to the villain wouldn't have lost anything important and would have sped up and strengthened a part that I thought limped.
While there are pros when writing in an omniscient POV, i now see why i like the deep POV more when it comes to creating a „character“.
This is so true. Whenever I watch this movie I'm never engaged until I meet Steve Rogers and then I'm super engaged from then on.
I've always wondered why I didn't like this movie as much as I wanted to. Your explanation is spot on. I'd really like to see the recut version. Thanks.
I agree about cutting out the first scene, although it is meant to introduce us to S.H.I.E.L.D. I didn't remember the first part until you showed. I thought the movie was drawn out and a bit slow. I became more interested when the protagonist was introduced.
Excellent recut. Completely agree, as much as I admire Hugo Weaving. I must admit I am surprised you didn't delve into the love story. The fact that Carter doesn't seem to fall in love with him (though she obviously cares) until AFTER the transformation. I always felt the 'Impossible Choice' pinch-point you explain so well should have been Peggy Carter coming to him the night before the experiment, more clearly already in love with him (before he gets 'hunkified', and it becomes a 'touch his pecs' gag) and presenting him with the options--subtextually wanting him to walk away, and not potentially go the way of Johann Schmidt/Red Skull. He makes the choice, and she stays with him (romantically/sexually or not). A little vulnerability from her at that point (as you often discuss in your romance videos) would have made her obvious turn of interest the next day more powerful (for me), and her relief more genuine, emotional, and less 'awe-struck' and giddy. But Marvel's love stories... well... that could be a whole 'nother video. LOL
me:Nobody can make and already iconic movie better...
Abbie: is that a challenge??
Abbie: Challenge accepted 😁
@@Stephanie.101 Challenge COMPLETED!! 1,000 points!
Next challenge: Fix MCU phases 4 onward.
Not gonna lie, I was skeptical at first, but this, like all your other videos, is actually really good!
I can only say one thing; Abbie you're wonderful at what you're doing. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. Amen!
❤️❤️❤️ first time I made it.. never having watched Captain America, this was pretty insightful.. thank you Abbie!
Great stuff Abbie! Thanks so much for sharing and being on here.
Incredible video, thank you so much for all the time and effort you put into this. I learned so much, your cut is in a different league to the original.
Please don't forget us when Hollywood reaches you out! This is awesome :')
You're My writing idol
I'm not all the way through the video, so it's possible my opinion can change after hearing more of your points, but I disagree that the beginning scenes are unnecessary/wouldn't change anything. The first scene shows that *something great* is going to happen. The next scene with the villain shows that the stakes are even higher than anyone could guess, and that's saying something, considering this takes place in WW2.
For me, those two scenes created a sense of suspense that wouldn't be there if all we focused on was Steve and his journey. You know a confrontation is gonna happen between Steve and Johann, but that tension and suspense wouldn't be there if we didn't see the villain's side of things.
Okay, gonna watch the rest of the video and come back and edit this if I need to.
I would say being a passive character pretty much sums up the military experience! (as my 8 years in taught me) Lol. But then again, the military is not designed to breed empathy.
A very interesting take. I like the idea of cutting the opening scene in the frozen desert. I never remember that scene exists when I turn on the movie, and it really confused me the first time I watched it. It's an interesting scene when you know what happened, but it wasn't great enough to start the movie with.
I don't know about cutting the first half of Red Skull's scenes. I guess I'm too used to seeing them to fully appreciate this idea. The first time watching this movie, I didn't know anything about the Red Skull, or the Tesseract. But those scenes gave us his goal (to rule the world himself through mystical means), the thing holding him back (Nazis), and what actions he takes to overcome that resistance (his new technology fueled by the Tesseract, that scene also showed us what new tech he has). The first half with Red Skull sets up his character as a big baddy that we ultimately want Steve to defeat. Interlacing those scenes with Steve's scenes gives us the bigger picture, helps us see there's so much more going on than just tiny Steve reading a newspaper and getting beat up in alleyways.
I also have to disagree that Steve was a passive character. He chose to join the army, and especially the experiment. It wasn't a hard choice for him, and I think that's where your complaint lies. Perhaps if the choice was harder to make? I don't see how that would work though. Maybe if he'd known he was going to be on ice for 70 years, but then he might not have been so sorry for himself later, which actually might have been more interesting.
I surprisingly did like the cut for the deeper POV. It was a bit a weird to my brain watching it that way just because I'm used to the original cut (I mean, how many times have I watched this in 10 years?). But it did seem more personal. And it did feel more like a mystery when taking out all the previous Red Skull scenes.
It's a hard movie to recut, and I feel like there may not be a right way of doing it. There are plenty of wrong ways, I'm sure. Thankfully the movie didn't go down one of those routes.
Hearing you describe the passive character reminds me a lot of the protagonist of Attack on Titan up until it's last season. It's definetly not for a lack of writing brilliance around it's characters or story, but it always bothered me that as aggressively driven as the protagonist is depicted, often felt like he was being dragged around by the plot and the decisions of other active side characters. I think that's especially felt in the 2nd season.
Anyways, totally unrelated to the Captain America movie lol but it just hit me and wanted to comment on the realization
So excited for this one!
14:45.... so where were you when they were making this film? That is literally making me cry right now 😭😭
I love doing this too in fact I was watching "Roxanne" with Steve Martin and "The Gate" with Steven Dorf. I'm not as big of a comic book nerd so I don't know the comic book cannon stuff as well as everyone else(I think its kinda silly) I only know;...uuh other stuff..and to me the comic book stuff is a little off sometimes but id have to watch the movie like 5 times in a row to be accurate...but yeah I see it too. I was always wondering why they sequenced it like that..the pacing is a bit goofy footed. Oh don't worry it's hollyweird they do this kinda thing ten times a day they did this choppy stuff on purpose. Like the "Roxanne" movie wasn't that about "Cyra-nose" he was like a bad ass musketeer and "The Gate"... well, I remember those weird little impish demon thingys talked to like Terry when he fell down the hole and the big demon thingy...if I remember right didn't it try to befriend the Steven Dorf character? like it had lines and a whole maniacal plan for the little boy and there was like a whole really interesting back story on the geode thingy I totally remember there was a lot more to that story than what was presented....but yeah I love doing this kinda thing too.🤘❤👍oh oh ok gorgeous...heres a challenge try to save the "Alien" franchise and "cloverfeild" franchises or at least try to get the cloverfeild story to make sense....love it love it see ya saturday.
A little late in the viewing and commenting, but I loved your thoughts. Almost makes me want to buy a copy just so that I can edit it into a deep pov, or at least fiddle around to make it better.
Your vision of what happened after the serum scene: emotional punch to the gut. Amazing and beautiful. The little flashback . . . despite the action and questions that would have been erupting, I would have been near tears.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and editing skills with us.
I love your insights into story telling, Abbie! Fantastic video.
*SPOILER WARNING* : You know, whenever I watch Disney's Cruella now, I skip all of Cruella's introduction scenes because I like the mystery from the Baroness' perspective. She takes on a young protegee and at the same time a new nemesis, and the reveal of them being one and the same would be quite a twist. When I showed the movie to my cousin, I showed her my version first and then the original. She preferred my version, and was shocked at the 'twist' of Estella being Cruella. The build-up and reveal just fascinate me, and I love the film all the more for it.
Thank you for such informative content
the protagonist sometimes can't make a decision until something happens, unless they're clairvoyant and can see the future, the event has to occur then they can react, that is the plot has to happen, then the story of what the protagonist decides what to do in response to the event. Plot is what happens, story is how the character reacts to it.
This video is so well done! I'd love to see more of these types of videos. Keep up the great work!
Late to the party but this is phenomenal. Would love to see you edit other films in the future. Thanks for posting
"Captain America: The First Avenger" presumes the viewers are at least somewhat familiar with his backstory, and so already care about Steve Rogers and know the significance of his shield, the HYDRA symbol and the antagonist Red Skull. It's basically fan service. But if you haven't read the comics or watched the cartoons, you have to play catch-up, which can get very confusing. I definitely see your point and love your suggestions!
This video was EXCELENT ... Very helpful to improve our skills as writers! Thank you! Great job as always.
FANTASTIC explanation. I love your videos.
So well done @abbieemmons !! The way you recut the film was stunning and 100% better than the original (which is saying a lot since that’s my fav Marvel movie probably of all time). This was an I credit helpful breakdown of deep POV, how to really land a hook, and how to be a ruthless editor to achieve the greatest result. Keep up the good work! You’re a legend!
I love these Science of Writing videos!!! They're so informative and helpful!! More please!!
I like the changes that could improve the movie, but I would question one thing. The Tesseract is a vital piece to the Avengers story as a whole and becomes the central piece in the first Avengers movie. Maybe a reference and a flashback would suffice to include it
we didnt need to see the villain dig up some magic artifact and do all kinds of experiments just to make... guns... that shoot stuff... and still have to be reloaded... like every other gun. The movie woud not change if the bad guys were using rifles they bought at a pawn shop in west virginia so all the teseract scenes were omittable
Well done, Abbie!
THANK YOU for posting this--this was exactly what I needed for my WIP!
Seriously I learnt a lot from this video. I would love see more videos like this. Keep it up.
Loved this one! Thank you, Abbie
Abbie, you make me view Captain America the first Avenger not in the same way again. I agreed with you, I totally love this movie. Infact, this is the only Avenger's member movie that I love. But I feel it lacking in something that I couldn't put my finger on. And after you pointed them out in this video, they all make sense now. Thank you so much Abbie. This really helps tremendously in getting to know what really matters in a story. Can't wait for the next Story Science Episode! I hope you go for Sherlock Holmes next. *fingers cross
10:30 I would argue his impossible choice was the grenade. His dream is to serve his country, and he chose to die protecting his fellow recruits instead of living to fight another day.