|
Jedit posted:No, that's just "adamant" or "adamantine". It's a Latin neologism; I'm not sure what the original Greek word was, if it was used at all. Ah, right. "Adamastos" was the original Greek word. "Diamond" also comes from the same root.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Mousepractice posted:The Dark Knight is really badly edited for dialogue and contains a lot of uncomfortably cramped line readings. I feel like a crazy person whenever I watch the new batman movies with other people, because everyone else loves them so much. I feel like they're all just so bad. Christian bale especially is a horrendous batman. Heath ledger clearly got to have some fun with his performance but everything else really rubs me the wrong way. People talk about how cool the batman vs bane fight was, and i'm like, were we watching the same movie?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I feel like a crazy person whenever I watch the new batman movies with other people, because everyone else loves them so much. I feel like they're all just so bad. Christian bale especially is a horrendous batman. Heath ledger clearly got to have some fun with his performance but everything else really rubs me the wrong way. I liked Bane and wish they would have used the even more unintelligible Bane Voice. It seems like the flaws in performances by Bale or Oldman and the editing are really on Nolan since he'd have the final cut. And I like Bat's dumb growly voice and several other bits. /comicbookmovieexcuses
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I feel like a crazy person whenever I watch the new batman movies with other people, because everyone else loves them so much. I feel like they're all just so bad. Christian bale especially is a horrendous batman. Heath ledger clearly got to have some fun with his performance but everything else really rubs me the wrong way. I thought the choreography in the films was terrible and really only liked a tiny bit of the dialogue in the trilogy. Keaton films 4 life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
Book example, which I'm not spoiling since it's been around forever: I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream ends with the Narrator turned into a soft squishy beast by the AI, after killing the four other humans trapped in the place they were in. But in doing so, the AI has utterly lost: there are no more humans to torment. Bonus points, the description of the transformation is implicitly impossible to harm. Yet the tone of the ending is "Wow the AI has totally won!" and it irritates me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Book example, which I'm not spoiling since it's been around forever: I always thought the "Hate speech" was goony as gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
The reason the tone at the end is "wow the AI won" is because, to Ted and the rest of the survivors, he did. I think you're looking at it from an interesting angle, but not the one the story puts forward. The story makes it clear that their one saving grace, the one thing keeping them all sane (well, most of them sane), was that they would not turn on each other. In the end, they did exactly that; to Ted, AM didn't win because he tortured the rest of the gang, he won because he drove them all mad.
CJacobs has a new favorite as of 08:02 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
Snapchat A Titty posted:I always thought the "Hate speech" was goony as gently caress Well, AM is goony as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
Mr E posted:I thought the choreography in the films was terrible and really only liked a tiny bit of the dialogue in the trilogy. Keaton films 4 life. If you put Keaton in not-a-90-lb.-rubber-suit-with-no-joints, his fights could've been just as good as Bale's. Bale could barely move or see anything either, so it's not like he added anything to the role. Actually, the old '89 suit had the advantage of having nose holes cut in the mask, so Keaton could speak more than one sentence without having to stop and gasp for air.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I feel like a crazy person whenever I watch the new batman movies with other people, because everyone else loves them so much. I feel like they're all just so bad. Christian bale especially is a horrendous batman. Heath ledger clearly got to have some fun with his performance but everything else really rubs me the wrong way. I really enjoyed The Dark Knight as a Michael Mann inspired crime drama, but The Dark Knight Rises was trash
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
Since there has been a lot of discussion about good and bad action scenes, u recommend everyone watches The Raid: Redemption. It's a very solid movie with great action sequences. True, their machine-guns never seem to run out of bullets, but it's otherwise pretty drat awesome. As for batman, I feel that even though they were good, only Heath Ledger's performance will outlive the trilogy. Everything else was pretty forgettable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
EmmyOk posted:I'm assuming this is "THINGS ARE WORSE THAN EVER" guy. I think he's hilarious but none of my friends get why it's so bad. That scene is bad for what it results in (two one-liners at a press conference is all it takes for them to give in to a terrorist's demands, on the spot with no deliberation or anything), it screams "gotta move this plot along, we dragged our heels in China too much oh god." But what's worse for me is the loving peanut gallery cop in the passenger seat of the paddy wagon during the whole transporting-Harvey-as-fake-Batman sequence. "What is that? Is that a bazooka?" "Oh man, this is not good. This is NOT good!" We don't need him. He serves no purpose. We don't need him as an audience surrogate; we can see the goddamn rocket launcher on the screen, we can see the helicopter crashing, we know these are Bad Things. He's not a character in the rest of the movie, he just exists for that sequence, so there's no tension from him being in peril because we don't give a poo poo about him. He's just there to spout one-liners. Did they need him as an excuse to make more cuts? Did Michael Bay guest-direct when that scene was filming? Was Nolan terrified of that much time going by without a line of dialogue? gently caress it feels so out of place and unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
I feel like the past Batman discussion just helped me realized that lately I've finished my journey all the way through the cycle of Batman movies. First I loved the Keaton movies, then hated them, then loved the Bale movies, then grew neutral to them and found joy and style in the Keaton movies again. The Adam West Batman movie remained great and the Kilmer/Clooney ones remained bad the whole time, though. EmmyOk posted:I'm assuming this is "THINGS ARE WORSE THAN EVER" guy. I think he's hilarious but none of my friends get why it's so bad. My irrational irritation is literally that, when I hear some really bad line delivery in a movie/show and I'm the only one who notices. Sometimes people don't even get it when I point it out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I feel like a crazy person whenever I watch the new batman movies with other people, because everyone else loves them so much. I feel like they're all just so bad. Christian bale especially is a horrendous batman. Heath ledger clearly got to have some fun with his performance but everything else really rubs me the wrong way. I'm so glad people are saying this now, because I often feel like I'm the only person who was utterly underwhelmed by the trilogy. I don't think they're bad, just meh. Bale's Batman was lovely and his gravelly voice is only second behind Bane's for the worst voice I've heard in a movie in the last twenty years (Bane sounds older than Christopher Lee, but has none of the gravitas). The plots were as stupid as they were forgettable. Mr E posted:I thought the choreography in the films was terrible and really only liked a tiny bit of the dialogue in the trilogy. Keaton films 4 life. Keaton was the only time I've believed a man would dress up as a bat and fight crime because he pulled off the entire "under this mask, I am loving insane" so drat well. Even when he's Bruce Wayne there's something in his eyes that shouts out that there's something just not right with him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
The first batman was kind of ruined for me by Jack Nicholson playing Jack Nicholson, so I never saw the second one until this year. It immediately struck me as a much stronger batman movie than anything we've been fed in the last twenty years. It had the melodrama and camp without going full clooney. The danny elfman score was extremely cohesive with the tone of the movie, and tim burton's eerie gotham felt just right. I think batman films should try to emulate the style of the animated series as closely as they can, because BTAS feels like the definitive batman to me. Sadly, that will probably never happen now that DC is trying to stuff its eggs into the avengers' basket. edit: I probably need a new avatar, huh
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:Adamantium is from Greek mythology. It's the nigh-unbreakable divine metal used to make the Gates of Tartarus, the chains of Prometheus, and other things meant to restrain deities. That's adamantine. -tium suffix is later. They all stem from αδαμαστος, same root the word 'diamond' comes from. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:Adamantium is from Greek mythology. It's the nigh-unbreakable divine metal used to make the Gates of Tartarus, the chains of Prometheus, and other things meant to restrain deities. Okay fancypants then it comes from the Greek adamantem, which is where English 'adamant' comes from.  Same difference.EFB syscall girl posted:I liked Bane and wish they would have used the even more unintelligible Bane Voice. It seems like the flaws in performances by Bale or Oldman and the editing are really on Nolan since he'd have the final cut. Originally the whole movie was full of unintelligible Bane Voice, and they went back and re-recorded almost all of his lines to make them clearer. If you watch the original trailers and compare the final scenes, his voice is different. I personally LOVED Tom Hardy's Bane. My first exposure to the character of Bane was either the Batman Animated Series or Batman Forever, but either way Bane was a dumb, muscle-bound luchadore moron who was just the big thug muscle for Poison Ivy. I never cared for the character at ALL. But I knew in the comics he was pretty awesome, I just haven't really read a ton of Batman comics. Finally we get a movie where Bane is still crazy strong, (He's one of a few superheroes in better shape than bats himself) but he's equal parts crazy smart and crazy driven. The guy is just a loving machine. Luchadore Bane doesn't really get me going, but Hardy's "Victory has defeated you!" Bane had me floored. Also; that's a great line.  I guess my Irritating Movie Moment is the entirety of Batman Forever. Just all of it. Every frame. Zaphod42 has a new favorite as of 17:23 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Bale's Batman was actually pretty good in Batman Begins. That scene where he's interrogating the dirty cop ("SWEAR TO ME!") was such a breath of fresh air after our last cinematic exposure to Batman had a Bat Credit Card. Then he became a parody of himself with that overdone voice in the sequels. Bane and the Joker completely overshadow Bats.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:
I can't fully hate Batman Forever, I kinda dig the aesthetic of it. The Nolan Batmans could have used a little neon IMO. Also, I think TDK is the only legit good Batman movie in the Nolanverse, Begins and Rises being merely okay, like each has a few things I really like (Liam Neeson, the scene where Gotham basically explodes, etc) Coffee And Pie has a new favorite as of 17:38 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Mousepractice posted:The Dark Knight is really badly edited for dialogue and contains a lot of uncomfortably cramped line readings. Now that I can look back at this, gently caress this hand held cam bullshit
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Pneub posted:If you put Keaton in not-a-90-lb.-rubber-suit-with-no-joints, his fights could've been just as good as Bale's. Bale could barely move or see anything either, so it's not like he added anything to the role. And yet, Tim Burton edited the fight scenes so that Batman looked agile Potato quality https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeAiF-G-PKw
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
ElGroucho posted:And yet, Tim Burton edited the fight scenes so that Batman looked agile
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Dewgy posted:I can definitely see some of the delivery being considered lovely, but on the other hand, it's a comic book movie. No matter how good you make it, flubbed writing and awkward delivery are pretty much just delivering on what you come to expect from comic books. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBEz-wfq8Ew
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:Here's my irrationally irritating movie moment: unnecessary gymnastics in a fight scene. Hey first guy, good job doing 10 back handsprings before spinning to actually face the guy you want to fight. That but with sword fights. When it looks like that they are purposefully trying to hit each other's swords just so the other one can parry, it looks stupid. I'm not a trained swordsman or anything, but I like Spartacus' fight scenes, because they duck and weave and swing at each other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Tying into the Batman chat that's why i loved the first Bane/Batman fight in Rises. No music, just Bane punching the poo poo out of his victim without fanfare. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Polaron posted:Bale's Batman was actually pretty good in Batman Begins. That scene where he's interrogating the dirty cop ("SWEAR TO ME!") was such a breath of fresh air after our last cinematic exposure to Batman had a Bat Credit Card. That quote for me was peak batman voice, it sounded great. From then on it definitely became a self-parody
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
mng posted:That but with sword fights. When it looks like that they are purposefully trying to hit each other's swords just so the other one can parry, it looks stupid. I'm not a trained swordsman or anything, but I like Spartacus' fight scenes, because they duck and weave and swing at each other. Agreed. The problem is Star Wars. Starwars was hugely successful and mainstreamed swordfighting for a lot of people who didn't watch sword-and-sandal movies before it. Problem is, with Star Wars you're fighting with lightsabers. Your weapons are extremely light (the blade has no weight at all so its entirely weighted towards the hilt and super fast) and the blade is infinitely lethal; a single swipe, even being grazed means you're completely toast. As a result, fighting with lightsabers is overwhelmingly defensive. Its all about using your lightsaber as a shield (since there's no light-shields in Star Wars) so you don't get your loving arm hacked off like Luke or Anakin. But.... real swords are absolutely nothing like that. They're big and slow and heavy. Also most blows, especially glancing blows, aren't going to be lethal. If you're wearing armor than lethal blows practically require you to knock your opponent to the ground and then coup-de-grace him with a dagger, rather than just slicing him to bits. Unarmored opponents are more likely to die to a thrust than a slash. Additionally when you're filming a movie, you don't actually want to hit the other person with your sword, and you're choreographing who is going to do what ahead of time. But that means a blow that was supposed to go for your opponent and be parried instead is targeted at your opponent's parry. Which is backwards. The end result though is that 99% of swordfights are a bunch of people actually trying to hit the other person's sword, not trying to kill each other. I posted a video a few pages back about criticism of modern action movies, and it talked about how most swordfights, especially lightsaber fights, feel a lot more like dancing than fighting, and that's absolutely true. There's no impact, no followthrough at all. Its just kids banging sticks against each other on purpose, clang clang clang. The problem is real fighting is pretty messy and not even all that much fun to look at, its mostly a bunch of maneuvering and posturing and then one or two real strikes and the whole thing is over in the flash of a second. Unless again you're wearing armor, in which case it turns into two people bashing each other until one wears out, like a boxing match. TLDR: Starwars' flashy lightsaber fighting has ruined swordplay for film forever. Unarmored swordfighting should go down like fencing, it should be over in like 10 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGearEu2PlU Armored swordfighting should go down like gladiatora, its about tripping and bashing your opponent so you can stab him in the neck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1S_Q3CGqZmg Zaphod42 has a new favorite as of 20:01 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:
No they aren't. Even longswords were fairly light. They had to be, or you'd never be able to fight with it. Movie scenes with people swinging in large arcs are nonsense. Period fight manuals describe such a person as an ox or a bull, and say you should just kill them quickly before they accidentally hit you. The real reason movie sword fights look the way they do is because they exist to tell a story. Showing actual fencing, between people who know what they're doing, would be really boring. It's full of short, controlled movements and careful gauging of distance. The person with more skill and patience will wait for a mistake, then stab their opponent in the face. There's some exceptions for things like heavy military sabres, but those were designed for specific uses. you're right about glancing blows though. Even leather clothing is enough to prevent most sword cuts. That's why most swords were designed to thrust, and were taught that way. Even then, it's unlikely that a single wound would just drop someone. All that adrenaline would keep them fighting for a few minutes, even after a nasty wound. Check out The Duelists for some excellent examples of movie sword fighting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
I wish that gif could somehow be the thread title.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Unarmored swordfighting should go down like fencing, it should be over in like 10 seconds: Sabre is a very fast weapon. Not all fencing is nearly so quick. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgJy92YFWDw
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:Tying into the Batman chat that's why i loved the first Bane/Batman fight in Rises. No music, just Bane punching the poo poo out of his victim without fanfare. Would be cooler if it was shot/edited better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
"No, but you see, they are so used to dueling together and and force powe-" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Sabre is a very fast weapon. Not all fencing is nearly so quick. I loving hated saber fencing. It's basically rock-paper-scissors and was made more for practicing cavalry sabers than fighting on foot. Foil is way more fun and stabby.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Wow, didn't know fencing rounds could be over so quickly. Now I want to see Dane axe dueling  With this guy 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:
 1:21https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2viKgHN9S1E Edit: Ugggg I looked this up at work with the sound off, don't turn on the sound. ClothHat has a new favorite as of 21:34 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
When people in movies (and most other things now that i think about it) open their eyes underwater! I know it's something that's perfectly plausible in real life, especially if you're not swimming in a ton of chlorine. But it still bugs me that when people in movies do that then come up for air and then aren't immediately rubbing their eyes because that poo poo hurts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Funzo posted:No they aren't. Even longswords were fairly light. They had to be, or you'd never be able to fight with it. Movie scenes with people swinging in large arcs are nonsense. Period fight manuals describe such a person as an ox or a bull, and say you should just kill them quickly before they accidentally hit you. Sorry, I over emphasized. I should have said heav-ier and slow-er than lightsabers, and with momentum. Longswords definitely didn't weigh a ton and weren't like loving monster hunter greatswords or anything. And yeah, most idiots with a sword do a real huge over-swing arc that nobody with any sword training would ever do, because its painfully easy to avoid and then you can stab them while they're recovering from the huge swing easy peasy. But my point is you can't flip them around like a lightsaber. (Rapier you pretty much can though, different story )And yeah, I admit some of this is just inherent to making a sword fight cinematic. People waiting and positioning forever just to get one strike is boring, and fights that are over in 5 seconds are easy to miss, and there's no time for tension. But that was only one of several complaints about Hollywood swordfighting. Nth Doctor posted:Sabre is a very fast weapon. Not all fencing is nearly so quick. There's more back-and-forth with the foil, less commitment to a single strike, yeah. But this still highlights the point I made above; that real swordfighting is more about posturing and then its over pretty drat quick. You say "not nearly so quick" and compared to sabre it is, but compare that to a movie swordfight and its still extremely short. ClothHat posted:
Haha, yeah. Thing is losing your lightsaber arm means the fight is over; the only reason Luke isn't immediately killed is because Vader is his father and is trying to corrupt him to the dark side, not kill him. And a body shot would be instantly lethal. But yeah, hacking off an arm is not actually lethal as much as it wins the fight
Zaphod42 has a new favorite as of 22:26 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Haha, yeah. Thing is losing your lightsaber arm means the fight is over; the only reason Luke isn't immediately killed is because Vader is his father and is trying to corrupt him to the dark side, not kill him. And a body shot would be instantly lethal. But yeah, hacking off an arm is not actually lethal as much as it wins the fight
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Pilchenstein posted:I thought he was referring to the point just before that where Luke grazes Vader. Oh. Well... then Vader is special because he's a cyborg at this point? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 23:26
|
|