|
net cafe scandal posted:I was curious about which Mahvel villains end up dead and how gruesomely they end up going Jeez Louise
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
And personally, going back to Man of Steel, all of Zod's pathos and nuance evaporate when, again, the plot forces him to be stupid for the sake of justifying his villainy. The plot opens other avenues for him by mentioning Kryptonian colonies, other potential worlds for him to rebuild Krypton on, and he insists like a spoiled child that it has to be Earth and no other place ever because he wants to be a super powered monster who can build an empire - which will do him a fat lot of good outside that solar system anyway. Not to mention all of his lackies are sneering uncharismatic thugs save Faora, who is cool because of how competent and confident she is in her viciousness. Both movies have this problem. Batman's moral ambiguity is undermined by his own idiocy. Lex Luthor is a caricature wrapped in dick jokes and pandering to baby boomers' hatred of millennials. They shoot high and come crashing down because they're more interested in being ponderous. If you absolutely must insist upon comparing things to Marvel, I got a greater sense of "achieving victory comes at a price" from the first season of Daredevil, where lives have been lost, Matt is wearying and a little more broken, and Fisk is on his way to becoming more dangerous than ever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
Brother Entropy posted:in what ways did the film make you guys feel awful? it hit alot of emotions in me but 'awful' definitely wasn't on that list It made me feel hopeless. Hopeless about the world. Hopeless about my life (although, that's personal). Hopeless about heroes. I felt drained and just beaten after it. I know it boils down to Superman. I felt this exact same way coming out of Man of Steel. This Superman is just so off putting to me it bothers me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
To me, that sounds like an interesting movie if it was capable of evoking such a strong emotional reaction from you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
net cafe scandal posted:Left badly wounded Note that Rumlow was spared because he was being set up to become Crossbones in Civil War and I assume that Klaw will be a villain in Black Panther so there's a good chance they'll get killed in those films.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
I find it kind of amusing that the only serious threats that weren't killed were Bucky, Loki, and Abomination. The Hulk is the only Marvel hero that spared the life of an powerful villain that they hadn't considered a lifelong friend beforehand. I also thought it was sort of interesting that Pepper was directly responsible for the deaths of two of the Iron Man villains when in the comics she's pacifistic and ardently refuses to wear any sort of armor with weaponry built in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:To me, that sounds like an interesting movie if it was capable of evoking such a strong emotional reaction from you. I don't like feeling bad. Especially after a superhero movie, which I'm seeing so I don't feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:To me, that sounds like an interesting movie if it was capable of evoking such a strong emotional reaction from you. And it isn't universal. I walked out euphoric and...hopeful, really. Excited for the great renewal to come. So no, the movie didn't set out to make its audience feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:And personally, going back to Man of Steel, all of Zod's pathos and nuance evaporate when, again, the plot forces him to be stupid for the sake of justifying his villainy. The plot opens other avenues for him by mentioning Kryptonian colonies, other potential worlds for him to rebuild Krypton on, and he insists like a spoiled child that it has to be Earth and no other place ever because he wants to be a super powered monster who can build an empire - which will do him a fat lot of good outside that solar system anyway. Not to mention all of his lackies are sneering uncharismatic thugs save Faora, who is cool because of how competent and confident she is in her viciousness. The movie points out that the colonies fail specifically because they aren't self-sustaining. There's no reason to think even Mars would be sustainable without constant aid from Earth. Even if it was, it's not a good idea to have Space Nazis right next door to you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
I should note that I really really enjoyed Super and Defendor, two indie superhero films that also dragged the genre over the coals and questioned some of their core assumptions. But they were also satires and had a ton of dark comedy through them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The movie points out that the colonies fail specifically because they aren't self-sustaining. There's no reason to think even Mars would be sustainable without constant aid from Earth. If I'm mistaken, I apologize. I've forgotten, though. What does the movie say about why Earth wouldn't fail while the others would? They're still sublimating one ecosystem for another, so the premise seems faulty to begin with. In the end though, it doesn't matter much to BVS because Clark doesn't think about what he did to Zod at all. It's the extenuating collateral damage he had no control over hanging over his head.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:It made me feel hopeless. Hopeless about the world. Hopeless about my life (although, that's personal). Hopeless about heroes. I felt drained and just beaten after it. I know it boils down to Superman. I felt this exact same way coming out of Man of Steel. This Superman is just so off putting to me it bothers me. that's interesting, i didn't find this superman all that less hope-inspiring than the average take on the character, especially with how blatant the jesus metaphors were
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
I don't really get the complaint that BvS was too depressing at all. I feel like it ends up in a much more optimistic, hopeful place than MOS did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
I will agree it is more optimistic. But it still greatly depressed me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
This is great, but there is a fault of sorts for me in there. We can't speak for general audiences. The only, albeit clumsy, measure being box office receipts, which were great for MoS and seem to be doing well for BvS. It also seems like the most vocal detractors are people familiar with comics/movies, I mean their general response to both movies has been Not My Superhero etc, that could be confirmation bias on my part. Add to that there's the whole political/ideological aspect of comic books, which have always been a vehicle of propaganda, so the question becomes what do they represent? I find the Marvel movie verse much more disturbing and darker than anything in the Synder movies. The synopsis you gave of the Marvel movies is only half right, yes they make the problem go away, temporarily, but another horde of nameless/faceless enemies is always just around the corner. It's just an endless cycle, Superman is all about Hope in the face of such horror. Also just as movies, MoS and BvS are really great at visual storytelling and well encapsulated because of it, Marvel feels like a tv series, complete with a season cliffhanger. brawleh fucked around with this message at 07:00 on Mar 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I will agree it is more optimistic. But it still greatly depressed me. Are you saying it was....unbearable?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:If I'm mistaken, I apologize. I've forgotten, though. What does the movie say about why Earth wouldn't fail while the others would? They're still sublimating one ecosystem for another, so the premise seems faulty to begin with. From what we saw, the colonies reverted back to barren moon-like worlds, which is probably how they started out. Earth is already able to support life, and even if the terraforming fails they'll just get superpowers instead (though I don't think they knew that at the time of the speech).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Nigh unbearable tension through-out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:From what we saw, the colonies reverted back to barren moon-like worlds, which is probably how they started out. Earth is already able to support life, and even if the terraforming fails they'll just get superpowers instead (though I don't think they knew that at the time of the speech). So again, there's nothing they have to gain by being supremacist jerks, and they reject coexistence because of a fixation on their own nostalgia. I guess that's a fair bit less hollow. But again, Superman has forgotten Zod. In fact, he's forgotten him by MOS's own epilogue. That being said, if we're expecting nuance from future villains, Lex and Doomsday already set a bad precedent, and Darkseid isn't known for being a character who lives in shades of gray. Heck, he's pretty much an anthropomorphic personification of evil - his draw has always been the grandeur and scope of it. Nodosaur fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Mar 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:03
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:So again, there's nothing they have to gain by being supremacist jerks, and they reject coexistence because of a fixation on their own nostalgia. I guess that's a fair bit less hollow. How is Lex not nuanced?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:But again, Superman has forgotten Zod. In fact, he's forgotten him by MOS's own epilogue. A weird thing that BvS does is re-establish the "Superman just blunders into situations and doesn't care about or even acknowledge all the collateral damage" complaint that people had about the destruction of Metropolis scene and turns that into a plot point around the massacre in the African village, but then flips that by revealing the African massacre was masterminded by Lex and wasn't Superman's fault in the slightest and people are dopes for doubting Superman's actions (which I'm interpreting as a really unsubtle dig at the people complaining about Mos) but then at the climax of BvS they have another Kryptonian-versus-Kryptonian battle where a whole bunch of buildings are 9/11'ed but this time they make it clear that civilians weren't in danger. C'mon guys, can we stick with just the one history revision instead of piling them up like this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
The movie spends all of five minutes detailing what drives him and what his background is. Say what you will about the Thor movies, but we ar least get time spent dwelling on Loki's perspective and why he has daddy issues. Hell, even in its own universe, MOS spends a lot of energy on dwelling on Zod's pain at losing his people. Another comparison is Fisk in Daredevil, whose abuse is elaborated upon. Likewise, as monstrously irredeemable as he is, Killgrave's childhood that allegedly drove him to villainy is given context even as it raises questions to its legitimacy. Lex? Gets "I was hurt and no one came to MY rescue." No look at his childhood, no flashbacks to his prayers going unanswered. Just a few lines and a bunch of pontificating about God that sounds like it was taken verbatim from a mid-2000's livejournal page. It's actually rather insulting, because it tries to use the serious issue of child abuse without any attention or care given to it, so all it serves as is a hastily delivered excuse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:The movie spends all of five minutes detailing what drives him and what his background is. Say what you will about the Thor movies, but we ar least get time spent dwelling on Loki's perspective and why he has daddy issues. Hell, even in its own universe, MOS spends a lot of energy on dwelling on Zod's pain at losing his people. Another comparison is Fisk in Daredevil, whose abuse is elaborated upon. Likewise, as monstrously irredeemable as he is, Killgrave's childhood that allegedly drove him to villainy is given context even as it raises questions to its legitimacy. Not having a super fleshed out backstory isn't the same thing as not being nuanced. He isn't motivated by being abused as a child, he's motivated by the fact that he's an impotent weirdo whose desires to be taken seriously are overshadowed by the massive forces he is playing around with. Lex's entire character is centered around being taken seriously by other people, to the point where he gets visibly flustered every time he screws up one of his pre-written villain speeches. He's an interesting mirror of Bruce Wayne in that the arrival of Superman amplifies his prior obsession and breaks him; Bruce viewed the destruction of the WayneCorp building as him losing his family on a larger scale, and Lex views Superman as an even larger shadow that he is stuck under after spending his entire life trying to fill his father's footsteps. Bruce realized that Superman is only a man and learns to accept him in order to fulfill his role as a protector, Lex cannot view Superman as anything but a god and loses everything in his quest to destroy him or drag him down to his own level. Snowglobe of Doom posted:A weird thing that BvS does is re-establish the "Superman just blunders into situations and doesn't care about or even acknowledge all the collateral damage" complaint that people had about the destruction of Metropolis scene and turns that into a plot point around the massacre in the African village, but then flips that by revealing the African massacre was masterminded by Lex and wasn't Superman's fault in the slightest and people are dopes for doubting Superman's actions (which I'm interpreting as a really unsubtle dig at the people complaining about Mos) but then at the climax of BvS they have another Kryptonian-versus-Kryptonian battle where a whole bunch of buildings are 9/11'ed but this time they make it clear that civilians weren't in danger. C'mon guys, can we stick with just the one history revision instead of piling them up like this? I thought the African woman was testifying about the negative side effects that came after the militia was taken out, not the battle itself. This would fit in with Pa Kent's anecdote about the horses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I don't like feeling bad. Especially after a superhero movie, which I'm seeing so I don't feel bad. There is no happy without feeling sad. But any depression on something you agree is optimistic is on you. HorseRenoir posted:I thought the African woman was testifying about the negative side effects that came after the militia was taken out, not the battle itself. This would fit in with Pa Kent's anecdote about the horses. That's exactly what it was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
If you want ANY of that to have any weight, though, you need to invest time in showing why he thinks that way. Give it CONTEXT. Comic books rightly left villains that had nothing but character tics and a gimmick behind ages ago, and you can't give screen time showing what makes Lex tick instead of shoring it up with a dubious motive rant and clumsy attempts at subtext? He's the most cartoonishly flat villain in a superhero movie since the dime store Sauron they had Chris Eccleston sleepwalk through playing in Thor: The Dark World.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Not everything needs an explicit origin story. What motivated Darth Vader in Episode 4?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:If you want ANY of that to have any weight, though, you need to invest time in showing why he thinks that way. Give it CONTEXT. . Why
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Holy Crap, Ezra Miller got swole for the Flash 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
TetsuoTW posted:Not everything needs an explicit origin story. What motivated Darth Vader in Episode 4? I don't think Vader is a very good villain in Episode 4. He's really just kind of Tarkin's thug.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:I don't think Vader is a very good villain in Episode 4. He's really just kind of Tarkin's thug. He was keeping a watchful Eye on Tarkin. Takin just thought Vader was his lap dog
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 08:16
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:I don't think Vader is a very good villain in Episode 4. He's really just kind of Tarkin's thug. A New Hope kind of sucks a lot. Edit: But it's still better than all three prequels and the Force Awakens.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
You know, actually, that question deserves more of an answer. "A New Hope" is a story about imagining archetypes in a setting and realizing it on screen. Episode 4 is more about ideas and it's heroes than it is its villains; they don't invite any high ideals. They're meant to be more devices than people. It's not until Episode V that investment is put into Vader as a character with a story. In the first movie, they're more invested in him as an element of design than they are with backstory - his actual role is the same as Rumlow's in Winter Soldier. Lex is meant to be the opposite number to the main characters. That's why the movie makes a token effort towards giving him background for his ideals. But it's all shallow and time is barely spent. As much as I criticize how they handled Bruce, they DO spend time fleshing him out, because he's a pit part of this story's theme. So is Lex, but they do next to nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:That being said, if we're expecting nuance from future villains, Lex and Doomsday already set a bad precedent, and Darkseid isn't known for being a character who lives in shades of gray. Heck, he's pretty much an anthropomorphic personification of evil - his draw has always been the grandeur and scope of it. Yeah, he's a perfect Zack Snyder villain. Snowglobe of Doom posted:A weird thing that BvS does is re-establish the "Superman just blunders into situations and doesn't care about or even acknowledge all the collateral damage" complaint that people had about the destruction of Metropolis scene and turns that into a plot point around the massacre in the African village, but then flips that by revealing the African massacre was masterminded by Lex and wasn't Superman's fault in the slightest and people are dopes for doubting Superman's actions (which I'm interpreting as a really unsubtle dig at the people complaining about Mos) but then at the climax of BvS they have another Kryptonian-versus-Kryptonian battle where a whole bunch of buildings are 9/11'ed but this time they make it clear that civilians weren't in danger. C'mon guys, can we stick with just the one history revision instead of piling them up like this? It's not revisionist history to give Batman a role on the team where he's the one competent to think strategically about the staging of the fight. TFRazorsaw posted:Lex? Gets "I was hurt and no one came to MY rescue." No look at his childhood, no flashbacks to his prayers going unanswered. Just a few lines and a bunch of pontificating about God that sounds like it was taken verbatim from a mid-2000's livejournal page. It's actually rather insulting, because it tries to use the serious issue of child abuse without any attention or care given to it, so all it serves as is a hastily delivered excuse. The movie is decidedly uninterested in Luthor's claim that it's alright to threaten to incinerate an old woman because you had a bad childhood, to its credit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
Looks like Patrick Stewart is definitely in next year's Wolverine movie.quote:Stewart told me he will complete the second season of comedy series Blunt Talk, which he makes with Adrian Scarborough, and then head for ‘an exotic, North American location’ to shoot a new Wolverine film with Hugh Jackman
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 12:03
|
|
|
If they really wanted to make a realistic BvS, it should have been revealed that Batman died the first time he tried swinging from a roof top.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
Not being a comics guy, how powerful is WW supposed to be? It felt a little off balance that she looked like she was having a blast and playing around while everyone else was on the brink of death. She came off as near invincible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
The Dave posted:Not being a comics guy, how powerful is WW supposed to be? It felt a little off balance that she looked like she was having a blast and playing around while everyone else was on the brink of death. She came off as near invincible. I guess a gunshot could kill her otherwise why the bracelets
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
The Dave posted:Not being a comics guy, how powerful is WW supposed to be? She's approximately as powerful as Superman. In the comics she can fly as well. Edit: she can keep up with the Flash at "cruising speed" (but not his best speeds) and Batman said she's the best melee fighter in the world. She's not quite as durable as Superman but her superhuman healing factor and her resistance to magical attacks apparently makes up the difference. http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Wonder_Woman_%28Diana_Prince%29 Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Mar 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:I guess a gunshot could kill her otherwise why the bracelets 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
Ezra Miller looks like some kind of creepily handsome movie star version of Brian Peppers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 14:07
|
|
