|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:
No, like 90% of the time it's "I went into the movie expecting X. When X didn't happen, I couldn't accept why it didn't happen, so I called it bad". Like there's no internal contradiction to this iteration of Batman (an older, jaded dude who is clearly suffering from PTSD) killing dudes who get in his way. It's just straight up "(my) Batman just doesn't do that!" computer parts fucked around with this message at 12:38 on Jul 7, 2016 |
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:21 |
|
|
computer parts posted:No, like 90% of the time it's "I went into the movie expecting X. When X didn't happen, I couldn't accept why it didn't happen, so I called it bad". It's almost as if there was a $100 million multi-level advertising campaign that carpetbombarded people with specific images and scenes and actor interviews over a period of several months and fed off their nostalgia and their love of these iconic characters that created a level of anticipation in the general population. Almost. But no, the audience is bad and they watch movies the wrong way, let's go with that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:It's almost as if there was a $100 million multi-level advertising campaign that carpetbombarded people with specific images and scenes and actor interviews over a period of several months and fed off their nostalgia and their love of these iconic characters that created a level of anticipation in the general population. Almost. That is correct. The marketing doesn't matter. Movies don't need to be what the audience wants.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
computer parts posted:No, like 90% of the time it's "I went into the movie expecting X. When X didn't happen, I couldn't accept why it didn't happen, so I called it bad". This Batman isn't My Batman because My Batman has a difficult time getting explosives away from him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
The problem a lot of people have is they cannot reconcile the impact of superheroes when they see things for what they really are. Nolan's Batman, Man of Steel, BvS shows a more complete picture of having superheroes, how people's lives and the world is affected, examines more, explores more, is funnier, and shows how stupid some of it is in the real world, etc. But when shown, people go "NOT MY SUPERMAN/BATMAN!!!" and get defensive and complain. They're the people dragging Superman down and like SMG says, aren't really fans. "WTF Superman? Why did you go to the Indian Ocean, you should have stayed in Metropolis, gently caress those others. WHY DIDN'T YOU CONTROL ZOD AND TAKE HIM OUT OF THE CITY!! NOT MY SUPERMAN!!" Pa Kent and Ma Kent are the real heroes, if it was just Jor-El, Superman would have let poo poo go to his head and lacked understanding of humanity. Pa Kent isn't appreciated nearly enough for what he had to deal with and how he raised Clark. poo poo, Ma is right and actually cares about Clark, he doesn't owe people poo poo for the way they treat and expect things out of him. Since Batman is the juvenile power fantasy he's probably the fanboys coming out of the basement to bring Superman down. They can't accept what a Zod vs Superman fight would do to a city so in their impotent feeling powerless rage they wanna go out and punch something. Alfred's the father figure begging him to be a normal adult. Unlike the Marvel movies which pay more lip service to all this and are more escapist pew pew fun good times, which is fine and great and I like them, but the DC movies are better films. "Let's just show you 5 seconds of tape here about the impact of having the Avengers then brush it all aside and fight."
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:That is correct. The marketing doesn't matter. Movies don't need to be what the audience wants. I'm not saying this is a good thing, or that it's the right way to approach movies at all, just that it's a thing that actually does happen. A lot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:No, like 90% of the time it's "I went into the movie expecting X. When X didn't happen, I couldn't accept why it didn't happen, so I called it bad". Again the comparison to Avengers is instructive here because, in Avengers, characterization is static. Tony Stark is one set thing, and nothing more. Here are his positive traits, here are his negative traits. Watch him overcome his negative traits, and use his positive traits to kill Nazi alien zombie demons. Then the negative traits kick back in. We go through the checklist, and we hit all the notes: there's a scene where he drinks scotch and scene where he tests a new suit, etc. "In this episode Hulk learns about sharing." Sharing makes Hulk angry, but Hulk can also use his anger to promote sharing. That sort of thing. If you follow the same checklist with BVS, there's no scene where Batman throws away a gun in disgust. And that's equally bad as if the red Power Ranger wore a blue shirt for the entire film ("why isn't he red? He's supposed to be red! This is unacceptable!!!") - or, worse, if Michelangelo toned down being a party dude. ("Partying can get you in trouble, but partying can also be a source of fun!")
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
Gatts posted:The problem a lot of people have is they cannot reconcile the impact of superheroes when they see things for what they really are. Nolan's Batman, Man of Steel, BvS shows a more complete picture of having superheroes, how people's lives and the world is affected You do understand that superheroes are entirely fictional and don't actually exist in the real world, right? That's it's not actually possible to "see things for what they really are"? That the DC films aren't actually more "realistic" than the Marvel films because they're both entirely unrealistic to start with? Choosing to show widespread destruction after a superhero battle is a creative choice, just as much as choosing to show joyful applauding crowds/witty quips/oh hey the dog survived the explosion after all [roll credits] is also a creative choice. It's in no way necessary for either option to be put into a movie. Complaining that people can't accept "realistic" superhero movies with "real consequences" is an odd way to dismiss other people's critiques.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Hopefully Godzilla 2 has a scene where some council furiously debates about who is going to pay for the buildings Godzilla knocked over in the first movie, right before Ghidorah spits electrics all over 'em.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
Electromax posted:Hopefully Godzilla 2 has a scene where some council furiously debates about who is going to pay for the buildings Godzilla knocked over in the first movie, right before Ghidorah spits electrics all over 'em. It's more tactically realistic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
I disagree Snowglobe. While not real this is a pretty good depiction of what would happen if they WERE real. Why can't we have that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Electromax posted:Hopefully Godzilla 2 has a scene where some council furiously debates about who is going to pay for the buildings Godzilla knocked over in the first movie, right before Ghidorah spits electrics all over 'em. Actually that'd be a great homage to the classic Godzilla genre. The early 60s Showa Godzilla films are chock full of subplots with TV station managers bitching about ratings and stuff like that which just go on and on and on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:In another subforum someone pointed out that he designed MGS1 levels out of Legos & used his finger to show camera placement and stuff to his team. You know something, it wouldn't be a stretch to think this influenced the look of the game in a way. Not that things look like Lego, but they totally get around the PSX's limitations by making everything very stiff and geometric.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Why is it called the PSX, is that like ID4 where I sorta had to be there
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:
We do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:Why is it called the PSX, is that like ID4 where I sorta had to be there Or like every other console ever except I guess the PS2. I think you're even an Xbox One player, what's the deal with THAT name?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:You know something, it wouldn't be a stretch to think this influenced the look of the game in a way. Not that things look like Lego, but they totally get around the PSX's limitations by making everything very stiff and geometric. The reason Solid Snake uses a SOCOM is because it's pretty blocky IRL and could be faithfully rendered on the PSX. Anyway, as to the merits of a "realistic" depiction of superheroes, it's a perfectly reasonable direction to take. Of course the characters are fictional, but contrasting them with everyday humanity and how we would most likely react to them means they can stand in stark relief to us. Snyderverse Superman's heroics are all the more admirable when he lives in a world like ours where his every action is scrutinized and large subsets of the population either revile or revere him. Batman becomes fallible in the ways that we were fallible after a comparable circumstance. I don't think the movies are trying to be totally "realistic" because some of the standard comic book concessions still apply, but it's just as valid an approach as transporting a comic book world to the big screen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:Why is it called the PSX, is that like ID4 where I sorta had to be there I believe it was "PlayStation Experimental" when it was being developed as a SNES CD add-on, then they dropped the X when they made it into a separate product. So basically, yeah like ID4.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:Why is it called the PSX, is that like ID4 where I sorta had to be there When it was the Super Nintendo CD add-on, it was called the PlayStation X. The name stuck.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Shanty posted:Or like every other console ever except I guess the PS2. I think you're even an Xbox One player, what's the deal with THAT name? I more meant that the full name for the console as far as I know is the Playstation or the Playstation 1, so Electromax posted:I believe it was "PlayStation Experimental" when it was being developed as a SNES CD add-on, then they dropped the X when they made it into a separate product. So basically, yeah like ID4. was pretty much the explanation I was looking for
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Shanty posted:Or like every other console ever except I guess the PS2. I think you're even an Xbox One player, what's the deal with THAT name? Except it was officially titled "PlayStation" so he's asking where the X comes into the abbreviation So like this explanation: Electromax posted:I believe it was "PlayStation Experimental" when it was being developed as a SNES CD add-on, then they dropped the X when they made it into a separate product. So basically, yeah like ID4. is good
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
And then you have the Nintendo Gamecube, which was officially abbreviated GCN. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:And then you have the Nintendo Gamecube, which was officially abbreviated GCN. Wasn't this because of the Neo Geo Pocket or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:While not real this is a pretty good depiction of what would happen if they WERE real. Why can't we have that? You can argue that they explore the wider potential ramifications of superhero actions to a greater depth than the Marvel films if you want (but I'd probably argue back on that point) but that's really really not the same thing as "a pretty good depiction of what would happen if they WERE real". I don't think a film with a wacky timetravelling quipster and a guy in a rubber suit growling "Do you bleeeeeed?" and a magic glowing gem that can pierce a rock troll's hide can really genuinely be argued to be 100% realer than the MCU films overall. Like, you can point to a whoooole bunch of "unrealistic" stuff in the MCU films (vibranium is just as dumb and "unrealistic" as kryptonite) but there's also a bunch of  realistic stuff in there as well that people tend to conveniently forget when they're comparing the two. And like I said, it's not like the DCCU is without it's wacky "unrealistic" stuff as well. BvS even had quips! Tons and tons of quips!I really, really don't think that anyone can argue that the DCCU films are more "real". They can probably put forward a good argument that they stay more grounded or that they're a more serious entry into the genre or that they choose to allude to collateral damage a lot more but that doesn't actually equate to "more real". MeatwadIsGod posted:Anyway, as to the merits of a "realistic" depiction of superheroes, it's a perfectly reasonable direction to take. Of course the characters are fictional, but contrasting them with everyday humanity and how we would most likely react to them means they can stand in stark relief to us. Snyderverse Superman's heroics are all the more admirable when he lives in a world like ours where his every action is scrutinized and large subsets of the population either revile or revere him. Batman becomes fallible in the ways that we were fallible after a comparable circumstance. I don't think the movies are trying to be totally "realistic" because some of the standard comic book concessions still apply, but it's just as valid an approach as transporting a comic book world to the big screen. I'd argue that the DCCU Batman isn't more "realistic" than the MCU Iron Man, there's really not a lot of emotions or motivations or decisions that Bruce Wayne has that aren't roughly mirrored in Tony Stark (right down to the crazy vision/prophecy which drives them to dangerous extremes). I'd also argue that the DCCU doesn't actually do a better job of "contrasting them with everyday humanity and how we would most likely react to them" than the MCU.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
I agree that BvS went in a more supernatural direction but I feel with MoS we got a story of, "this is how things would go down if Superman was real". And it's why I love that movie so much. That's why Chronicle was so good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:I'd argue that the DCCU Batman isn't more "realistic" than the MCU Iron Man, there's really not a lot of emotions or motivations or decisions that Bruce Wayne has that aren't roughly mirrored in Tony Stark (right down to the crazy vision/prophecy which drives them to dangerous extremes). I'd also argue that the DCCU doesn't actually do a better job of "contrasting them with everyday humanity and how we would most likely react to them" than the MCU. While my comment could have been taken as a put-down on Marvel because of the DC vs. Marvel fealty that is almost inseparable from all this, it wasn't meant to be. I was referring more to what some people seemed to want or expect from the DCCU versus what they've gotten so far. I saw Iron Man in theaters and Thor 2 in a hotel room last year. Aside from Jessica Jones, that's my level of exposure to Marvel entertainment. That also isn't meant as a put-down, mind you. Partly the reason is that I didn't keep up with the MCU in realtime so my backlog of movies has steadily grown over the years, and partly it's because I grew up with Batman: The Animated Series and Marvel was just never on my radar so I just don't have that baseline level of interest to watch them. I can't speak intelligently on the merits of MCU versus DCCU. Maybe that's why I like Man of Steel and BvS in the first place because I don't know what I'm missing, but they're also just movies so
MeatwadIsGod fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jul 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Chronicle had really good and relatable characters. That's why I loved the film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Chronicle had really good and relatable characters. That's why I loved the film. And the flying scene was something straight out of dreams. Loved it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
greatn posted:I think the scene would have worked better with child actor Clark instead of Cavill The tornado scene would absolutely be better if they used the younger dude. They deliberately set Clark's age to 17 to show that he wasn't an adult yet. The scene would read a lot better if a young kid listened to his father rather than a clearly-past-his-twenties dude getting ordered around and sobbing. You can google Henry Cavill in Count of Monte Cristo - he was 17 at the time - and imagine how a truly young man would completely change the dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:You can google Henry Cavill in Count of Monte Cristo - he was 17 at the time - and imagine how a truly young man would completely change the dynamic. OMG he's adorable!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:OMG he's adorable! Looking him up on Google Image search is depressing. He's just infuriatingly good looking in every single photo that's ever been taken of him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The tornado scene would absolutely be better if they used the younger dude. They deliberately set Clark's age to 17 to show that he wasn't an adult yet. The scene would read a lot better if a young kid listened to his father rather than a clearly-past-his-twenties dude getting ordered around and sobbing. Yeah, I mean it's believable that a teenager would be a bit petulant in that "you're not my real dad!" way, but Henry Cavill is practically Adonis so it seems a bit forced coming from him at his actual age. The child actor would have been better all around, from that argument to the tornado.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
I should maybe also note that it's probably unfair to compare the "realness" of MoS and BvS to the entire catalogue of the MCU films. Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk (the first two MCU films) were a lot more 'grounded' than a lot of the later entries and the next entry in the DCCU is going to be Suicide Squad which has a lizard man and a crazy sorceress lady and a lady wielding a sword which drinks souls and some psychologically disturbed clowns. It also looks like it's gonna be QUIP CITY.MeatwadIsGod posted:but they're also just movies so This option is always available as a valid fallback. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:I'd also argue that the DCCU doesn't actually do a better job of "contrasting them with everyday humanity and how we would most likely react to them" than the MCU. Please actually do so instead of just saying you can, because from the peanut gallery most of Marvel's films are far less interested in exploring the implications of their potentially world-changing events in favor of more general action-adventure fare, even when they try their best to "ground" things (Winter Soldier, Civil War). Here's some quick examples I just pulled from the top of my head: very, very little has been hinted about the wider religious or social implications of figures from Norse myth suddenly appearing tangible and doing battle in the United States. In Iron Man 2 the Senate hearing shows examples of a looming power armor arms race that threatens major global instability, but nothing comes of it later. Any of a multitude of the questions or issues raised by the alien invasion in The Avengers are either ignored outright, raised only as minor plot points with little depth or relegated to television side projects. Snowglobe of Doom posted:I should maybe also note that it's probably unfair to compare the "realness" of MoS and BvS to the entire catalogue of the MCU films. Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk (the first two MCU films) were a lot more 'grounded' than a lot of the later entries and the next entry in the DCCU is going to be Suicide Squad which has a lizard man and a crazy sorceress lady and a lady wielding a sword which drinks souls and some psychologically disturbed clowns. It also looks like it's gonna be QUIP CITY. I'm prrrrrreeeeeetty sure this isn't the kind of realism being compared. McSpanky fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Jul 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
The word is verisimilitude, which is akin to psychological realism. There's absolutely nothing scientifically accurate about these aliens who speak English and look exactly like humans, but fans nonetheless perceive Superman as a terrifying alien presence. They know a man can't actually fly, but nonetheless call for him to be banned. Avengers has an Ultra-9/11 caused by aliens, and everyone ether kinda shrugs or celebrates. It doesn't pass a sniff test.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:Please actually do so instead of just saying you can, because from the peanut gallery most of Marvel's films are far less interested in exploring the implications of their potentially world-changing events in favor of more general action-adventure fare, even when they try their best to "ground" things (Winter Soldier, Civil War). McSpanky posted:In Iron Man 2 the Senate hearing shows examples of a looming power armor arms race that threatens major global instability, but nothing comes of it later. McSpanky posted:Any of a multitude of the questions or issues raised by the alien invasion in The Avengers are either ignored outright, raised only as minor plot points with little depth or relegated to television side projects. Remember that I'm not saying that the MCU is doing a sterling job in this department, I'm just saying that the DCCU isn't doing a better job. If you have examples of "contrasting them with everyday humanity and how we would most likely react to them" that you think the DCCU is doing much better than the MCU then feel free to bring them to the table. McSpanky posted:I'm prrrrrreeeeeetty sure this isn't the kind of realism being compared.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
I should note that I'm really really open to being convinced that the DCCU is more "real" than the MCU and I'm not just being antagonistic but I'm not seeing any good counter arguments yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
HIJK posted:
Its hosed that he kept the club around too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
All the Avengers kept working for an organization, the leadership of which attempted to nuke New York City, for two more years until SHIELD imploded in Winter Soldier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:21 |
|
|
Gatts posted:
Hate to break it to you, but that's what all good comic book movies are. Except for Ghost World maybe? The eventual TV series they're bound to make from Maus?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:53
|
|