|
Maluco Marinero posted:"I won't kill you."
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:48 |
|
|
TheFallenEvincar posted:I hope the next Batman is basically Stalin If the various Justice League spoilers floating around are true the next Superman probably will be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Considering how effective drone strikes are, why not just make some bat drones and unleash them throughout the city to take out gang members with a gatling gun? Rubber bullets optional of course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
The Batwing does have a drone mode though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Since this seems like it fairly applies to me as much as anyone else, I'll go ahead and ask you to explain. It certainly doesn't seem literally true, given that both the initial flashback and Bruce's later nightmare focus on Martha Wayne. The name 'Martha' is repeated because that was the father's last word, marking his failure to protect the family. Bruce is motivated by anger at his father's failure, and guilt over the fact that (as a child) he himself was powerless to stop the mugger. Bruce and his dad both 'let them kill Martha'. The point of the film is that Bruce forgives his father and also stops acting like a child - revelling in his powerlessness, acting out against 'God'. He decides to honour his father by becoming a hero again. (The ambiguity, of course, is that Bruce graduates from being a childish psychotic to being a very mature quasi-fascist.) SolidSnakesBandana posted:I'm just trying to imagine the scenario in which Bruce was a hyper-disciplined non-lethal warrior so skilled in his training that he vowed never to take a life, to just deciding one day that he didn't care about that training. There's no middle ground where you get to be just a little murdery for a little while. That's why it seems to me that BvS Batman has always been OK with killing. There's no such thing as a non-lethal warrior. If you use a taser or whatever, or get into crazy brawls, there is a chance that you will kill someone. Batman is aware of this. Every Batman has been ok with killing. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Karloff posted:Yes, Alfred says that thing about "good men being cruel" but this is never explored or contextualized within the narrative, Batman is still murdering people like a maniac after his change of heart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Martman posted:Murdering people like a maniac? Killing people in order to stop them from burning an old lady to death doesn't sound like the most maniacal thing ever. But don't you remember how Batman was blowing people's heads off and slitting throats while laughing and sporting the biggest boner in cinema history? I swear some people seem to have misplaced this movie with Predator during the Batman scenes when they watched it
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The name 'Martha' is repeated because that was the father's last word, marking his failure to protect the family. This dovetails nicely with Lex trying to relive his childhood by recreating his father as Doomsday. Batman and Lex are both trapped by their traumatic childhoods and can/will not move past it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Here's the awesome ending to Under the Red Hood where Batman himself explains his position. Seriously, the whole scene there is hinged upon Batman being perfect and infallible. Dodge a bullet and throw his bat thing into the barrel of the gun before the second shot (and not have it bounce off). A moral code isn't much of a code if it never genuinely gets tested with consequences.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Considering how effective drone strikes are, why not just make some bat drones and unleash them throughout the city to take out gang members with a gatling gun? Rubber bullets optional of course. same reason he wouldn't be satisfied with just donating to anti-crime organizations or getting into politics to curb corruption ; bruce wayne loves to beat the poo poo out of criminals with his bare hands
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
Tezcatlipoca posted:This dovetails nicely with Lex trying to relive his childhood by recreating his father as Doomsday. Batman and Lex are both trapped by their traumatic childhoods and can/will not move past it. Martha is relevant here because The Bat - the literal Bat-Monster that explodes from her grave in the nightmare - is the persona that Bruce adopts out of revenge towards his father. If Doomsday is the monstrous father, The Bat is certainly his wife. In a bizarre way, Bruce effectively spends most of his life (and half of this film) dressing up in drag and beating himself up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Here's the awesome ending to Under the Red Hood where Batman himself explains his position.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:Seriously, the whole scene there is hinged upon Batman being perfect and infallible. Dodge a bullet and throw his bat thing into the barrel of the gun before the second shot (and not have it bounce off). The Joker living, and killing more, seems to be a pretty big consequence. That's like the whole dramatic conflict of the scene. Martman posted:Murdering people like a maniac? Killing people in order to stop them from burning an old lady to death doesn't sound like the most maniacal thing ever. Okay, I concede to that, I was being dramatic. But here's the thing: Most of you are saying how Batman's got murderous recently and how that is so compellingly explored within the character (it isn't). But after he is redeemed by Superman's mum having the same name.... somehow. He still goes back to killing. It's almost as if Batman doesn't change at all as a character and that killing is just something this Batman does. Again he has a memorial to a dead Robin, with that Robin carrying a loving axe. SuperMechagodzilla posted:
There's no such thing as Batman. It's okay if you have a fictional character who fights people with a no kill rule, applying "real life" to super-heroes rarely works for just this very reason. And when did the animated series Batman kill someone?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Karloff posted:The Joker living, and killing more, seems to be a pretty big consequence. That's like the whole dramatic conflict of the scene. In that particular movie the Joker is an afterthought (the end montage makes a point of telling the audience he's safely locked in arkham again). The actual dramatic conflict of that scene is Bruce's failure to reach Jason and convince him he loves him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Did Adam West Batman kill people?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Did Adam West Batman kill people? He punched them out of existence at least.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
TheFallenEvincar posted:Watching the minute or so that I could tolerate of this awwwwwesome cartoon did make me wonder...Has anyone just tried shooting The Joker in the dick? I think he'd stop spouting things that sound profound/witty to white male teens if you just shot the dude in his dick. I think several versions of the Joker would be loving thrilled to have their dick shot off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:I think several versions of the Joker would be loving thrilled to have their dick shot off. Joker or not, he'd scream, buddy. Dick pain is mankind's universal common denominator and I categorically refuse to believe the joker is soooooo~ cool he'd be like "another, mother!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
Karloff posted:he is redeemed by Superman's mum having the same name.... somehow. Instead of seeking understanding you are revelling in your state of confusion. That is not a position of strength. If you do not actually understand (read: in your actions demonstrate understanding of) the things you are talking about, then your actual goal is to spread your confusion to others. The goal is to make others disinclined to think and therefore more likely to agree with your implicit politics. There is no avoiding death. Even your evocation of the ideological fantasy of 'the cartoons' is an acknowledgement of the unavoidable reality of death. Batman kills people. Batman has always killed people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Dark_Tzitzimine posted:In that particular movie the Joker is an afterthought (the end montage makes a point of telling the audience he's safely locked in arkham again). The actual dramatic conflict of that scene is Bruce's failure to reach Jason and convince him he loves him. Dozens killed!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:(Superman, as a contrast, appears as a version of Bruce who actually grew up. Combining traits of Bruce's dad with Bruce himself.) If this was the actual text it would have actually been a fantastic scene.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:If this was the actual text it would have actually been a fantastic scene. It is the actual text. The movie even cuts to a flashback of Thomas Wayne lying on the ground saying "Martha" so you know that's how Bruce sees Superman in that moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:If the various Justice League spoilers floating around are true the next Superman probably will be. Considering that's the literal translation of Man of Steel , it fits.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:If this was the actual text it would have actually been a fantastic scene.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:I'm just trying to imagine the scenario in which Bruce was a hyper-disciplined non-lethal warrior so skilled in his training that he vowed never to take a life, to just deciding one day that he didn't care about that training.  Brother Entropy posted:same reason he wouldn't be satisfied with just donating to anti-crime organizations or getting into politics to curb corruption ; bruce wayne loves to beat the poo poo out of criminals with his bare hands http://i.imgur.com/TxeSqqD.gifv SuperMechagodzilla posted:All the visual information is about Bruce's relationship with his father, while all the dialogue is about Martha. Fans ended up fixating on Martha because, frankly, they're visually illiterate. It does prime you for this through the dialog in the ruined Wayne Manor, which is explicitly about his father.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
dublish posted:It is the actual text. The movie even cuts to a flashback of Thomas Wayne lying on the ground saying "Martha" so you know that's how Bruce sees Superman in that moment. I'll watch it again, but it might have silenced a thousand angry nerds if you just took any further explanation or Lois Lane entirely out of that sequence (or the movie).
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:I'll watch it again, but it might have silenced a thousand angry nerds if you just took any further explanation or Lois Lane entirely out of that sequence (or the movie). Don't make movies for angry nerds imo
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:I'll watch it again, but it might have silenced a thousand angry nerds if you just took any further explanation or Lois Lane entirely out of that sequence (or the movie). I honestly not sure what you're trying to say here. How would adding more ambiguity (the thing that angered the nerds) improve the text? Why do you want to remove the only character that used non-violent skills to uncover the villian's plot? Hat Thoughts posted:Don't make movies for angry nerds imo 
Equeen fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:If this was the actual text it would have actually been a fantastic scene. Then I have good news, for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
Equeen posted:I honestly not sure what you're trying to say here. How would adding more ambiguity (the thing angered the nerds) improve the text? Why do you want to remove the only character that used non-violent skills to uncover the villian's plot? Wasn't there backlash over this Lois because she's competent and managed to figure out Superman's identity? Removing Lois from the movie is a terrible idea so of course angry nerds would be all for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:Wasn't there backlash over this Lois because she's competent and managed to figure out Superman's identity? Removing Lois from the movie is a terrible idea so of course angry nerds would be all for it. Lois being a normal woman who isn't an expert fighter exempts her from Strong Female CharacterTM status, unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
I just finished watching MoS after like a year of not seeing it and man, I can't understand all the complaints about the movie. The first thing we see Clark doing is saving people and through the whole movie there's an undeniable grow of his character. How can people say Cavill is wooden when you can see him smile a lot, show genuine wonder when he flies for the first time or all the times Lois surprise him? And Jonathan, the man is definitely flawed but he always thinks about what is the best for his son. The moment where he tells Clark without hesitating he is his son was one of the best scenes of th emovie. How can anyone hate that man? I dunno, the movie holds expectionally well and is a great take on the Superman mythos and certainly doesn't deserve half of the critcism it gets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Don't make movies for angry nerds imo Pretend I said film critics actually. Equeen posted:I honestly not sure what you're trying to say here. How would adding more ambiguity (the thing that angered the nerds) improve the text? Why do you want to remove the only character that used non-violent skills to uncover the villian's plot? Most of the complaints I read about that scene is the explicit information that the thing that stops Bruce is learning the coincidence of their mother's names. Maybe that isn't the whole story, but it's what sticks in people's minds. The whole "Clark is Bruce made whole" thing is good and interesting but starts to fly out the window when the screenplay says it needs Lois to come in an explicitly state the meaning of things. I think that's why more ambiguity is what the film needs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Dark_Tzitzimine posted:I just finished watching MoS after like a year of not seeing it and man, I can't understand all the complaints about the movie. The first thing we see Clark doing is saving people and through the whole movie there's an undeniable grow of his character. Man of Steel is a film with big flaws, but there's a lot of really interesting stuff going in it and it strives for greatness even if it doesn't always stick the landing (pun intended). Something flawed with big ambitions is sometimes more interesting than something safe that is merely solid. I really hope it doesn't get lumped in with the utter disasters of film-making and storytelling that is Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad, as it really is much better than either of them. Also, agree that Cavill is excellent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
Karloff posted:I get that Batman is in a darker place in this film, and that first scene where Batman looks up at his trashed tower and the music stirs up is effective. But Batman discovering Superman is a good person because he mentions he wants to save someone in the fight. Really? Batman already knows Superman wants to save people, he knew this before he decided to kill him, why should it make a difference that Superman mentions to him directly that he wants to save someone? That''s not revealing himself as an idealist, it's not new information for Batman. Superman doesn't say anything to change his mind, doesn't poke holes in his perspective, there's no moment of doubt, he tries to convince not to fight for like a second, then throws him through a building. It feels like you're bringing a lot of your own baggage into this movie's story while ignoring explicit text in it. Clark and Bruce have a face to face conversation in the movie where Bruce remarks that Superman has no real attachment to humanity and is simply "Saving cats from trees." He believes that Superman violently escalated the Africa situation and has a nightmare about dictator Superman. Your other problem is that you assume Batman's change has to do with his decision to take a life when he deems it necessary. This has not changed, and the idea that a vigilante who runs around beating up criminals can actually make a decision like "Not killing" is childish escapist fantasy that Snyder explicitly rejects in a Post-Watchmen world. KVeezy3 fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:Pretend I said film critics actually. Who cares about them
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:It feels like you're bringing a lot of your own baggage into this movie's story while ignoring explicit text in it. Clark and Bruce have a face to face conversation in the movie where Bruce remarks that Superman has no real attachment to humanity and is simply "Saving cats from trees." It's defenders of the film in this thread who have said that Batman is killing people because Superman, is that not the case then? Also, Batman is a childish escapist fantasy, in any rendition. He is not a realistic character, there is no such thing as a realistic Batman. I would also make the argument that increasing the level of violence is not the way to measure maturity in a work. "Look, you see, Batman's just threw a box at that guy and his brains exploded over the wall, Batman's totally real and serious Mum!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Karloff posted:It's defenders of the film in this thread who have said that Batman is killing people because Superman, is that not the case then? Defenders of this film are not a monolith. It's explicit in the movie that Batman is still willing to kill if necessary because reality doesn't suddenly become able to bend to his will. The real contention and question is why does it offend you so much that Snyder refuses to be complicit in the idea that violence has no consequences? Pretty much any other comic book movie will give you that cathartic guilt free violence you're seeking. EDIT: Snyder has Batman call himself a criminal while declaring that everything he has done as Batman in the past 20 years has resulted in no real changes. That's far from a childish take on Batman. KVeezy3 fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Who cares about them Honestly tho I don't know what u expect, I'm not going to say "I agree, they should make the movie worse so it sells better to other people"...like...maybe if my interest was in making sure the movie sold, but I'm in it for the art baby!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:48 |
|
|
Let's talk about comic book movies that aren't Superman related. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UD9eFpLyc0 Corto Maltese is legit one of the greatest works of the artform and there's been a few animated movies made of some of these stories. They're pretty beautiful looking, and can be found subtitled in English for you non-French or Italian speaking folk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 05:24
|
|
