Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours
I'm still holding out for Jeffery Dean Morgan returning as Doctor Hurt.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

Actually, there's nothing dumb about what he said. If he read The Fountainhead as a thesis on the creative process then it's up to him to make the argument for it. The argument that he makes definitely could be stupid. But, saying "I read The Fountainhead as a rumination on the creative process" is not intrinsically dumb. I mean the whole book does center around an rear end in a top hat who designs the objectively best skyscrapers and blows up his work when it's compromised.

Veidt is literally a guy who makes Adrian's Gulch out in the Antarctic and retreats there. He's described as "the smartest man in the world" in the original text of the book and tells people he's going to do it his way or not at all. Yeah, he's totally a Randian protagonist. That's pretty accurate and the fact that Snyder makes him the villain is not really an endorsement.

In my original post I was agreeing with you that the Snyder is a Rand devotee thing is overblown!

I'm just saying that seeing the Fountainhead as a thesis on the creative process is a little weird, because that wasn't the intent of the book (but death of the author and all that) and that the book says that there is one objectively correct creative process and that the world is better off with nothing than having more than one person / vision involved in the process. I see what he is going for, but it is a weird book to pick to make that point and also an opinion that many people would disagree with.

Hollismason
Jun 30, 2007
FEEL FREE TO DISREGARD THIS POST

It is guaranteed to be lazy, ignorant, and/or uninformed.
Snyder's depiction of Veidt an Alan Moore's depiction are completely different, Veidt isn't a objectivist in the book he's a utilitarian. Also, he is a paedophile in the movie.

LesterGroans
Jun 9, 2009

It's funny...

You were so scary at night.

Hollismason posted:

Also, he is a paedophile in the movie.

Howzat now?





Edit: just saw your username. Typical anti-Veidt propaganda from Nite Owl I.

HIJK
Nov 25, 2012
in the room where you sleep
So what I'm getting out of this is that nerds are jealous of Snyder's physical fitness and success with action movies and even go so far as to smear him as an Objectivist because of reasons.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
I don't think it is 100% clear that he is a pedophile in the movie, but he has a folder on his computer that has something about boys on it.

I think the implication is that he likes twinks, but I am not going to google "Watchmen, Twinks, Pedophile" on my work computer to confirm.

Snowglobe of Doom
Mar 30, 2012

sucks to be right

MacheteZombie posted:

I like the bit about him adding levity. The guy's idea of a good joke is ending a cartoon episode with the titular character contemplating suicide.

Eh, Rick and Morty has two show runners and a whole roomful of additional writers, you can't really pick a specific moment and pin it on just one of the guys.

On the other hand if Marvel had brought in Justin Roiland to punch up their dialogue I'd be going "WTF?" along with everyone else.

MeatwadIsGod
Sep 30, 2004

Foretold by Gyromancy
I'll never understand the people who thought his Superman was somehow Objectivist in Man of Steel. I think there's just a small but vocal Internet minority who gets so put off by Snyder for whatever reason they they just stop digesting his movies and try to explain their distaste of him through byways like "he doesn't understand/love DC characters," "he's all style and no substance," or "he's a Randian."

Basically what I'm saying is never read what people write about comic book movies, even ITT.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours
Not so much that Superman is Objectivist, but also that Iron Man, as the most prominent example, is not.

Guy A. Person
May 23, 2003

MeatwadIsGod posted:

Basically what I'm saying is never read what people write about comic book movies, even ITT.

You should read what I write because I am very smart and handsome

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

Not so much that Superman is Objectivist, but also that Iron Man, as the most prominent example, is not.

Stark is a hardcore objectivist at first, but his character arc eventually leads him in the other direction. He goes from a neurotic paranoid objectivist to a neurotic paranoid communitarian.

Tuxedo Catfish
Mar 17, 2007

You've got guts! Come to my village, I'll buy you lunch.

HIJK posted:

So what I'm getting out of this is that nerds are jealous of Snyder's physical fitness and success with action movies and even go so far as to smear him as an Objectivist because of reasons.

If nothing else, I'm inspired by the degree to which Objectivism has been discredited even in internet nerd circles.

Megaman's Jockstrap
Jul 16, 2000

What a horrible thread to have a post.
That's a really good point, Tuxedo Catfish.

Karloff
Mar 21, 2013

Martman posted:

This kind of statement is completely useless, and basically suggests "hey, Rotten Tomatoes backs me up here, so I'm gonna throw in some trash talk." A lot of your walls of text are heavily padded with statements like this, and "If it was good it would be good, but it's bad so it's bad" and things along those lines.

Can you back up your claim that you have an understanding of story structure and characterization? Your arguments against Batman in BvS have been unfocused and shifting constantly. You're pointing to a Batman who's being presented as an unstable guy clinging to fantasies, contradictions, and lies, and saying "why is he using non-lethal weapons when he doesn't have a problem with killing?" The fact that Batman is acting in inconsistent ways when living out his power fantasies is a point the movie is making, and you're attacking it as a mistake. At the end of the day, call the warehouse scene a power fantasy if you want, but Batman is not purely willing to slaughter everyone. He's overly willing to use weaponized vehicles in ways that will obviously kill people, but in person he's clearly still focused on incapacitating dudes.

When you take out your presumption that the writing is "just bad" as a basis for your arguments, there's not much there.

The worst part is this idea that the fans of the movie are just into the edgy grimdark Batman. This is a Batman shown repeatedly loving up, becoming the villain, and then embarrassingly having the wind taken out of his sails by his own mommy and daddy issues. To claim that people like this version of Batman because it's wish fulfillment is just pathetic, and it rests on the idea that all of these problems with Batman were just included accidentally and also the fans are too stupid to notice them.

Bolded is the most telling part of your post. Why is Batman more lethal in a vehicle then he is in person? Why does his worldview and approach to criminals transform when he's in a plane from when he's on the ground?

It's because Zack Snyder, who is a truly brilliant action film maker it must be said, understands that non lethal visceral action is hard to do in weaponized vehicles (Batman Begins also struggled with this concept), so he just throws caution to the wind and does it as viscerally as he can, so lots of explosions, car crashes and machine guns.

When Batman is grounded it's much easier to keep that visceral action up by using punches and kicks so Batman is a lot less violent there (still killing though, but not to a Rambo extent like when he's in his plane).

But there's no unifying character concept there, it's whatever is needed to make the cinema work in the moment, but the wider scope of the work falls to pieces as a result.

Also, I didn't bring up Rotten Tomatoes as I'm not overly fond of it, but I understand why that's a sore point.

Chairman Capone posted:

It'll almost be like his character arc in BvS was him getting over those murderous traits!

Except he doesn't.


Equeen posted:

A few months ago, I actually saw a critic accuse Snyder of mistreating his mother, their "evidence" being the ~grimdarkness~ of his superhero movies.

Snyder's mother died in 2010.

This is horrible. One thing I hate is people using films to attack the film maker personally or make wild assumptions about who they are and try to character assassinate them to prove a point. I don't know what Snyder is like because I do not know him, by all accounts he's a lovely person, but even if he wasn't this doesn't change what any of his films are. I can only responsibly talk about Snyder in terms of his films like my above bit on how deals with the action, but as for his personal life, I don't see how that's relevant.

Tuxedo Catfish
Mar 17, 2007

You've got guts! Come to my village, I'll buy you lunch.
It's pretty common for drivers to be more aggressive or cavalier than they would be as pedestrians. There's even a name for it.

The Batmobile in particular has Batman looking at the carnage he's doing through a computer screen, safely encapsulated in what basically amounts to a very mobile tank.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

Karloff posted:

It's because Zack Snyder, who is a truly brilliant action film maker it must be said, understands that non lethal visceral action is hard to do in weaponized vehicles (Batman Begins also struggled with this concept), so he just throws caution to the wind and does it as viscerally as he can, so lots of explosions, car crashes and machine guns.

It would be nice to know what "non lethal visceral action in a weaponized vehicle" looks like.

Tuxedo Catfish
Mar 17, 2007

You've got guts! Come to my village, I'll buy you lunch.
It also relates back to Superman shooting down the drone in MoS, destroying impersonal tools of surveillance and destruction while Batman builds and embraces them.

Karloff
Mar 21, 2013

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

It would be nice to know what "non lethal visceral action in a weaponized vehicle" looks like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aj1Q_BAqwa8

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

This is just more equivocation, though. As long as he uses untested DOD pain emitters and not guns, it would put your mind at ease? Did you watch the end of The Dark Knight?

breadshaped
Apr 1, 2010


Soiled Meat

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

It would be nice to know what "non lethal visceral action in a weaponized vehicle" looks like.

In the Dark Knight Returns cartoon Batman drives up in a Battank and takes down all the mutants with a turret that shoots rubber bullets. I would also say that this was completely stupid.

Batman is all about the gadgets though. This is my Batman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dghbyBaQyI

Karloff
Mar 21, 2013

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

This is just more equivocation, though. As long as he uses untested DOD pain emitters and not guns, it would put your mind at ease? Did you watch the end of The Dark Knight?

I did watch the end of The Dark Knight, yes.

EDIT: And yes, to your first question as well. I do think that makes a difference.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

Karloff posted:

I did watch the end of The Dark Knight, yes.

EDIT: And yes, to your first question as well. I do think that makes a difference.

In it, he deploys a "nonlethal" technology to serve his own ends, and decides to deactivate it. The third film begins with him unwittingly funding a nuclear weapon. What has he learned by The Dark Knight Rises? How's this character better?

Jenny Angel
Oct 24, 2010

Out of Control
Hard to Regulate
Anything Goes!
Lipstick Apathy

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

It would be nice to know what "non lethal visceral action in a weaponized vehicle" looks like.

Big rear end butterfly net mounted on top of the Batmobile like a tank turret. He uses it to scoop up crime

Chairman Capone
Dec 17, 2008

Hat Thoughts posted:

Looking for the quote I did find someone pointing out that in BvS "Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Comedian) was Thomas Wayne, Patrick Wilson (Nite Owl) was the voice of the US President and Carla Gugino (Silk Spectre) was the voice of Kryptonian ship."
Which is neat

I didn't realize until I finally watched the ultimate edition that Thomas and Martha Wayne in BvS were both played by actors from The Walking Dead (Negan and Maggie).

Megaman's Jockstrap
Jul 16, 2000

What a horrible thread to have a post.

Jenny Angel posted:

Big rear end butterfly net mounted on top of the Batmobile like a tank turret. He uses it to scoop up crime

Bag of money with huge dollar signs on it under a spotlight, surrounded by an electrified zapper cage. At dawn he goes and collects all the unconscious criminals around it and takes them to jail.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

Chairman Capone posted:

I didn't realize until I finally watched the ultimate edition that Thomas and Martha Wayne in BvS were both played by actors from The Walking Dead (Negan and Maggie).

I've gone on about it before but Lauren Cohan is especially inspired casting.

Jenny Angel posted:

Big rear end butterfly net mounted on top of the Batmobile like a tank turret. He uses it to scoop up crime

You're being flip but that's still the whole idea. It could shoot bubbles, but nobody is fooled by what a guy who dresses up like Dracula and drives around in a tank is there to do and it sure as hell is not to responsibly diffuse a situation nonlethally.

This is not just something he does but how people react to him. Symbols are carefully chosen.

Hollismason
Jun 30, 2007
FEEL FREE TO DISREGARD THIS POST

It is guaranteed to be lazy, ignorant, and/or uninformed.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I don't think it is 100% clear that he is a pedophile in the movie, but he has a folder on his computer that has something about boys on it.

I think the implication is that he likes twinks, but I am not going to google "Watchmen, Twinks, Pedophile" on my work computer to confirm.

It's a folder labeled young boys on his computer.

Chairman Capone
Dec 17, 2008

Martman posted:

Snyder, a known Ayn Rand lover, almost definitely intended it to be sad for Doomsday, a clearly superior being, to be brought down by a bunch of parasites.

Doomsday was created by Lex Luthor, who could only get where he was in the movie by government contract and who wasted money donating to the Metropolis Library. Bruce Wayne however is never shown to work with the state and merely issues a statement in support of books, costing nothing. Doomsday is defeated because Batman is the superior capitalist.

Jenny Angel
Oct 24, 2010

Out of Control
Hard to Regulate
Anything Goes!
Lipstick Apathy

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

You're being flip but that's still the whole idea. It could shoot bubbles, but nobody is fooled by what a guy who dresses up like Dracula and drives around in a tank is there to do and it sure as hell is not to responsibly diffuse a situation nonlethally.

This is not just something he does but how people react to him. Symbols are carefully chosen.

I know friend that is my general point!!

MacheteZombie
Feb 4, 2007

Chairman Capone posted:

Doomsday was created by Lex Luthor, who could only get where he was in the movie by government contract and who wasted money donating to the Metropolis Library. Bruce Wayne however is never shown to work with the state and merely issues a statement in support of books, costing nothing. Doomsday is defeated because Batman is the superior capitalist.

Batman doesn't defeat Doomsday. He does save Space Jesus's Earth Mom, the Virgin Martha, though.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

Jenny Angel posted:

I know friend that is my general point!!

I'm all fired up

Tezcatlipoca
Sep 18, 2009

MacheteZombie posted:

Batman doesn't defeat Doomsday. He does save Space Jesus's Earth Mom, the Virgin Martha, though.

He hits Doomsday in the face with a Kryptonite grenade, he helps.

MacheteZombie
Feb 4, 2007

Tezcatlipoca posted:

He hits Doomsday in the face with a Kryptonite grenade, he helps.

Pretty impotent attack imo, it's not like it made Doom vulnerable to the Spear made of Kryptonite.

Tezcatlipoca
Sep 18, 2009
It made him immobile long enough for that to happen. Princess Diana wouldn't have been able to hold on to him without it.

MacheteZombie
Feb 4, 2007
Nah she had it covered, Batman just wanted to feel like he was being helpful.

RBA Starblade
Apr 28, 2008

Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

Tuxedo Catfish posted:

If nothing else, I'm inspired by the degree to which Objectivism has been discredited even in internet nerd circles.

I remember having to take a couple psychology courses for my computer science major. The professor went over various philosophies and when he got to Objectivism he began by telling us all what a colossal load of bullshit it is, how it's barely a philosophy (or anything), the disdain most actual philosphers have for it, and what a piece of poo poo Rand was. He was a good professor.

MacheteZombie
Feb 4, 2007

RBA Starblade posted:

I remember having to take a couple psychology courses for my computer science major. The professor went over various philosophies and when he got to Objectivism he began by telling us all what a colossal load of bullshit it is, how it's barely a philosophy (or anything), the disdain most actual philosphers have for it, and what a piece of poo poo Rand was. He was a good professor.

My high school english teacher thought Ayn Rand was the most important writer in American history. :negative:

Pirate Jet
May 2, 2010
I feel like the whole point of the last grenade was to stop him from charging another laser dome thingy.

MacheteZombie
Feb 4, 2007

Pirate Jet posted:

I feel like the whole point of the last grenade was to stop him from charging another laser dome thingy.

It was.

Suicide Squad chat: Common's character design is dope.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

RBA Starblade
Apr 28, 2008

Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

MacheteZombie posted:

My high school english teacher thought Ayn Rand was the most important writer in American history. :negative:

Ewww :smith:

  • Locked thread