|
Rhyno posted:Is this an SMG parachute account? Can you gently caress off back to CD now please? No. Whatever else you might think about SMG, he puts a whole fuckton of effort into his schtick. He would have run the whole discussion through so many hoops we'd be talking about Wittgenstein and Marxist revolution by now. This is just a guy continuously going "Nuh-uh!!!"
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
If anyone has seen Logan yet, is it worth springing for IMAX? My guess would be no but wanted some opinions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:The Ravagers represent the discomfort and demands of life, which is why they're marginal and counterproductive to the fantasy of space adventure. The reason he couldn't be a leader is because they stand for things, even though they're terrible, while the Guardians are a chance to get what's life denied to them. But beyond that, his shift from wanting to sell the Orb to stopping Ronan is his biggest flaw as a character, because in between those points there should've been an epiphany about how meaningless his Star-Lord fantasy was. You keep pushing Star-Lord as childlike fantasy, and the read is not supported at all. Remove that, and it's easy to see that Quill wants out of the Ravager's simply because they are terrible. They are thieves, and represent the opposite of responsibility. The transition from "sell the orb" to "stop Thanos" occurs naturally. "Sell' goes off the table when the danger of the orb is made apparent. Personally stopping Ronin only becomes the goal after they fail to keep it from him, and Quill only pushes it because he feels personally responsible for him having the Orb. glitchwraith fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:No. Whatever else you might think about SMG, he puts a whole fuckton of effort into his schtick. He would have run the whole discussion through so many hoops we'd be talking about Wittgenstein and Marxist revolution by now. This is just a guy continuously going "Nuh-uh!!!" I guess you're right. And the last time SMG popped into BSS he got probated on his first post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Please gently caress off with this poo poo to CD?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
It's inherently pointless trying to reason with BotL, the guy's arguments are transparent bullshit that are based on him just contradicting both his opponent and his own prior statements. He doesn't believe any of the poo poo he's selling so trying to get him to stick to a position is like trying to lasso a swarm of bees. I only even bothered attacking him today because I couldn't resist making fun of how dumb that one argument was. The things that are really tired about the contrarian gimmickposters is that because they're starting from the premise of "defend thing people don't like/attack thing people like," they will almost never acknowledge any real criticism of the thing they're defending, or offer any real praise of the movie they're attacking. Even if BvS is some secret masterwork, the fact that its messaging is so goddamn confused no one but the most insufferable overanalyzers understood it would still be a real, legitimate problem with the way that movie presents itself. Likewise, going for the dumbest possible readings of movies that, while good, aren't that deep to prove they're bad doesn't prove anything. Even if you're not arguing in bad faith, all you're doing is proving that you engage with movies on a really weird level most people don't give a loving poo poo about. It's really obvious that none of what he's saying matters, even if he somehow means it, so I don't get why people care. BotL is all about blatant, low-effort trolling. I really just wish he did a better job because he's loving boring as poo poo. Seriously, why are you fuckers biting for the limpest, coldest loving takes? At least make fun of him, engaging earnestly is just... why? I mean, it was pretty funny when he kept trying to tie everything back to Tintin, but that got old within like two posts, and it should be clear he's barely trying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
I like talking about Guardians of the Galaxy. It's fuckin' rad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I like talking about Guardians of the Galaxy. It's fuckin' rad. For whatever it's worth, I've been enjoying reading your analysis of GotG 
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I like talking about Guardians of the Galaxy. It's fuckin' rad. Eh, fair.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I like talking about Guardians of the Galaxy. It's fuckin' rad. And if you were talking about it with almost literally anyone else, it'd be a great conversation, but the parts that aren't you are just a bunch of wet farts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
I don't see what the big deal is?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:This is just a guy continuously going "Nuh-uh!!!" Your line of argument seems to be that GotG is a rad epic of love and loss in the guise of a sci-fi adventure. It's really a very safe space adventure/fantasy with themes it doesn't live up to, and a lot of cynical subtext. It doesn't particularly evoke pain and loss, it's full of over-the-top, cartoonish sci-fi action. There's about one effective moment of pathos, which is capped off with a dumb thematic conclusion. Anything else serious is usually countered with comedy, which is less of a triumph of life over death than a series of dodges. Even Drax's shame and epiphany is paired up with comic relief. It's not a movie about dealing with pain and loss: when the slave girl is horribly disintegrated for example, there's no pathos, it's just cruel and she's immediately forgotten. It has a lot of bad writing decisions, like relying too much on exposition. There's some cool action and setpieces, so it works as a passable action movie. Arist posted:It's inherently pointless trying to reason with BotL, the guy's arguments are transparent bullshit that are based on him just contradicting both his opponent and his own prior statements. He doesn't believe any of the poo poo he's selling so trying to get him to stick to a position is like trying to lasso a swarm of bees. I only even bothered attacking him today because I couldn't resist making fun of how dumb that one argument was. This "dumb" argument was that GotG's plot isn't about pain and suffering, while you said that that's like dismissing The World's End.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Your line of argument seems to be that GotG is a rad epic of love and loss in the guise of a sci-fi adventure. It's really a very safe space adventure/fantasy with themes it doesn't live up to, and a lot of cynical subtext. It doesn't particularly evoke pain and loss, it's full of over-the-top, cartoonish sci-fi action. There's about one effective moment of pathos, which is capped off with a dumb thematic conclusion. Anything else serious is usually countered with comedy, which is less of a triumph of life over death than a series of dodges. Even Drax's shame and epiphany is paired up with comic relief. It's not a movie about dealing with pain and loss: when the slave girl is horribly disintegrated for example, there's no pathos, it's just cruel and she's immediately forgotten. It has a lot of bad writing decisions, like relying too much on exposition. There's some cool action and setpieces, so it works as a passable action movie. You're really caught up on the whole "This movie is fun and adventurous, it can't have meaning deeper than the superficial!!!" no matter how many times I and others point it out to you. You're hopelessly hung up on the deliberate dissonance between what the movie shows us and what we're meant to infer. We, the audience, are having fun watching the adventure. The characters are not. They're sad. They're lonely. Maybe this movie just isn't for you. Better you should just stick with Zack Snyder. He'll never confuse you like this movie does.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
A Gnarlacious Bro posted:I don't see what the big deal is? It might break the scrolling feature on my phone if I scroll past that many words!
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:You're really caught up on the whole "This movie is fun and adventurous, it can't have meaning deeper than the superficial!!!" no matter how many times I and others point it out to you. I haven't said that at all. GotG has themes like overcoming death through culture, where cultural artifacts are used to overcome death and devastation (the problem is it reads more like avoidance than confrontation). Quill living out a child-hood fantasy-life is the "deeper meaning" of what he says and does. Phylodox posted:We, the audience, are having fun watching the adventure. The characters are not. They're sad. They're lonely. I admit, I was touched when Rocket broke down crying out of self-loathing while he and Quill smashed Ronan's minions with mining drones. Gamora tearfully beating Nebula to death was inspiring in its tragic grandeur. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I haven't said that at all. GotG has themes like overcoming death through culture, where cultural artifacts are used to overcome death and devastation (the problem it reads more like avoidance than confrontation). Quill living out a child-hood fantasy-life is the "deeper meaning" of what he says and does. And now you're just flailing. Goodnight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:It might break the scrolling feature on my phone if I scroll past that many words! I mean, he also has a lovely attitude where he regularly talks down to people treats them like idiots for not agreeing with him, as well as regularly mocks autistic people. Sick low effort zinger though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Roth posted:Sick low effort zinger though. thanks! but seriously, if BotL does make fun of people with mental disabilities often that's pretty lovely. As someone who's been skimming Phylo and BotL's current GotG conversation and agreeing with Phylo more than BotL on the movie: A Gnarlacious Bro posted:I don't see what the big deal is? MacheteZombie fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:- There is going to be an announcement this year of a 3rd MCU movie in 2020 to take the spot of the previous Inhumans release date. It's a November date. It'll probably be Dr. Strange 2, but I really really hope it's Sub-Mariner.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
Is Daniel Dae Kim too old to play Namor?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
glitchwraith posted:That would have made more sense for the earlier scenes. The whole point is that Superman doesn't know if he wants to continue to help. Supermans motivations for helping humanity were established in MoS, so BvS doesn't rehash them, instead it explores what happens when his love for humanity is tested, and if he's going to turn his back on them when they reject his help. Ma says if he wants to help because he thinks it's the right thing to do, then go for it, but not of any sense of guilt, he doesn't owe anything to anyone. What Pa is saying is that there are consequences for your actions, no matter if they're backed by good intent, and you do what you need to do, and you learn to live with the consequences. This makes his decision to actually give a gently caress and give his life more important, because he's sacrificing himself not of any misplaced sense of duty or responsibility, but out of love for his fellow humans. notthegoatseguy posted:Glitch nails it. I love a movie with layers and subtext and open for interperation. I saw Muholland Drive a couple weeks ago and loving loved it and I keep bringing it up to people because I'm still thinking about that movie several days later. But for me personally, a movie has to be....you know, good and edited well and watchable for me to give a poo poo to then analyze it at a deeper level. BVS isn't an absolutely horrible movie, but they desperately needed a good editor to trim the fat. Between the editing, the Eisenberg's Lex, and a really poor reason for Superman to fight Batman (Bat's support was really obvious and actually well done), the movie just fell flat. Also all the Wonder Woman poo poo is just kind of there and adds almost nothing to the story. You could take Wonder Woman and the quicktime files out completely and it doesn't impact the movie at all. Ironically, the trimmed fat you complain about is the reason Supermans motivation for going after Batman is a bit lacking. They delve a bit further into this in the extended version. It also makes Supermans first meeting with Batman a bit less jarring. Lex...well, Lex is jarring, I wil give you that. I can kinda see the reason why they made this change, in that the Silicon Valley Elon Musk CEO is a more modern take on the Evil genius billionaire trope. Frankly he's probably my least liked part of the movie as well, but I can totally see why they went the way they did. Regarding wonderwoman and the other cameos, this movie references Excalibur a lot, borrowing lots of visual imagery, casting both Supes and Bats as King Arthur (one at his noblest, and the other at his lowest). I suspect Snyder is going for a sort of "King Arthur assembles the Knights of the Round" thing, a theme starting in this movie that will be paid more attention to in the next one. And she steals pretty much every scene she's in as well, so I'd argue that even if she could be cut out of the movie with no changes to the story, it would still be a net loss because she was pretty badass. YMMV though. Still, I rather they try to integrate this sort of thing in to the plot itself rather than have a teaser at the end of the credits. Personally I loved the movie, it was like an wagnerian opera, an epic tragedy about how the human flaw of the gods leads to ruin, reminiscent of the ancient greek myths.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Is Daniel Dae Kim too old to play Namor? I don't know who that is... But here's who'd got me excited: http://mcuexchange.com/donnie-yen-responds-fan-campaign-play-namor-sub-mariner/
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
I imagine if Marvel wants to make a Namor movie, if they even can, they'll want to keep away from 50 year olds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
X-O posted:I imagine if Marvel wants to make a Namor movie, if they even can, they'll want to keep away from 50 year olds. Ludi Lin will be their target
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
X-O posted:I imagine if Marvel wants to make a Namor movie, if they even can, they'll want to keep away from 50 year olds. MacheteZombie posted:Ludi Lin will be their target From a business standpoint you're probably (almost certainly) right, but as an excessive in pure fan-casting I think Namir should skew older. e: they've gone on record saying they have the rights to the character back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
I look forward to seeing Namor played by Casey Affleck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Clearly Casey Affleck belongs in the DCEU as Hush opposite his brother.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
Yakmouth posted:Clearly Casey Affleck belongs in the DCEU as Hush opposite his brother. Lmao this would be hilarious
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
My Dream scenario (which I absolutely don't expect) is that Namor be the big bad in Iron Man 4 before getting a solo series. Marvel needs stronger antagonists in general, and Namor deserves to be as complicated in the MCU as he is in the comics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
Superman's conflict over whether or not he's going to save humanity doesn't work for me in MoS or BvS, because it's rarely if ever reflected in him. Every other character in the movie debates it internally or talks at him about it, but he never strongly inputs his own thoughts and feelings. It's part of why I think Cavill is so robotic in the role.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
Logan is pretty amazing and, I feel, represents a shift in comic book movies that will make it hard to go back to the old style. The way it uses actual X-Men history to base its themes and atmosphere is something that's only really comparable to the way comics reference the silver age or something, or maybe the way Snyder's Watchmen tried to reference 90s Batman (and didn't do much with it). It's really fascinating and although the movie is by far the best X-Men themed film, it also could never have existed and been as good as it is without all the previous ones. Patrick Stewart is amazing, and so is Jackman, and so is Laura. I think it's also the most emotional superhero movie ever in large part due to the history that it has to deal with and work through. So yes, recommend.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Probably complete bullshit like all such rumors, but not a bad choice if true. https://twitter.com/TheWrap/status/837407517688811520
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
I've only seen that guy play a skeevy douche.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
He's great in Stranger Things. You think at first he's going to be a jerk but then he just becomes a punching force of good and awesomeness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:If anyone has seen Logan yet, is it worth springing for IMAX? My guess would be no but wanted some opinions. Reposting this question since I'm taking a trip this weekend near a city with an IMAX. Goddamn, I wish we had one here. Also, how extreme is the violence? I mentioned this back before Deadpool came out, but my wife is pretty squeamish about ultra-violence and torture. She really wants to see this cause she loves Stewart, Jackman and Merchant, but she's worried it'll be too much for her. She ended up enjoying Deadpool, but she did have her head buried in my chest when they had him in the torture machine thing and EDIT - I misunderstood that, she was fine with the hand thing. VVVV Awesome, thanks! I think she'll be fine. Perry Normal fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Mar 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
If the hand thing in Deadpool freaked her out then Logan might not be for her. Logan and Laura both hack off limbs with wild abandon in the fight scenes. I didn't see it IMAX but I can't imagine it adds much, there aren't that many shots where the scale would matter, and the higher res might actually show more of the seams of the effects. Logan's very, very good and (ending spoiler) I welled up when Laura turns the cross on Logan's grave to make an X, which was impressive as I was unsure if I was sad or amused when she was quoting Shane. Jackman and Stewart are great, Merchant and Grant are wasted, and I'm not sure about Keen. She sells the action scenes and the feral element of the character, but (mid-way spoiler)once she starts speaking I'm not sure how much is deliberate choice to not emote, how much is her struggling with English and how much is just lack of acting skill/experience. It's basically what happens when a director and actor decide "what if X-Men was actually Unforgiven/The Shootist".
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
Logan was good and excellent and like, whoa didn't see that ending coming honestly. Best X-Men flick ever but of course the bar was low as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
It was a little forced in setup, but I really enjoyed the (ending spoiler)'last stand of the Wolverine' sequence, where we get a couple of minutes of him just getting to be that guy one more time in full berserker mode, cutting down an army alongside X-23. Very much fit the Western theme, the last hurrah of the old gunslinger and all. Before his age catches up to him. Maybe it's because I've never seen Shane, just heard about it and seen clips, but I keep thinking of The Shootist, actually. Maybe because it has the old gunman with cancer and reluctant to train a protege.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
My review of Logan: "God drat."
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
Gaz-L posted:It was a little forced in setup, but I really enjoyed the (ending spoiler)'last stand of the Wolverine' sequence, where we get a couple of minutes of him just getting to be that guy one more time in full berserker mode, cutting down an army alongside X-23. Very much fit the Western theme, the last hurrah of the old gunslinger and all. Before his age catches up to him. Maybe it's because I've never seen Shane, just heard about it and seen clips, but I keep thinking of The Shootist, actually. Maybe because it has the old gunman with cancer and reluctant to train a protege. I really thought that they were gonna pull out some sort of save for him at some point. Like either Laura's blood mixed with his would reboot his healing factor or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 04:45
|
|