|
Jiro posted:I too prefer my Batmen to be The Punisher instead of Batman. not my batmans
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
Challenge: Point out things in MoS and BvS that you didn't like (and no cop outs like "It wasn't the director's cut")
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Batman's not like the Punisher!! ...he has way more money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
Jiro posted:I too prefer my Batmen to be The Punisher instead of Batman. You just rekt yourself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:This is an own on yourself for being this dense. I guess? I just don't think different iterations of Batman built on the no guns and no murder pillars, should end up calling themselves Batman when he's blowing dudes away with guns, driving into them with his car, and blowing them away with his plane. And mimicking a scene from DKR by firing a gun to immolate KGBeast. Preferences I guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Challenge: Point out things in MoS and BvS that you didn't like (and no cop outs like "It wasn't the director's cut") Really need your dislike of those movies validated, huh?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
Just came out of a screening from Justice League. As someone that hated BvS, JL is pretty good and fun throughout. There’s a couple of scenes that were kinda odd/misplaced and I feel the story could have used another pass at writing / putting all the parts in place but overall it was a pretty good movie for seeing these heroes do heroic things. That said (villain talk): Steppenwolf was super bad and not threatening at all and brings the movie down because of it. End set piece talk: i swear to god Whedon has to be the one that added the family we kept jumping back to because holy poo poo that was straight out of Avengers/Ultron.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
But the Batman in Batman Returns does most of that and he's the best Batman in any medium.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
Jiro posted:I guess? I just don't think different iterations of Batman built on the no guns and no murder pillars, should end up calling themselves Batman when he's blowing dudes away with guns, driving into them with his car, and blowing them away with his plane. And mimicking a scene from DKR by firing a gun to immolate KGBeast. Preferences I guess. Gosh if only Batman v Superman had a scene where Batman had a gun and lined up a guy in his sights and you were all "holy poo poo is he the dang Punisher now? Is he just going to canoe this dude?" and then he shoots a tracking device and everyone breathes a collective sign of relief. It's facile to equate Snyder's Batman, who shows up in the Batmobile and revs his engine to scare thugs away (they unwisely start shooting) and only escalates when his prey does, with the Punisher, who would a show up in his battle van and straight up merk every last dude with a triple tap.to the dome regardless of what they were doing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Just came out of a screening from Justice League. As someone that hated BvS, JL is pretty good and fun throughout. There’s a couple of scenes that were kinda odd/misplaced and I feel the story could have used another pass at writing / putting all the parts in place but overall it was a pretty good movie for seeing these heroes do heroic things. Would you say Steppenwolf is like Aries, as a villain that's just there or is a more involved villain? I kinda got the impression that he was just there to have a massive CGI fight at the end with no real buildup.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:But the Batman in Batman Returns does most of that and he's the best Batman in any medium. Ironically isn't Returns the one with the least amount of Batman on screen? I will cop to Batman blowing a clown up with dynamite being Bugs Bunny funny but also  Batman just blew up a loving person and no one batted an eye. Some straight up Death Wish 4 kind of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Jiro posted:Would you say Steppenwolf is like Aries, as a villain that's just there or is a more involved villain? I kinda got the impression that he was just there to have a massive CGI fight at the end with no real buildup. Ares at least had things / motivations to be in WW by motivating / “inspiring” the machinations behind WW1. Steppenwolf here just... kinda shows up and with the exception of one flashback scene to explain who he is, there really isn’t anything about him that screams world ending threat. you don’t even get a big CGI fight like BvS or WW. Steppenwolf is seriously a step down in just about every way to the previous villains in these movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Ares at least had things / motivations to be in WW by motivating / “inspiring” the machinations behind WW1. Steppenwolf here just... kinda shows up and with the exception of one flashback scene to explain who he is, there really isn’t anything about him that screams world ending threat. That's............drat near what I expected. Thanks man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:you don’t even get a big CGI fight like BvS or WW. Steppenwolf is seriously a step down in just about every way to the previous villains in these movies. They've done it. They successfully aped the MCU! Super Fan fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Nov 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Gosh if only Batman v Superman had a scene where Batman had a gun and lined up a guy in his sights and you were all "holy poo poo is he the dang Punisher now? Is he just going to canoe this dude?" and then he shoots a tracking device and everyone breathes a collective sign of relief. It's facile to equate Snyder's Batman, who shows up in the Batmobile and revs his engine to scare thugs away (they unwisely start shooting) and only escalates when his prey does, with the Punisher, who would a show up in his battle van and straight up merk every last dude with a triple tap.to the dome regardless of what they were doing. Was he just trying to scare those dudes who had already crashed (ceasing to be a threat) by dragging them along for a half a mile and then using them to murder some other dudes? I guess violently being murdered is pretty scary, so maybe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbnKGRNBlZU&t=18s
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
Jiro posted:I guess? I just don't think different iterations of Batman built on the no guns and no murder pillars, should end up calling themselves Batman when he's blowing dudes away with guns, driving into them with his car, and blowing them away with his plane. And mimicking a scene from DKR by firing a gun to immolate KGBeast. Preferences I guess. Counterpoint: He's a man who dresses like a bat, therefore Batman is an apt alter-ego descriptor. The actual character's name is Bruce Wayne, and he kills heavily armed mercenaries because why wouldn't he? And Batman killed that guy in DKR.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:Counterpoint: He's a man who dresses like a bat, therefore Batman is an apt alter-ego descriptor. The actual character's name is Bruce Wayne, and he kills heavily armed mercenaries because why wouldn't he? Obligatory split hair, he's never charged with that guy's murder he's only ever charged with Joker's murder and it's said more than once in DKR that killing is line he doesn't cross, even going out of the way in a blurb saying he's uses rubber bullets against the Mutant Gang. Even going so far to smashing a gun saying it's the weapon of the enemy. Snyder did what he does best and take a cool visual and translate it to screen to make just usually without any other context. Sorry didn't mean to rant. Like Snyder can make some really really good visuals happen but there's really no substance to them, I just wish there would be. That's coming from someone that enjoyed his Watchman adaptation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Challenge: Point out things in MoS and BvS that you didn't like (and no cop outs like "It wasn't the director's cut") [rubbing my fist into my open palm] Lex Luthor's bad attitude. I'll tell you what, that guy's a real piece of work and I'd like to clean his clock
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Super Fan posted:They've done it. They successfully aped the MCU! I was seriously shocked when Nick Fury showed up in the post-credit scene.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:Counterpoint: He's a man who dresses like a bat, therefore Batman is an apt alter-ego descriptor. The actual character's name is Bruce Wayne, and he kills heavily armed mercenaries because why wouldn't he? No he didn't. The guy (actually an extremely muscular neo Nazi woman named Bruno - I'm not joking) appeared in later comics set in the DKR universe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Neurosis posted:No he didn't. The guy (actually an extremely muscular neo Nazi woman named Bruno - I'm not joking) appeared in later comics set in the DKR universe. There were more of those? Huh, interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Comic book characters are retconned back to life all the time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Neurosis posted:No he didn't. The guy (actually an extremely muscular neo Nazi woman named Bruno - I'm not joking) appeared in later comics set in the DKR universe. Bruno's not the one who grabs the kid. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
Neurosis posted:No he didn't. The guy (actually an extremely muscular neo Nazi woman named Bruno - I'm not joking) appeared in later comics set in the DKR universe. You're thinking of the grocery store scene where Bruce disguises himself as an old hag. The scene in question is when the mutants are holding a baby hostage. See above. Jiro posted:Obligatory split hair, he's never charged with that guy's murder he's only ever charged with Joker's murder and it's said more than once in DKR that killing is line he doesn't cross, even going out of the way in a blurb saying he's uses rubber bullets against the Mutant Gang. Even going so far to smashing a gun saying it's the weapon of the enemy. Snyder did what he does best and take a cool visual and translate it to screen to make just usually without any other context. Sorry didn't mean to rant. Substance is not a spiritual essence, it is determined by the reader or spectator's relationship to the text, their capacity and willingness to interpret. So in The Dark Knight Returns, the substance of depicting Bruce engaging in hyperbolic violence in contrast to his stated ideals is to shock the reader from complacency. The text goes out of its way to demonstrate that forces to which he is opposed are irreconcilably evil, and that a corrupted, ineffectually liberal and bureaucratic state is incapable of dealing with them in the straightforward and efficient manner of simply amassing one's own personal arsenal and bludgeoning them into submission. It's a far rightist ideological fantasy, akin to Dirty Harry, but with the intention-based morality of something like Ender's Game, in which no matter what the protagonist does or how violent, he is never held personally accountable to death. With the above panels, you get a perfect illustration of this ideological conflict. While we are never explicitly told that the mutant dies, or that Batman is charged with murder, the point is that the text itself never addresses the mutant's fate, because this is framed as morally irrelevant. The life or death of the mutant is immaterial to Batman as this avenging outlaw rapturing an innocent from the clutches of unambiguous evil who, had they received some paltry mercy, is implicitly undeserving of it. To wit, there is a huge difference between what Bruce says, and what is straightforwardly presented to the reader as a highly aestheticized ideological fantasy. "Rubber bullets. Honest" is a black comic joke. He's already riding in a tank against snaggle-toothed droogs hopped up on super-meth. Frank Miller, the inveterate provocateur, is making fun of contrivances that exist exclusively to alleviate the discomfort that Bruce does awful things in the name of a 'greater good,' that he can wave away the inevitable consequences of violence with the wave of a hand. In Batman v Superman, we are not presented with the same scenario, but 'without substance.' Instead, the substance is of the visual parallel between Bruce's nightmares (both of the bat demon emerging from his mother's tomb and the Omega nightmare) and the 'reality' of the warehouse raid. Instead of seeing the mercenaries as being the mindless, Lovecraftian cult of Superman, he now sees them as 'just bad guys.' Instead of his mother emerging from a tomb as a horrific monster to consume him, he now emerges from the walls of the warehouse in order to symbolically rescue his mother (also named Martha).
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
Come on, Batman kills people all the time, his "no kill rule" is just something he says because he's a crazy person. You don't punch My favorite part of Daredevil is that staircase fight, where right before he's telling the Punisher that he refuses to kill, and then like two minutes later he hangs a guy by his neck from a chain. Oh, I mean, I don't kill anyone but that one guy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:In the former case because that's a ridiculous quirk to attach to the Amazons which was invented by men who had no idea how a boob actually works. In the latter case because David Thewlis doesn't have the body for it. You sound like a Fox News host bitching about pop singers revealing 'too much' skin in their music videos.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
Jerk McJerkface posted:Come on, Batman kills people all the time, his "no kill rule" is just something he says because he's a crazy person. You don't punch Right. Batman kills, but unlike the Punisher, he doesn't execute people. That's why in BvS he stages a series of elaborate accidents, culminating in him turning a flamethrower into a bomb a split second before the trigger is pulled. This is also the logic behind him branding people in the expectation that, though without his direct involvement, they'll be killed in prison.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Right. Batman kills, but unlike the Punisher, he doesn't execute people. That's why in BvS he stages a series of elaborate accidents, culminating in him turning a flamethrower into a bomb a split second before the trigger is pulled. This is also the logic behind him branding people in the expectation that, though without his direct involvement, they'll be killed in prison. You know if BvS had the twist of Batman being the one that set Luthor up to set Batman up and set Superman up against Batman in order to work together to stop Luthor and put together the Justice League just cause way better movie and a way more interesting insane Batman that plans for EVERY contingency. Only it all goes off the rails when Luthor makes his Doomsday Zod Baby and gets Superman killed. Just like having him silently mouth out "oh gently caress this wasn't part of the plan! Fuuuuuuck" Like some super brilliantly stupid way that had Fury bring the Avengers together.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Right. Batman kills, but unlike the Punisher, he doesn't execute people. That's why in BvS he stages a series of elaborate accidents, culminating in him turning a flamethrower into a bomb a split second before the trigger is pulled. This is also the logic behind him branding people in the expectation that, though without his direct involvement, they'll be killed in prison. Which, to expand on the inevitable and invited comparisons to The Dark Knight Returns, frames Beavis as a repudiation of the former. As with NOT MY SUPERMAN, Batman is the locus of an ideological fantasy, in which a single character stands in for the ideal of a perfectly moral society. Bruce acknowledges that he's a criminal, that he's always been a criminal, but, again, there's a huge difference between what he says, and what is straightforwardly depicted in the text. Whatever his personal views, his criminal behavior is nonetheless found perfectly consistent with the status quo of the police state, prison industrial complex, and reactionary conservatism:    
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I wasn't excusing anything because it's not clear to me what needs to be excused. I honestly thought the problem wasn't the basic idea of celebrating a woman's physique, but rather what physiques were being celebrated and why and what that embodies about how women are viewed in our society. Here's the thing: what (little, admittedly) we've seen of the Amazons in JL is not an actual role-reversal of the half-dressed Spartans in 300. For the JL Amazons to be that, the entire movie would have to feature female combatants and only female combatants pitted against each other in all their half-dressed musculature while the only major male character we see -- let's say it's Henry Cavill -- gets assfucked by a conniving woman in order to help his queen wife Gal Gadot achieve glorious victory in battle. Some other male actors -- let's say Affleck, Ezra Miller, and Jason Momoa -- are hired to do some pole-dancing at a party. Your understanding is that power fantasies are different from sexual fantasies even though there is overlap between the two, which is completely correct. In many portrayals, someone wearing less clothes can actually be more powerful and less sexual than someone wearing more clothes. But y'know what? If you're depicting multiple armies' worth of these power fantasies and, just so coincidentally, the only ones that are being exposed in the middle of an Apokaliptic battlescape are the female warriors?...then yeah, hey, that looks really loving suspicious! You can say that you're depicting their muscles and their power all you want but apparently you only want to do this for the women's armors? Do the male warriors not have abs in the DCEU? Are we not going to show off of the muscles of any Atlanteans, who live underwater and have even less reason for bulky armor than the Amazons? Seriously, what should we assume is the mindset behind these design choices? (And yes I'm aware that a number of the Amazons are fully covered as well. I'm asking specifically in regards to the design choices behind those multiple Amazons we've seen who aren't.) Which is exacerbated by the fact that "I'm actually empowering women by allowing them to wear less clothes" is a really precarious, context-dependent rationale has been used by male creators for years and years to justify JRPGesque chainmail bikini in media, ones that aren't all that different-looking than the designs we see in JL. You can say that the intent to display power and the execution of that power will make all the difference here and maybe that will end up being true, but Justice League absolutely deserves scrutiny if it has Amazon battle attire looking like a parody of what they were in their own film. Because, lest we forget, these specific female warriors were just in another film that was notable among its very many female fans for subverting those tropes of high fantasy Amazon warriors dressed in JRPG bikini armor, putting them instead in very functional-looking, historically-inspired armor. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:This is corporatized Maybelline feminism. "To Women, For Women?" What the hell? You can't seriously believe this foolishness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
'Male gaze' is not something you 'employ' to 'dis-engage women'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:You're thinking of the grocery store scene where Bruce disguises himself as an old hag. The scene in question is when the mutants are holding a baby hostage. My bad. Iirc Bruno has a machine gun in that scene, hence my confusion
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
What was the deal with that Nixon poster in the football crowd? Isn’t it someone (Snyder? Fong?) who tries to subtly put Nixon in all his movie?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
Violator posted:What was the deal with that Nixon poster in the football crowd? Isn’t it someone (Snyder? Fong?) who tries to subtly put Nixon in all his movie? Some college teams use signs to call plays. e: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
Violator posted:What was the deal with that Nixon poster in the football crowd? Isn’t it someone (Snyder? Fong?) who tries to subtly put Nixon in all his movie? A little bit of the above, but also a Watchmen easter egg.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Well first of all the difference between 300 and the typical scantily-clad women in a movie is that it is the men who are scantily-clad in this case, and that's actually a pretty meaningful distinction for far too many reasons than can be easily summarized, but can very broadly be boiled down to this not actually being a problem since power and social dynamics in media still overwhelming favor men and the contest is not close. Even in the narrative of the film itself, the men retain all expressions of overt, masculine-coded, strength-driven power while women -- while vital to the overall text and metatext -- are only "powerful" in regards to the surreptitious feminine support they offer and the sex-driven wiles where I guess they'll allow themselves to be raped on behalf of their husbands for political gains. It's the same logic wherein swapping a black character for a white one, all else being equal, will still change the themes and messaging of certain storylines because power and social dynamics in media still vastly favor one over the other. That dynamic is heightened in 300's case because it does absolutely every-loving-thing in its power to make sure everyone remembers that this is not a movie made for women even though it features scantily-clad men in every other frame. LOL
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/justiceleaguewb/status/930311932833234946 [edit] Ray Fisher on top of the world. God bless him  https://twitter.com/bestofrayfisher/status/930108035598499840 teagone fucked around with this message at 07:21 on Nov 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 07:05
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Bruno's not the one who grabs the kid. It's hilarious how some people still go 'actually he only fired a warning shot and the mutant got so scared he dropped the kid' 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
Renoistic posted:It's hilarious how some people still go 'actually he only fired a warning shot and the mutant got so scared he dropped the kid' Well, if you saw the official DC UNIVERSE ANIMATED ORIGINAL MOVIES adaptation, you would know that Batman only shot the mutant in the hand and then struck her with the butt of the rifle. Frank Miller just forgot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
For a feminist, BrianWilly's arguments about what men and women like are very gender essentialist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 07:28
|
|