|
They should roll with the business suit/full face covering batmask look of one of Batman's dime novel vigilante inspirations, The Bat. He packed a revolver and also a special knockout gas gun he would use to take one person alive to interrogate later. We've gone full circle to the point where people would barely notice the difference.
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:There was certainly discussion of what a cop-out that is, particularly considering Batman caused the train accident that's about to kill Raz, and also all the people he killed blowing up the League of Shadow's lair. But it didn't break people's brains the way BvS did and wasn't nearly as large a part of the conversation. I wouldn't necessarily say it 'broke their brains', more that comic fans frame nonserial superhero films as being contained in their own right (just as most comics are, especially Marvel's, which had an unwritten rule that the reader should be able to pick up any issue and figure out what the hell was going on). Their grievance was that Batman is not established in-film as having ever been less-than-lethal. If one wanted to appeal to them, it would involve changing the opening scene so that it's Batman and not Bruce, and have him not-kill an aggressor with a lethal weapon. Obviously the counterargument is that they should know what Batman is like before even seeing the film, and understand that the film much like MoS relies on your prior knowledge of bea and vis as good figures. But I can understand their point of view, it's just another example of how a film can be interpreted in ways unforseen by the director as their work is observed and absorbed into pop culture.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
Conal Cochran posted:This is out of the blue, but I'm trying to remember and I ask this earnestly, when Batman Begins first came out did fans make as big of a discussion out of his "I don't have to save you line." and letting Raz Al Ghul die at the end as they did about him killing people in BvS? It was occasionally brought up, but I don't remember the complaint being that Batman killed a person so much that it was a weak excuse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Their grievance was that Batman is not established in-film as having ever been less-than-lethal. I do not recall this being the extent of people's grievances.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak is right. People literally say that BvS's Batman is the Punisher even though Snyder specifically put in a scene that shows you he's not. He "NEVER EVER KILLS" because that's how the cartoon did it or w/e
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I do not recall this being the extent of people's grievances. Well, obviously you can find sizzling hot takes of all varieties from the billions of people that exist on this rock. In my personal experience both anecdotal and reading/watching reviews their concern was generally less "batman should never ever kill" and more that it seems unprompted and nonsensical when they feel that they are expected to take Batmans' concerns seriously or with any merit. For a rather topical reviewer example: Rich Evans of RLM said that Batman was the only good part of BvS, and his primary annoyance was that he killed for no reason. I can't blame him for feeling that way when one of his biggest solo scenes, chasing the kryptonite van, is revealed to have been pointless. I think the promotional material hyping it up as evoking DKR took out a lot of potential fervor over baman killing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Nolan actually originally filmed it with him just realizing oh poo poo I delayed him from realizing the track is busted long enough it's time and bailing without even saying that last line to R'as. R'as self-owned by not minding his surroundings in the climax of an entire movie where people self-own by not minding their surroundings but the line they ended up using was pretty far from bringing that up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
I just like it as further characterization of Bateman being totally self-righteous.
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
It's a moment that definitely got better once The Dark Knight came out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Well, obviously you can find sizzling hot takes of all varieties from the billions of people that exist on this rock. In my personal experience both anecdotal and reading/watching reviews their concern was generally less "batman should never ever kill" and more that it seems unprompted and nonsensical when they feel that they are expected to take Batmans' concerns seriously or with any merit. For a rather topical reviewer example: Rich Evans of RLM said that Batman was the only good part of BvS, and his primary annoyance was that he killed for no reason. I can't blame him for feeling that way when one of his biggest solo scenes, chasing the kryptonite van, is revealed to have been pointless. I'm not claiming that the Rich Evans's of the world don't exist, I'm disagreeing that they significantly represent the reaction to Batman killing, such that we can claim that they have this one grievance. As Megaman's Jockstrap points out, there's also plenty of people who just couldn't get past Batman not being who he was in some cartoon they loved. And plenty of other reasons aside. It's silly to suggest it's just one thing. Also, chasing the Kryptonite wasn't pointless just because he had a backup plan. He preferred to try to steal the Kryptonite from the international smugglers who also engaged in human trafficking than the guards who happened to have a job at LexCorp. The former are fun to terrorize, while the latter he was a little less theatrical with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
"Batman didn't catch the truck and had to think up another plan, which worked, so the whole thing was pointless" is the Galaxy-Brain-level-thinking that got us the "Raiders of the Lost Ark was a pointless exercise because God nukes the Nazis at the end anyway" 'joke' from Big Bang Theory. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:"Batman didn't catch the truck and had to think up another plan, which worked, so the whole thing was pointless" is the Galaxy-Brain-level-thinking that got us the "Raiders of the Lost Ark was a pointless exercise because God nukes the Nazis at the end anyway" 'joke' from Big Bang Theory. More like the nazis got the ark back in the next scene.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:David Sanderburg tweeted this while talking about the Shazam Movie. Anyone outside looking from pig to Captain Marvel, and from Captain Marvel to pig, and from pig to Captain Marvel again would find it impossible to say which was which.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:https://io9.gizmodo.com/chadwick-boseman-chose-his-black-panther-accent-to-make-1820258023 What you're talking about here is anti-colonialism divorced from anti-capitalism, so what we have in Black Panther is just a racially and culturally homogeneous society where the black people are exclusively exploited by other black people. The 'advancement' of the nation is described solely in technological terms, and you can note the adjectives like "tainting", "poisoning" and "disrupting" are used in contrast to this. In other words: were it not for racists, a given African nation would have experienced unhindered progress to become... a paradoxically 'North Korean' version of a first-world nation? (Or is it a 'first-world' version of North Korea?) Besides the general strangeness, none of this is far off from eurocentric Modernization and Development Theories that appeared during the cold war in order to combat marxist thought. You have, for example, influential thinkers like Talcott Parsons: "[Parsons] believed that modern civilization, with its technology and its constantly evolving institutions, was ultimately strong, vibrant, and essentially progressive." (My bolding.) But also you're sort-of making the mistake of mixing up the character and the actor when reading that quote; note Boseman's emphasis on how Wakanda is supposedly unconquered, supposedly the most advanced. The character apparently makes a conscious point of covering up his 'natural' European accent in order to galvanize his subjects against the colonial/globalist enemy that would 'poison' the ethnostate. Things are... bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:
why is everybody itt so invested in putting a black guy back in his place for daring to pose his views on a comic book franchise? its super gross and very transparent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
I'm coming back to the whole Batman Begins thing. The way I look at the line "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you either." is his way of forming a mentality that allows him to better cope with the death of his parents. He's getting away from the save/kill binary mentality that he is going by when he says to Alfred, "I killed them." (Which is then wonderfully mirrored when Rachel dies in TDK) But what I don't get is this: Why does Bruce at the beginning feel the need to save Liam Neeson, but seems unbothered by killing the rest of the league of shadows? Is Bruce Wayne simply racist, and therefore indifferent to their deaths, or is there something that I'm just not understanding? Conal Cochran fucked around with this message at 05:48 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
bring back old gbs posted:why is everybody itt so invested in putting a black guy back in his place for daring to pose his views on a comic book franchise? its super gross and very transparent. psst, what's super gross is spinning this as 'putting a black guy back in his place' when at least two other people who've posted wariness about the black panther movie are also black
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
bring back old gbs posted:why is everybody itt so invested in putting a black guy back in his place for daring to pose his views on a comic book franchise? its super gross and very transparent. I gotta agree with the guy whos avatar is the meme where donald duck is in slightly misspelled shock comics that our goal here is to bring the black man down by *squints* debating capitalistic themes in The Black Panther movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
Conal Cochran posted:But what I don't get is this: Why does Bruce at the beginning feel the need to save Liam Neeson, but seems unbothered by killing the rest of the league of shadows? Is Bruce Wayne simply racist, and therefore indifferent to their deaths, or is there something that I'm just not understanding? The inverse ninja law applies to their humanity as well as their martial prowess with equal severity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
I try not to judge avatars, because people replace them because they're salty little assholes. I have never watched One Punch Man, so I still don't know if I'll like it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
Only the avatarless can be trusted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
They should be banned for making threads unsightly IMO
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I try not to judge avatars, because people replace them because they're salty little assholes. I have never watched One Punch Man, so I still don't know if I'll like it. It's like training with a weight, it obligates u to be more powerful in posting or else face the consequences
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
Conal Cochran posted:I'm coming back to the whole Batman Begins thing. The way I look at the line "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you either." is his way of forming a mentality that allows him to better cope with the death of his parents. He's getting away from the save/kill binary mentality that he is going by when he says to Alfred, "I killed them." (Which is then wonderfully mirrored when Rachel dies in TDK) They havent espoused any higher thought to him, so they're more like single-minded animals than men, less likely to reconsider their views.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 07:19
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Well, obviously you can find sizzling hot takes of all varieties from the billions of people that exist on this rock. In my personal experience both anecdotal and reading/watching reviews their concern was generally less "batman should never ever kill" and more that it seems unprompted and nonsensical when they feel that they are expected to take Batmans' concerns seriously or with any merit. For a rather topical reviewer example: Rich Evans of RLM said that Batman was the only good part of BvS, and his primary annoyance was that he killed for no reason. I can't blame him for feeling that way when one of his biggest solo scenes, chasing the kryptonite van, is revealed to have been pointless. Sir Kodiak posted:Also, chasing the Kryptonite wasn't pointless just because he had a backup plan. He preferred to try to steal the Kryptonite from the international smugglers who also engaged in human trafficking than the guards who happened to have a job at LexCorp. The former are fun to terrorize, while the latter he was a little less theatrical with. All of Batman's actions up to the "Why did you say that name?" scene are pointless from Batman's perspective because he was acting under false assumptions based on falsified data and were performed in pursuit of a goal which he abandoned as soon as he became better informed. Here's the exact moment he realises that all of his actions these last 18 months were for completely wrong reasons: https://i.imgur.com/vijAefG.gifv Of course Batman's prior actions weren't pointless at all from Lex's perspective, they all played perfectly into his plans right up to that point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 07:47
|
|
|
Conal Cochran posted:I'm coming back to the whole Batman Begins thing. The way I look at the line "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you either." is his way of forming a mentality that allows him to better cope with the death of his parents. He's getting away from the save/kill binary mentality that he is going by when he says to Alfred, "I killed them." (Which is then wonderfully mirrored when Rachel dies in TDK) Yeah, these films love giving Batman a do-over. The whole "I promise you Martha won't die tonight" thing in BvS was another do-over that went in a different direction.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:All of Batman's actions up to the "Why did you say that name?" scene are pointless from Batman's perspective because he was acting under false assumptions based on falsified data and were performed in pursuit of a goal which he abandoned as soon as he became better informed. Eh, that's not what "pointless" means. Particularly since the post I responded to equated it to "for no reason," when as you put it he was acting for the wrong reasons. Like, in that clip, he's not realizing that he wasted his time, or that he was led on a wild goose chase, or anything like that. He's realizing what he's become.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 08:18
|
|
|
Why are Batman and Superman's mothers, both named Martha? *drives past 10 chairs, emerges from the trunk* No reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Eh, that's not what "pointless" means. Particularly since the post I responded to equated it to "for no reason," when as you put it he was acting for the wrong reasons. Neurolimal was saying that the kryptonite van chase was pointless at the time it happened, I'm saying that Bruce also realised that everything he'd done had been pointless in retrospect. Also chasing the kryptonite truck wasn't pointless, the plan was probably to get the kryptonite while it was most accessible which was before it got stored away in LexCorp's secure facility. Breaking into LexCorp to steal it would have been Plan B in case the earlier attempt failed and he probably would have succeeded in stopping the truck if Superman hadn't interfered. He planted the tracker on the truck as insurance. (Sidenote, breaking into LexCorp was probably easier than he expected because getting most of the kryptonite to Batman was central to Lex's plans. Breaking into the computer at Lex's house was also easier than it should have been for the exact same reasons.) Sir Kodiak posted:Like, in that clip, he's not realizing that he wasted his time, or that he was led on a wild goose chase, or anything like that. He's realizing what he's become. He's realising all those things at once. He's having a big hard think about a lot of things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
Conal Cochran posted:This is out of the blue, but I'm trying to remember and I ask this earnestly, when Batman Begins first came out did fans make as big of a discussion out of his "I don't have to save you line." and letting Raz Al Ghul die at the end as they did about him killing people in BvS? Batman Begins was the first "not my Batman" I remember seeing, and that was a MAJOR sticking point for a lot of people. There were just less of them because it was coming off of And Robin as opposed to TDK to TDKR where way more popped up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 12:04
|
|
|
I love this version of Pa Kent. People go nuclear on his "...maybe" line, but the thing is, he is an overprotective father. He cares far more about his son's own safety and well-being than him saving others. He wants to protect Clark from the world instead of the other way around, the world scares him and he fears what people will do to his son. As a father I entirely relate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 12:07
|
|
|
“Did they hurt you?” “You know they can’t” “It’s not what I meant, are you alright?” Honestly, as far as portraying and writing someone who himself doesn’t know the answers and wants to ensure Clark grows up capable of making his choices his own, it feels bang on. He doesn’t tell his son what to think or feel. He just constantly gets him to work through his own feelings and make up his mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Here's the exact moment he realises that all of his actions these last 18 months were for completely wrong reasons: The pointless part of that whole scene was his powered armour suit, because it was entirely worthless against healthy superman, and entirely unnecessary against choking on Kryptonite superman, there wasn't actually a reason for him to be wearing it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The pointless part of that whole scene was his powered armour suit, because it was entirely worthless against healthy superman, and entirely unnecessary against choking on Kryptonite superman, there wasn't actually a reason for him to be wearing it. 90% it was there because some board member saw the Hulkbuster in one of the Age of Ultron trailers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:90% it was there because some board member saw the Hulkbuster in one of the Age of Ultron trailers. Dickeye, you wanna take this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The pointless part of that whole scene was his powered armour suit, because it was entirely worthless against healthy superman, and entirely unnecessary against choking on Kryptonite superman, there wasn't actually a reason for him to be wearing it. there's also no reason for him to have the spooky voicebox but toys make him feel like a bigger man
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:90% it was there because some board member saw the Hulkbuster in one of the Age of Ultron trailers. Not to be glib or anything, but you know that this particular power armor predates the hulk buster by about three decades, yeah? https://imgur.com/a/RAcQD At a bare minimum, it's there as an homage to that scene, from the story of which the movie takes a lot of inspiration from. But more than that, it's kinda symbolic of Bruce's state of mind. He's emotionally closed himself off entirely. Superman breaks this barrier and manages to get through to him that what he's doing is wrong. Contrast how he is at the start of the fight, all sturm und drang, armored up, with the voice synthesizer sounding like a demon, and then all confused, scared, voice synthesizer fritzing, armor broken. It brings him from cold, distant, aloof and untouchable to vulnerable and human. It also further plays in to the Arthurian imagery that Snyder likes to employ in BVS, where Bruce embodies the worst qualities of King Arthur, using the excalibur for selfish means and damning himself. A Dark Knight (lol) who's lost his way McCloud fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
You can clearly see damage on the armor. Damage that would be on his body if he didn't wear the armor that's what armor does, it protects. In this case, it protected batman from environmental damage
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The pointless part of that whole scene was his powered armour suit, because it was entirely worthless against healthy superman, and entirely unnecessary against choking on Kryptonite superman, there wasn't actually a reason for him to be wearing it. When you're fighting a guy who can fly, level skyscrapers and shoot lasers out of his eyes you probably want to take every precaution and manufacture as much of an advantage as you can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
McCloud posted:Not to be glib or anything, but you know that this particular power armor predates the hulk buster by about three decades, yeah? Rest of armor chat aside, this doesn't necessarily mean that the inclusion of the batman armor is impossible to have been influence by AoU showing off a giant mech suit. Doesn't mean it's a ripoff ofc (and I dont think that's what MiddleOne was suggesting). quote:Neurolimal was saying that the kryptonite van chase was pointless at the time it happened, I'm saying that Bruce also realised that everything he'd done had been pointless in retrospect. I'm just trying to show the thought process that would lead to such takeaways from the film, I dont like how close the two scenes were to each other but understand that was due to rough editing and even then it doesn't bother me too much. I simply like to look at things from the perspective of others, especially if they're being derided.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 14:05
|
|