|
Joey Freshwater posted:My thing with Winston is he started the show just a little quirky, maybe weird but by the end of it he was portrayed as a complete paste-eating moron. Well, he is a cop at the end of the show.
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
SiKboy posted:How come people are so weirded out by a show having its own rules for witches but not when its a show with its own take on vampires or zombies or whatever? C'mon, there's at least one decade of Twilight complaints and also every time a discussion arises whether zombies should be fast or slow
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:Believe me, there are plenty of people who get all worked up about how zombies work in various shows, and vampire spergs etc. We just haven't had a popular new zombie/vampire movie/show in a while, iZombie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Jedit posted:iZombie? I don't think a CW show that isn't Supernatural can be put in the same discussion tier as major "franchises" like walking dead etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:How come people are so weirded out by a show having its own rules for witches but not when its a show with its own take on vampires or zombies or whatever? I have no idea why people have their ideas about how <supernatural thing> should work. I can't remember where I read/heard it, but if you ask a writer "How do you kill a vampire?" the answer is "However you want to." Vampires aren't real. If I write a book where vampires are killed by the touch of human spit so be it, that's my world, and anyone who argues against it doesn't have a leg to stand on. Don't get me wrong, sparkling vampires are dumb as poo poo. But saying it's 'not correct' is stupid. Almost makes me want to see a vampire production where people are ready to gently caress vampires up and stuff but the vampires in this world are actually Jiangshi and don't give a poo poo about stakes or garlic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I have no idea why people have their ideas about how <supernatural thing> should work. Supernatural has a lot of this. One of them is a monster that's attacking Bobby and there's a whole big ritual thing to kill it. So he winds up just tossing it in a wood chipper. That does it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
Push El Burrito posted:Supernatural has a lot of this. One of them is a monster that's attacking Bobby and there's a whole big ritual thing to kill it. Wasn't there a Buffy episode where they had to fight a big bad demon who has the distinction of "no weapon forged can hurt it", so Buffy grabs an RPG or something similar and blows it away? (Because the RPG is certainly a weapon, but it's not forged, see.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
I saw the first episode of Sabrina and Ambrose turned and said 'Penny Dreadful for your thoughts' and I was like EUUURGH I GET IT YOURE WITCHES AND SPOOKY
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Fingerless Gloves posted:I saw the first episode of Sabrina and Ambrose turned and said 'Penny Dreadful for your thoughts' and I was like EUUURGH I GET IT YOURE WITCHES AND SPOOKY Wait until you find out that they named their women-protecting-women group WICCA. Which, I understand the cultural significance, wiccanism being very matriarchal, woman-dominated culture, but in the context of this show, with lines like that 'penny dreadful' one, is so eye-rolling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
^^^^^^^It was also a descriptive vs proscriptive thing. He was so strong that no weapon forged (that we know of) can kill him, rather than being magically immune to the entire concept of weapons. Joey Freshwater posted:My thing with Winston is he started the show just a little quirky, maybe weird but by the end of it he was portrayed as a complete paste-eating moron. The rest of the cast had a couple of weird quirks, but with Winston it felt like they couldn't settle on one, and just bounced around a lot. The intermittent ones were loving hilarious (getting weird on fruity drinks, over/underdoing pranks) but the dumb shirts and the cat obsession were just ghastly. I still love that stupid show, and was practically in tears when Schmidt started ranting about underwear to put on a show for the paparazzi (i was uh...in a weird place when that came out) and the schmaltzy final mini-series was exactly what I wanted for those characters. Even at its dumbest it had an earnestness and a compassion for its characters in a way that Friends or Brooklyn Nine Nine never quite managed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Mikl posted:Wasn't there a Buffy episode where they had to fight a big bad demon who has the distinction of "no weapon forged can hurt it", so Buffy grabs an RPG or something similar and blows it away? (Because the RPG is certainly a weapon, but it's not forged, see.) Yeah, that was from Buffy in the season where Angel was turned evil. Though I don't think the trickery was that the weapon "wasn't forged", it was that the weapon didn't exist (i.e. wasn't forged) when the book that said that was written.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Yeah, that was from Buffy in the season where Angel was turned evil. Though I don't think the trickery was that the weapon "wasn't forged", it was that the weapon didn't exist (i.e. wasn't forged) when the book that said that was written. As far as I remember there wasnt a trick as such. The book had been written hundreds (thousands?) of years ago. As far as the writer of the book knew, it was correct because it was impervious to everything those primitive screwheads could hit it with. It was just that high explosives hadnt been invented when the book was written, so that hadnt been tried. It wasnt magically immune to weapons, it was just tough enough to shrug off poo poo from the bronze age or whenever. In the same way that a medieval suit of armour might be described by the blacksmith who forged it as "impenetrable" but 500 years later it isnt going to do poo poo to stop small arms fire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Joss whedon is a loving genius
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I have no idea why people have their ideas about how <supernatural thing> should work. Wasn't that noted child murderer John Landis? He killed kids you know
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Len posted:Wasn't that noted child murderer John Landis? He killed kids you know Kids can only be killed by helicopters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
Len posted:Wasn't that noted child murderer John Landis? He killed kids you know Did you know that Vic Morrow had severe dandruff? When they were clearing the scene they found his Head and Shoulders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Did you know that Vic Morrow had severe dandruff? When they were clearing the scene they found his Head and Shoulders. Too soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
Alright, now you can make jokes about noted multiple child killer John Landis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I have no idea why people have their ideas about how <supernatural thing> should work. If you are a competent writer you know that your choice in words is important because of explicit and implicit connotations. Effectively dealing with this baggage is an important part of writing, and failing so badly as to inspire mockery from the audience shows that the authorial choices made were incorrect - not that the audience was wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 00:52
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
So many of these seem like they originated as Australian-style pranks. (the 'loving with gullible tourists' kind, not the 'frequently lethal' kind)
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
Len posted:Like the other poster said they're doing a thing where Archie is now grim and gritty. Riverdale isn't exactly "grim and gritty" despite first impressions of the content because it's so over-the-top pants-on-head stupid melodrama. And it's awesome and everyone should watch it. It opens with a Who Killed Laura Palmer-esque murder, but you quickly stop giving a poo poo about that because of all the bizarre stuff going on around it. The latest season features a hilarious 80s-style satanic panic D&D-playing suicide cult, and Archie is the reigning champion in an illegal fight club.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Joss whedon is a loving genius
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 10:56
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I can't remember where I read/heard it, but if you ask a writer "How do you kill a vampire?" the answer is "However you want to." Vampires aren't real. If I write a book where vampires are killed by the touch of human spit so be it, that's my world, and anyone who argues against it doesn't have a leg to stand on. I'm reminded of a quote by the comedian Hannah Gadsby about growing up gay in Tasmania (a very LGBT-repressive place to grow up in the 80s): "When I was growing up, I knew more facts about unicorns than I did about lesbians. THERE ARE NO FACTS ABOUT UNICORNS"
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 11:03
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:I think it'd be even smarter if Buffy had just grabbed a stick off the ground and beat the guy to death with it, because that's neither a weapon nor is it forged. gently caress your ancient semantics!!! By that logic, like food and air could kill him. They're not forged weapons, either! If he's tough enough to withstand forged weapons he's not going to die to a branch you found lying on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 11:43
|
|
|
Memento posted:I'm reminded of a quote by the comedian Hannah Gadsby about growing up gay in Tasmania (a very LGBT-repressive place to grow up in the 80s): A unicorn is a mythological creature resembling a horse with a single horn facing forward from its forehead. FACTED!
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
sassassin posted:By that logic, like food and air could kill him. They're not forged weapons, either! I could be misremembering, but the rocket didn't destroy him either, just blew him into little kibbles, and one arm crawling about by itself. You could probably glue him back together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 12:37
|
|
|
Yeah, they put the pieces in a bunch of different boxes and sent them all to different parts of the world. That's why "no weapon forged" could kill him. Stab him, does nothing. Cut off an arm, he just sticks it back on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
Mr. Bad Guy posted:A unicorn is a mythological creature resembling a horse with a single horn facing forward from its forehead. Don't forget the goat's beard and they can only be caught by virgins and the horn cures poison and and and
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:As far as I remember there wasnt a trick as such. The book had been written hundreds (thousands?) of years ago. As far as the writer of the book knew, it was correct because it was impervious to everything those primitive screwheads could hit it with. It was just that high explosives hadnt been invented when the book was written, so that hadnt been tried. It wasnt magically immune to weapons, it was just tough enough to shrug off poo poo from the bronze age or whenever. In the same way that a medieval suit of armour might be described by the blacksmith who forged it as "impenetrable" but 500 years later it isnt going to do poo poo to stop small arms fire. I like this interpretation a lot more than the alternative. It feels kind of weird and arbitrary if the monsters are actually "invincible" but the hero kills it with a technicality. Tangentially: In Return of the King, there's a prophecy/phrase/whatever that says Nazgul can be killed by no man (which unfolds into the clever denouement of being stabbed by a woman and a hobbit), but it always seemed like an odd way to phrase a prophecy in a world where "man" is only one of many, many races. Like, it implies that it could be killed by an Elf, a Dwarf, a Hobbit, an Ent, etc. It's like we had a prophecy in our world that the antichrist could be killed by no Canadian.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 16:56
|
|
|
CordlessPen posted:It's like we had a prophecy in our world that the antichrist could be killed by no Canadian. *Man stabs the antichrist* Man: Sorry about that eh Antichrist: Noo...it's impossible, no Canadian could kill me! Man: *puts on purple toque with the Vikings logo* Man: I am no Canadian, ya cheesehead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
CordlessPen posted:Tangentially: In Return of the King, there's a prophecy/phrase/whatever that says Nazgul can be killed by no man (which unfolds into the clever denouement of being stabbed by a woman and a hobbit), but it always seemed like an odd way to phrase a prophecy in a world where "man" is only one of many, many races. Like, it implies that it could be killed by an Elf, a Dwarf, a Hobbit, an Ent, etc. It's like we had a prophecy in our world that the antichrist could be killed by no Canadian. The "prophecy" was an off the cuff comment by an Elf to stop some king of the north from chasing after the witch king when he was fleeing a battle. It's not an odd way to phrase it when the specific intent was to stop someone from the race of men from rushing off to their probable death.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
Death and/or corruption, since the Nazgul used to be humans themselves, before falling to the temptation of their rings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
I'm sure it's been answered but did any of those kings question where their magic rings came from? Did they just get a gift-wrapped box with a ring of power in it and think 'oh cool, a magic ring! no ulterior motives here and my friends all got one too so lets pop this fucker on'. Did they think some really nice person was just handing out magical rings?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
Sauron convinced them he was on the level because he was still able to assume an angelic appearance at the time and he preyed on their arrogance/fear of death by promising that the rings would make them immortal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
I've got to the honest, if I were in that universe and some evil dude handed me a ring saying it would make me a powerful badass I'd slip it on before he even got to the fine print.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
Sauron was slick in the beginning. He even deceived Celebrimbor, who actually forged the rings of power with Sauron's guidance. Sauron then used his knowledge of the rings of power to master them with the One. The rings themselves are not evil. Gandalf and Galadriel have one each. They're only dangerous because of their connection to the One.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 18:19
|
|
|
Basically Sauron developed the ring API with a backdoor, then shared the design documents around
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Sauron: Hey elves, I am Annatar, a Gandalf-esque emissary from your gods across the sea come to teach you things! Elves: Cool! (Sauron spends the next 400 years teaching the elves stuff) Sauron: Next lets make some magic rings! (They work together to make 16 rings. Head elf guy makes another 3 on his own. Sauron makes super ring that can control all the other ones designed the same way) Sauron: Ha ha! I am actually your evil enemy from a thousand years ago and am going to mind-control you through the magic rings! Elves: (takes off rings) Sauron: Nuts. (attacks and steals the 16 rings they both worked on. Elves hide the other 3) Sauron: Hey dwarves+men, want some magic rings? As far as you know, I am still a friendly Gandalf-esque guy and they're pretty sweet rings
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
Imagined posted:Sauron was slick in the beginning. He even deceived Celebrimbor, who actually forged the rings of power with Sauron's guidance. Sauron then used his knowledge of the rings of power to master them with the One. The rings themselves are not evil. Gandalf and Galadriel have one each. They're only dangerous because of their connection to the One. The ones Galadriel and Gandalf wear are the ones made by Celebrimbor by himself, Sauron wasn’t involved. Those Rings aren’t evil. The ones given to men and the Dwarves definitely are. Sauron had a direct hand in making those.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 13:12
|
|
