|
zoux posted:New poster, first piece of marketing I've seen featuring Tennant. I see Kafka 
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 23:03 |
|
|
Based on what I've read and seen, they've basically abandoned the theme of the comic (the clash between normality and celebrity). It's really not doable with the direction they're going for, so it just makes it weird that they decided to adapt it in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:Also, the contrast between Jessica and the Avengers et al was never the sole theme of Alias. It was only the most important theme. Alias was all about it. The superheroic world is presented as an almost mythic plane of reality, and the intrigue comes from how real people have to deal with it. In the first story arc, Jessica Jones ens up being a pawn between SHIELD and a supervillain, and it's terrifying because she's a normal (if enhanced) person dealing with forces incomprehensible in normal reality. She gets outfoxed and intimidated by a Homicide detective, how is she going to deal with SHIELD and a billionaire criminal mastermind? Or look at the Rick Jones arc, which is almost as thematically important to the series as Purple Man (who in the comic's world represents the ultimate violence). "Superheroic reality" being handled through realistic logic is a reoccurring motif in Brian Bendis' comics. Ultimate Spider-Man emphasises superheroic reality being a kind of violent intrusion into people's lives (Mark Bagley makes action in the series always explosive), with Peter Parker as somebody who navigates both worlds. Even "Bendis-speak" is part of that: applying a pseudo-realistic speech pattern to an unrealistic genre. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
1x01 Decent start. The noir narration felt unnecessary and lazy though..
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
1x04 Good so far, some dull choreography. I think the witnesses were a tribute to Brian Bendis' "ton of people answer a question" gag he uses a lot. Still hate the narration. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Nov 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
1x04 The twist with Malcolm was great. I thought his role in the series was bad writing, that he was there to show how considerate Jessica Jones could be to this incredibly humble And not everything is lost in adaptation: the the couple out to kill supers was really a Brian Bendis plot. It's exactly what I was talking in my earlier post about normal and superheroic realities meeting. My skepticism has been satisfied. I don't know about the rest of the series, but Episode 4 finally gets the comic. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Nov 21, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Hopefully there'll be a cut that cuts out the narration someday. 1x07 I don't mind that they dropped Purple Man breaking the fourth wall (aside from a nod or two), because they still understood its purpose. His big scene at the police station shows that: he's the sheer unreality of violence, how it disfigures everything normal. This might turn out like DD with an extremely disappointing ending, but I'll most likely enjoy the journey like I did with Daredevil. I'm still wondering where they're going with Hogarth's subplot. It ties in thematically, but it's kind of superfluous. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Nov 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Spoiler that poo poo, moron.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Is the Cop supposed to be anyone? I don't recognize the name, but he feels like he should be someone (1x13/general comics) He's Nuke, from Daredevil: Born Again..
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Wait Nuke as in the guy with the American flag tattoo'd on his face I last saw trying to kill Wolverine? (1x04) Notice how he's made up to look like Chris-Evans-as-Steven-Rogers?.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:I'm really struggling to describe my feelings about this show, because its something that I feel is at best okay but for some reason I'm just completely gripped by it. ...a Marvel product? 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
I enjoyed this series, but like Daredevil it's a mixed bag. Some of the subplots are a good example: while they're relevant thematically and in writing, they eat up way too much time before they pay off in terms of narrative. Adaptation-wise it was surprisingly faithful in spirit and writing to the comics: they translated Bendis' story of people trying to live in a world of abusers and irrational assholes pretty well. Episode 4 was the high-point in terms of fidelity. And for the ending, (1x13) the problem is that the climax of Jessica's Jones story shouldn't be defeating Kilgrave, it's what she does after that. But again, it's a case of the narrative and writing ultimately not living up to the ideas and themes behind them. And gently caress them for bringing back the narration for the last scene. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 09:54 on Oct 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2015 10:24
|
|
|
I like that part even if it's bad, because it's so true to the spirit of the comic.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
HIJK posted:The point is that Jessica is an archetypal anti-heroine. This is not a bad thing, it just means that she isn't inherently revolutionizing the anti-hero genre by being a lady. She's a good protagonist by virtue of functioning in her role in an intelligent and thoughtful way. Protagonists don't have to shake the foundations of the media industry to be good characters. Just doing their jobs well is enough in this world of intense mediocrity, "Revolutionizing the anti-hero genre" is an utterly meaningless phrase you shouldn't use, you're welcome. I like that they establish that JJ was always a bad person, and that her trauma just dropped any pretences. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 10:46 on Nov 24, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Maybe but the context of that tweet in this thread was FourLeaf pointing out that all the reviews praising Jessica Jones for being revolutionary were operating under a false premise. She isn't revolutionary, just archetypal. That is also dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:You're missing his point super hard and projecting a lot of crazy things on to a random guy you don't even know. I definitely missed the point, okay. Sorry about that. But your mistake is equating "lack of heroic qualities" with "evil", and "heroic qualities" with "trying to do good". Now Jessica Jones is a bad person and not a hero: the whole crux of the series is that the only thing that separates JJ from the rest of the world is her super-strength. Consider the flashbacks to her adult life pre-Kilgrave: she's basically the same as him. Jessica Jones extorts someone so that she can coast through life for a few months, and humiliates a man she finds obnoxious (granted, it's mostly him). This is called "'being kind of a bad person". Now this isn't saying that she is evil, or deserves anything that happens to her, just that she's equal to the people around her. After Kilgrave she's become worse. She makes an outright career of exploiting people's weaknesses, and she's violently dysfunctional. She spends most of the series on a quest to free Hope by using Kilgrave, and uses countless people for her purposes. She constantly lashes out with violence and almost always at people weaker than her. Robyn is actually kind of right when she turns the support group against JJ. But this is bad because it's merely returning the abuse JJ gives, just like JJ just returns the abuse directed at her. Obviously there's The Rolling Stones article is not good, but it is accurate in that Jessica Jones is an anti-hero. She lacks heroic qualities (idealism, integrity, etc) despite being the protagonist. Tony Soprano is actually more heroic (in the classical sense, and you can't argue about anti-heroes when you don't use the classical definition) because he's a man of action and a pillar of the community despite being a sociopathic criminal. Junkfist posted:All my heroes scapegoat blacks to steal drugs from hospitals. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 13:13 on Nov 24, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 12:19
|
|
|
Kilgrave: I do bad things because of horrifying trauma. Goon: That doesn't justify what you've done. Jessica Jones: I do bad things because of horrifying trauma. Goon: Oh my gosh what a hero!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:So she exploits Malcolm.  
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Like I said, things end up okay for him, mostly due to Jessica's efforts. "I can't save you." - Jessica to Malcolm "You choose." - Jessica, giving drugs to a drug addict
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
zoux posted:If they are working for good, if their goals are what we would consider socially worthwhile, like getting an innocent girl freed as opposed to, say, building a huge meth empire, then they aren't anti heroes. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Jessica Jones almost drunkenly murders a women while trying to intimidate her into acquiescing in a lawsuit. "Not an anti-hero." mycot posted:Because I absolutely have to Google tells me this is a TvTropes thing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 17:57
|
|
over Breaking Bad, Walt was a villain protagonist.
|
McNerd posted:I make it a personal rule to think twice whenever I'm about to brag about being baffled by something, suggesting that my confusion is more correct than other people's comprehension. This is a 144 page thread full of people explaining where they think those storylines led and what they think they meant, and why they thought Dinofrio's performance and those fight scenes were good. You don't have to like it, but if you truly don't get it, you only have yourself to blame. "Oh, you don't agree with our opinions. Quite a pity.  "
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
The most beautiful thing about Jessica Jones is that it argues that the very concept of patriarchy is a weak construct without ultimate meaning or relevance. It's rather against liberal feminism.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Dexo posted:She's more like the real Superman than the lovely one from MoS IMO The real Superman almost drunkenly murders people by throwing them under subway trains. computer parts posted:I'm glad the "real" Superman also snaps people's necks. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
jivjov posted:We just saw JJ for 13 episodes of MCU content. The result wasn't very good.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
"Patriarchy"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
The villain seems really generic after Kingpin and Kilgrave, so it seems weird to play him up at all. And DD and JJ suffered from having such dominant villains that I hope they're avoiding that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
You can't deceive me, I know that you criticized this show without properly watching it *adds another newspaper clipping to the board, scribbles THUNDERDOME GROUP? in the centre*
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
lol Anyway, I wonder how they're going to bungle up the extended storyline this time around after a strong start and a couple of strong episodes in the middle.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Lick! The! Whisk! posted:That really only applies to JJ and the latter half of DD season 2, and for wildly different reasons: JJ inexplicably used only one arc of Alias as its source material (and then doubled down on it in its latter half, stripping away all the original characters they added to focus on it even more) and the sheer lack of sustainable story showed through - especially in 110 and 111. It just sorta ran out of gas for a good three or four episode stretch before a fairly strong final two episodes. DD S1 ended with an unbelievable wet fart of a finale after hours of build-up. ImpAtom posted:Yeah. I think JJ was rough but it was rough in interesting ways. It's one of the few shows I've watched that are just genuinely awful and uncomfortable (though it gets tamer in the second half I think) It was tame all the way through, really. It relies on sarcasm and an over-the-top supervillain instead of being really uncomfortable (like Black Mirror or something). TV strikes me as not doing that well, since it's not good serial material.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
This Netflix format has spoiled the writers. They just can't help not making these long-winded scenes that could be cut in half for the same effect.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Daredevil had its tensions of class system, Jessica Jones had it's mockery of feminism, but Luke Cage really has nothing. The show peddles cliches but doesn't have the courage to embrace them (the number of hours before a dashboard cam shows up shows remarkable restraint but not prudence). Who does Luke Cage fight as a definitive black superhero? His primary nemeses are (1X08) an anachronistic night club crime lord, an evil black career woman, and a charmless B-movie ghoul, three nails on the coffin for relevance. It's sad that Daredevil has more honest concern with gentrification than the show set in Harlem of all places. The showrunners are too consumed with setting up the next misguided slow burn scene to indulge in the comic book fantasy except in passing. Two stars out of five, and may God have mercy on their soul.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 12:15 on Oct 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Could you elaborate? I don't remember feminism being mocked at all in Jessica Jones. Quite the opposite in fact. Skippy McPants posted:I think he means that the way JJ handled feminism made a mockery of the issue. I.e. the show did a poor job of tackling its themes, in his opinion. JJ is about a woman trying to prove that the Patriarchy exists to fix things, and failing horribly because she only needs to execute the serial killer to set things right. When the Patriarchy is dead, nothing is ultimately fixed and she's still a miserable poo poo but now without the excuse of overlooming abuse. e: I don't think the message is particularly well-delivered or -executed (and I certainly don't want to imply with that last line that abuse is meaningless). It's just the most coherent message to come out of that show. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Oct 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Luke Cage lives in a world of color. 95 percent of the casting are persons of color in fact the first two white people you see are immoral bad guys. In fact I think there are 3 white people who speak in the entire series. Like? What does it say? Does Luke's speech really sum up the show's themes accurately?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:I think it's actually super interesting. Especially when you add the racial dynamic. He is basically black superman without the flying/lasers which makes him human and more relatable. The show ends up feeling incoherent with all these motifs and themes. It embraces such a motley variety of elements from black culture, media, and experience that it ends up like a patchwork rather than a dialogue. This incoherency extends to more basic storytelling and style, like how hesitant the show is to embrace the superhero fantasy of its basic premise. Like how Cottonmouth and Diamondback are over-the-top anachronisms on a show that can't do justice to over-the-top anachronisms. And even the basic lesson of "always forward" doesn't ring that true with the emphasis on taking responsibility and confronting the past. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 10:16 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:This "Luke Cage is a black conservative" hot take needs to gently caress right off. What's wrong with it?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:It relies on out of context interpretations of specific scenes and ignoring the really really really overt themes of the show. Please be more specific, I don't know why people insist on being so vague about the show's themes and messages. The source of contention seems to be people like Justin Charity criticising the show for being conservative. So it seems like some partisan nonsense (though some of Charity's points about the shows political muteness are valid). BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
nerdman42 posted:Here's my question: Jessica Jones was a film noir story about abuse. Luke Cage (so far) seems like a modern blaxploitation about African-American culture and the systematic failing to help provide that culture. Emphasis on seems. Luke Cage is ultimately rather hollow, and peddles cliches without any insight into them. It actively avoids being too relevant with its villains. It's similar to how Jessica Jones was praised as feminist, but no one managed to say what's so feminist about it. It's actually a shockingly exploitative and weirdly anti-feminist show. One of the unspoken draws is the escalating atrocities committed by the villain (This man puts gardening shears to his neck! He forces these people to hang themselves! Now he has a gay man mutilate himself!), and barely anyone made a note of this, too busy as they were talking about strong female characters. Similarly, you have people constantly praising the show's 'strong themes' because having police dash cams or mentions of BLM apparently equal a coherent social statement. Daredevil was about people being caught up in systems larger than themselves and the corruption of capitalism. It's problems was of course that it dropped all of that (they never figured out what role a fully superheroic Daredevil could play in such a conflict), but S1 still managed to be the most authentic and relevant of the shows. Luke Cage, in contrast, expressly has only a villain stand for anti-gentrification when in DD it was the heroes. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Oct 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 23:03 |
|
|
bloodychill posted:At the center of JJ, we have two characters - Jessica Jones, a super-powered rape victim, and Kilgrave, a super-powered rapist. It's important to acknowledge that Kilgrave is more than a literal rapist - his ability completely takes other's control and self-determination away from them, so it's essentially an extension of the effects of rape. In his presence, other's agency is nothing. In a lot of ways also, he comes across very much as a manchild. He is complains that he is misunderstood, his parents were poo poo at raising him, his universe begins and ends with his well-being and his desires and no woman (or man for that matter) can stop him. He's the epitome of white male privilege that way. Everyone must understand him, everyone must sympathize with him. The one time he does good, he deserves recognition for it. To further this equivocation between a powerful rapist and Kilgrave, everyone rushes to his defense, denies that what he does his real, and most importantly denies the experiences of his victims. Depicting "white male privilege" as a rootless, invisible serial killer is one of the dumber creative decisions I've come across. e: I mean hell, Kilgrave is even explicitly a foreigner. One of the reasons rape and abuse is downplayed or ignored is that exposing and prosecuting them would upset communities and local institutions - the case of Jerry Sandusky, for example. The comics treat Kilgrave as a shallowly-characterised, over-the-top nightmare figure. Trying to characterise him too much as the show does strikes me as the root of the problem. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Oct 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 17:29
|
|