|
Tony's just jealous of their relationship.
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
GonSmithe posted:Or, you know, you can just not be an rear end in a top hat and not assume that just because people see a movie differently than you they're trolling you. I like the argument that incredibly popular movies like Transformers are bottom tier trash for idiots - i.e., the opinions of the general movie-going public should be ignored because they are all stupid - but we should also listen to the (imaginary) mass consensus of a bunch of nerds - because, obviously, they're smarter. Martman fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Mar 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
If it's so easy to make "dumb" entertainment that earns billions of dollars, why don't more of these cynical nerds do it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Can someone make a chart of frequent CineD posters ranking them by their ratio of probations/bans to posts? Then we can finally find out who is right about movies.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2016 05:52
|
|
|
No, I meant the person with the most probations is the best poster. Because the mods are obviously playing along with all the trolls pretending to like movies in the movie forum.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:Too bad Baron Bifford is gone...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Ezra Miller looks like some kind of creepily handsome movie star version of Brian Peppers.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Star Wars: The Force Awakens Viewing #118: I'm sure of it, Rey made blatant eye contact with me this time. Even the audience was aware of it, the tension was unbearable. Soon... soon I will enter the film. I'm getting closer every day.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
I really hated TDKR, and this scene: kinda captures why for me. Sure, the Batman suit is weighing on Wayne's conscience or whatever, but more than anything I can't help but look at this guy and think Patrick Bateman. He just looks goofy, and after being given a leg upgrade and deciding to kick a hole in the wall because it's badass, he basically decides to go fight Bane because... uh, gently caress Bane and I'm awesome. Like, ok, Batman is forced to develop as a character after being outclassed by Bane. But why is he outclassed by Bane? Because he's a complete idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2016 09:09
|
|
|
"Snyder is a hack, so obviously the only thing he could have meant by this scene is a Jesus metaphor. Therefore I'm not gonna put any more thought into what it could mean."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Things can exist and be lazy, poorly executed, or superfluous. Something's existence does not have inherent meaning.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Wow, red and white? He couldn't even get his lazy metaphor right, what a hack.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Way to go Snyder, you didn't even realize that normal humans don't have superpowers!! What a moron.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:Jesus's story is about moral goodness, conquering the one supernatural barrier to our salvation quote:the devils coming to Earth in his wake won't be metaphorical, they won't inspire man to sin. They'll be CGI spectacles that the Flash, Wonder Woman, Cyborg, and Aquaman have to beat up
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Last time I watched the movie of Watchmen, I started to find Veidt's decision a lot sillier. All the discussion of how nuclear war is inevitable started to seem like a joke to me given that we live in a world where we didn't need an alien holocaust in order to prevent the Cold War from fully erupting. Maybe the movie helped make me feel this way, but I think it's kinda reasonable to consider the possibility that Dr. Manhattan is actually kind of an idiot and doesn't really know what he's talking about (especially with regard to knowing the future).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
I'd like to see Batman asking someone for directions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
I really can't see how it's surprising for any followups to Batman v Superman to be way more lighthearted. The movie was about making a great sacrifice in order to overcome pessimism/darkness/etc. and it ends with Batman being recommitted to being a real superhero and finally having a partner whose safety he doesn't have to worry about.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
HIJK posted:All shall fall before the empire of Disney!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
What's interesting about brainwashing? Is there ever a way to resolve it beyond a loved one making an impassioned last-ditch effort to appeal to their good side, and then they hesitate for a moment, shed a tear, and their eyes change back to non-evil colors?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
I do still think the Martha line feels awkward, but it did just occur to me that it kind of parallels Man of Steel in characterizing Superman. Right before Pa Kent dies, Clark gets into that argument where he says "You're not my dad," etc. I think it kind of makes sense that in Clark's darkest moments he starts fixating on being a weird alien and feels like he doesn't belong and doesn't have a real family (i.e. he won't even call his mom "mom"). I honestly think a lot of what makes people so mad about the movie is that it makes them feel really weird and awkward. I think the Martha scene is actually such a problem for people not because of a character saying something unrealistic but because it violently pops the fantasy bubble Bruce has been living in and we're left feeling just as dazed and embarrassed and stupid as he does. The Apocalypse dream sequence is similarly disorienting, and I think a lot of audiences get really angry when stuff like that happens. I just love it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Fuckman posted:Three characters meet in the woods. Thor is angry that his very dangerous brother has escaped and mere mortals who don't know what they are dealing with refuse to hand him to the gods' justice. Tony Stark is irreverent, literally, which further angers Thor, who we know to be a pompous, violent hothead. Stark is arrogant and possessive and dismissive, he sees Thor as an annoyance and an interloper keeping him from his goal. Thor sees Stark as a deluded fool. Thor attacks and Stark rises to the challenge, to prove the tech he built is above so-called magic. From afar, Loki watches with glee. They fight and Thor inadvertently gives Stark a brief advantage, which sets the tone - Thor is clearly more powerful, but Stark's cleverness keeps them evenly matched. Steve Rogers arrives to play peacemaker, but misjudged how much Thor - an unknown to him at this point- is amped for a fight. Thor blindly attacks Rogers in a rage, causing a wave of destruction. The characters stand up, the climax passed. Rogers asks "Are we done here," and indeed, we are.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
I think you meant to say Henry Cavill is a more closeted gay Superman in The Man from U.N.C.L.E.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
I'd appreciate a moment where the cliche "remember who you are" happens, Evil Superman laughs and ignores their cheesy attempts, and then the real Superman flies outta nowhere and kicks his rear end. And then it turns out Darkseid and Evil Superman were just shapeshifting Martians... ok I'll stop now.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Karloff posted:Yes, Alfred says that thing about "good men being cruel" but this is never explored or contextualized within the narrative, Batman is still murdering people like a maniac after his change of heart.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Karloff posted:So, what is your interpretation of that Batman fight scene near the end, I said it was cynically mounted to viscerally excite the audience as a power fantasy, but what do you think? As far as not seeing the consequences of Batman's actions... you see people die. That is the whole point of this argument. Death is the consequence of action which is very dangerous and potentially fatal. Where other works shy away from showing that fighting (especially the kind of fighting Batman does) will often result in death, BvS does not.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
By teaching that acting good will result in presents, maybe what is actually taught is selfishness. Similarly, by presenting a superhero as able to meaningfully fight evil while (practically) always avoiding killing anyone, maybe what is actually taught is that nobody can be as good or heroic as Batman in the real world. Is that a good message?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 12:51
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:BvS exists so that film students can practise using obscure theory nobody cares about to defend an inherently bad movie long enough for everyone to get bored
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Like people are taking the most hostile reading of that Death quote possible, when in fact it's really just expressing basic existentialist concepts very, very clumsily. "Human beings create meaning in an absurd universe." I just don't get these comments along the lines of "wow, you really need your Batman to be a grimdark killer don't you?" when people defending BvS are just accepting this version of Batman as one interesting look at the character among so many other versions. No one is saying that Snyder has discovered the One True Batman, but within the context of the BvS world it made sense.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
Lord_Magmar posted:I'm not actually arguing against this version of Batman, I'm just having a discussion about why I don't like what I've heard about this version of Batman. Also on the nature of belief, and why the claim that Batman has a no kill policy is an important one even if in practice such a policy is impossible. The lie is not "Batman doesn't kill" the lie is "Batman by his nature must be a killer, because he's a vigilante" the fact is that Batman has a no kill policy because from his internal logic that is one step too far in the pursuit of justice. He refuses to be judge, jury and executioner, he is merely a man who will stop crimes in progress and take people to the police
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
Lord_Magmar posted:I don't think you're actually arguing with me to be honest, you seem to have made a decision that I'm the bad guy and my argument is inherently flawed and then looking for interpretations of my argument that prove this claim.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
Karloff posted:This is, and always will be, a terrible argument. Different characters in different stories with different contexts are different. If the upcoming Justice League featured a Batman who didn't dress up like a bat, but instead wore a fedora and used a whip would you go "Yeah, well, you didn't have a problem with Raiders of the Lost Ark so it's weird for you to find that odd"? It seems like you (or at least others) have been saying there's more to this, that the issue involves the ethics of killing and the nature of heroism, etc. All of that is relevant in the same ways in other movies and other stories. EDIT: I guess you seem to be arguing in a different direction, but I think the question is relevant to many people's arguments about Batman killing. Martman fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Aug 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
So a masked stranger is walking down the street, and someone pulls a knife on him and attempts to stab him. It's not ok for the stranger to kill him in self defense? Like you just acknowledged that there is a difference between murder and killing, but then applied the blanket statement to the wrong one. Does wearing a mask mean he's sacrificed all his rights?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:If this scenario were to occur, the person who did the killing would ideally be arrested and tried in court. The court will determine whether or not it was OK. The fact that Batman won't let himself be subject to the power of the justice system doesn't change the ethics of killing in self-defense. You're saying a "rational world wouldn't tolerate it" but all you're really showing is that the justice system doesn't allow vigilantism to any extent, regardless of killing. Replace "killing" in your example with "seriously wounding by beating and lacerating." How does this change what you're talking about? EDIT: If when you said "And let's be clear, if you are OK with Batman killing people, you are condoning the act of killing." you were referring only to the fictional world of Batman, what exactly was your point? You're actually claiming now that all you were trying to say is "If you condone Batman killing people, then you condone Batman killing people." Martman fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Aug 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:It shouldn't tolerate vigilantism! Vigilantism is and always has been against the law. The Avengers for instance, are a government backed agency and their checks and balances are often discussed.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Karloff: I've seen people say this is their favorite movie version of Batman, but I haven't seen anyone say that he is the best version of Batman because he kills. If you're arguing specifically at people who say that the no-kill Batman is "not my Batman," could you give an example of anyone actually arguing that? I don't understand why you're giving an example of a movie where no one would recognize the character as Batman. No one had trouble recognizing the character in BvS as Batman, and you're also seemingly not even trying to argue that BvS Batman is too far from Batman. At the end of the day, your argument seems to basically be that the movie is bad. I truly don't know what you're referring to when you say people disagree as to Batman's motivation. They might disagree as to what his behavior seems to have been before the events of the movie take place (which is obviously unclear), but everyone agrees on his basic motivation (stop Superman at all cost so he doesn't destroy the world) and on the basic trajectory he's been going on leading up to the movie (getting worse, more cruel, etc.). You're pointing to people interpreting art and saying "look your interpretations don't line up therefore the art is bad." Martman fucked around with this message at 09:50 on Aug 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
BvS would still be good if Batman killed a puppy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 12:00
|
|
|
Karloff posted:The "deep writing troubles" in BvS are incredibly clear, at least to anyone with even the slightest understanding of story structure and characterization. Can you back up your claim that you have an understanding of story structure and characterization? Your arguments against Batman in BvS have been unfocused and shifting constantly. You're pointing to a Batman who's being presented as an unstable guy clinging to fantasies, contradictions, and lies, and saying "why is he using non-lethal weapons when he doesn't have a problem with killing?" The fact that Batman is acting in inconsistent ways when living out his power fantasies is a point the movie is making, and you're attacking it as a mistake. At the end of the day, call the warehouse scene a power fantasy if you want, but Batman is not purely willing to slaughter everyone. He's overly willing to use weaponized vehicles in ways that will obviously kill people, but in person he's clearly still focused on incapacitating dudes. When you take out your presumption that the writing is "just bad" as a basis for your arguments, there's not much there. The worst part is this idea that the fans of the movie are just into the edgy grimdark Batman. This is a Batman shown repeatedly loving up, becoming the villain, and then embarrassingly having the wind taken out of his sails by his own mommy and daddy issues. To claim that people like this version of Batman because it's wish fulfillment is just pathetic, and it rests on the idea that all of these problems with Batman were just included accidentally and also the fans are too stupid to notice them. Martman fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Aug 25, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Snyder, a known Ayn Rand lover, almost definitely intended it to be sad for Doomsday, a clearly superior being, to be brought down by a bunch of parasites.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Karloff posted:Bolded is the most telling part of your post. Why is Batman more lethal in a vehicle then he is in person? Why does his worldview and approach to criminals transform when he's in a plane from when he's on the ground? quote:But there's no unifying character concept there You can say that's fan fiction, but anything you say as to Snyder's intent (sacrificing the "wide scope" for the moment) is also made up. I do understand that it can seem weird for Batman to continue being problematic after he's had his Martha moment. But he's spent 20 years becoming a violent monster; he's not gonna turn into Adam West in a moment. The warehouse scene is satisfying because he finally has a goal that's actually good instead of actually working towards evil ends. But he still really really likes beating up criminals.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
Topolino posted:Well, the kid said that they had an Oscar guy, (or two?) so I guess that is what he meant. That having an Oscar guy means good so the DC movies are not bad. But I guess box office is what actually determines if a movie is good according to his edit. Who knows!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2016 01:19
|
|