TetsuoTW posted:

I can't wait until someone makes a superhero movie that actually is grim, dark, and gritty.

Colonel Whitey posted:

If you want more than a cliffs notes version of that story just read the graphic novel. The movie hits the beats and moves on way too quickly. Adrian Veidt and Laurie Jupiter were badly cast. The movie has some pretty shots and touches on interesting stuff but is a thematic puddle compared to the lake that is the comic. Plus the book's criticism of superheroes doesn't really translate well to film; the original comic was a direct response to comics of the time and the movie doesn't serve the same function for comic movies of its time.

I read today that Chris Nolan told Snyder he made that movie too soon, and that is extremely on point. There's enough context now for moviegoing audiences to get what it's doing that didn't exist back in 09 or whenever it was. It would have been even more interesting coming from Snyder after having 2-3 DC movies under his belt.

CelticPredator posted:

I did this super quick and I'm sure it has a hosed up histogram or it's over contrasted whatever...but as a quick thing does this make the shot look better? Or at least a little more visually interesting than a boring grey sky over a boring grey location?

Tezzor posted:

The vast majority of people who watch these movies you listed think of them as dumb entertainment which they like because they like lasers and explosions and nostalgia, not because they appreciate the alleged hidden complexity in them that can only be sussed out by 30,000-word fan theories. Most film watchers don't care about or even know about "alternative interpretations" (that is to say, poorly substantiated headcanon that always requires belief in a lot of stuff not in evidence) and of those who do, you are correct that most do see them as funny diversions or fun thought exercises. The problem arises when certain individuals get up their own rear end about their Alternative Interpretations to the extent that they forget that these are just silly games and not actually evidence that Darth Jar Jar or Secret Genius Michael Bay is a real thing, let alone that their existence is a material factor as to the quality of the movie.

Boogaleeboo posted:

Sadly won't matter. This would need the greatest upswing in the history of cinema to become "Acceptable". It's hit basically all major markets I believe, and it's doing equally lovely in them too. It might end up making money, barely, but in no way would it be considered a success. Honestly if JL started filming a tiny bit later they'd probably shitcan Snyder. One movie that makes money but is critically iffy is one thing, another that is critically shat upon AND doesn't make money? That's a trend.

Sir Kodiak posted:

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

No, there are dozens of ways.

Harime Nui posted:

What any particular version of Batman does or doesn't do doesn't really have a bearing on the film's quality. Since the sequence where Batman toasts those guys with his jet and then breaks through that window is a kickin' rad piece of filmmaking, it's a kickin' rad piece of film. The comics still exist and will continue to do so. An adaption isn't beholden to them any further than taking whatever works for it. I mean I could be really mad that they made Iron Man into a snark machine when before in the comics he's usually the serious, leaderly one but it's better to accept the movie as its own thing.

The music and editing are fantastic. What follows when Batman infiltrates the building is one of the best action sequences I've seen in the movie theater since, well, I guess Man of Steel. That I think means more than "is this doing justice to the pen and ink version of Batman or the Timm cartoons or whatever.

Gorn Myson posted:

I like how we've gone from "BvS sucked because Batman kills people <no further push on why thats important>" to "BvS sucked because it didn't inspire enough internet memes".

Phylodox posted:

I was 29 when it came out.

You're welcome.

MeatwadIsGod posted:

Serious question: Do any of you use reviews or aggregators to determine if you're going to see a movie or not?

HIJK posted:

Jared Leto alienated the cast and crew by acting like an rear end. Cutting his screentime was probably inevitable.

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

I have a very clear memory of watching The A-Team with my dad and laughing with him at the absurdity of Mr. T spraying machine gun fire at the "bad guys", followed by cuts of them jumping out of their exploding vehicle or running away while bullets sprayed everywhere. Same with GI Joe always showing people bailing out of their crashing planes or jumping free of their exploding tanks or never getting hit anywhere but in the shoulder by their laser machine guns.Think that you can fire a machine gun at people at not hurt them? Yeah right. This was something my friends and I laughed at on the playground, how unrealistic and stupid it was.

At 10 years old I had realized that massive violence without consequences was just bullshit pandering so that kids could enjoy it. At 10 years old. There's really no hope for the people who haven't grasped that in their twenties or (shudder) older.

If someone chooses to beat the poo poo out of people then their moral code against killing doesn't matter, because a moral code vs. a brain hemorrhage caused by blunt impact trauma to the skull doesn't mean poo poo.

Jonah Galtberg posted:

Actually, it didn't

Die Laughing posted:

People like jacking off their hate boners over Identity Crisis, and ignore that it has really good art and dialogue. There's some stupid poo poo in there, but Butter Pecan, and "I bet Batman never does this to his parents." when Superman hassles his mom for paying for her Daily Planet subscription when she didn't need to, is some of the most heartfelt stuff you'll find in a super hero book.

Crion posted:

Frankly, it's hosed up that they weren't more graphic, in order to maximally troll those lame nerds. As it is, forums user "Y Kant Ozma Diet" can only make lovely posts fantasizing about how much worse an already terrible comic could be.

Crion posted:

Oh hell yes, both versions of that post got preserved

Crion posted:

I'm just glad there's even one thing about comic books you're willing to assess critically, regardless of how questionably edited it is.

Tezcatlipoca posted:

Hey Simon Pegg made it.

Vintersorg posted:

JL was a huge let down tho. Basically ruined every single character. I hope the loving nerds who cried about colour and levity are happy. Fuckers.

Mr. Apollo posted:

What disappointed me the most about JL was how we’re constantly reminded that Diana is a super sexy lady. Also Superman’s 180 from being a guy who’s trying to figure out his place in the world and realizing that everything his does will have some sort of negative consequence to a happy go lucky guy who is cracking jokes was jarring.

Away all Goats posted:

Whedon ruins everything he touches. I'm so glad the Russos got the job for the next Avengers movies.

Blazing Ownager posted:

I think this thread is mostly populated by hardcore Snyder fans who think Wheedon broke their previous movie rather than Wheedon coming in and trying to bail water out of a sinking ship to make something remotely watchable under a 2 hour mandate with half completed footage.