Its hard being a DC fan. (Rant)
- Thread starter Samtemdo8_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Sorry...I will stop talking about Civil War.AccursedTheory said:
But to be honest I was talking about only for minor things from the movie, nothing Major. I hope to have fun with the movie.
I actually love BvS.
I don't get some of the criticisms (a lot of people say that it was too dark and depressing, it actually has a lot of humor, it's just more subtle than goofy one liners from Marvel movies).
Good acting, good action, good visuals, good effects, decent atmosphere, so-so story (Lois Lane, for example, if she was removed from the movie then nothing would be lost) but it's not like the Marvel movies have great stories either.
I like that it's a bit more serious and realistic than the MCU.
Batman is like a billionaire James Bond and his upcoming solo movie will probably be kick ass.
Suicide Squad also looks promising, it might be DC's Guardians of the Galaxy (darker but still the most light hearted of the DC movies).
SPOILERS AHEAD
I like the fact that Superman got taken out for now because when the solo movies will come out, the audience won't be asking "So, why wont't Superman take care of this?"
He will be back, possibly evil at first and that might also be interesting.
END OF SPOILERS
I used to be really into Batman and Superman as a kid and, in my personal opinion, BvS is the shit.
I think that people will warm up to it a lot more in the future.
I want to see the R rated 3 hour version when it comes out.
I don't get some of the criticisms (a lot of people say that it was too dark and depressing, it actually has a lot of humor, it's just more subtle than goofy one liners from Marvel movies).
Good acting, good action, good visuals, good effects, decent atmosphere, so-so story (Lois Lane, for example, if she was removed from the movie then nothing would be lost) but it's not like the Marvel movies have great stories either.
I like that it's a bit more serious and realistic than the MCU.
Batman is like a billionaire James Bond and his upcoming solo movie will probably be kick ass.
Suicide Squad also looks promising, it might be DC's Guardians of the Galaxy (darker but still the most light hearted of the DC movies).
SPOILERS AHEAD
I like the fact that Superman got taken out for now because when the solo movies will come out, the audience won't be asking "So, why wont't Superman take care of this?"
He will be back, possibly evil at first and that might also be interesting.
END OF SPOILERS
I used to be really into Batman and Superman as a kid and, in my personal opinion, BvS is the shit.
I think that people will warm up to it a lot more in the future.
I want to see the R rated 3 hour version when it comes out.
So says you. And since I know you've been wrong before (I am, actually, a 'real' gamer), I'm not inclined to believe you over the other comparisons I've read.Charcharo said:AccursedTheory said:Considering everything I've read on comparing the books with the games puts them in the same ball park of quality (At least), story wise, plus the games are interactive, that's a pretty poor example for 'video games are worse then books.'Charcharo said:Is this so hard...AccursedTheory said:Really. You follow up 'video games are inherently inferior art' with a 'no true gamer' statement. I'm not even sure how to respond to that, other then with a sad sigh.Charcharo said:mduncan50 said:
Well... you had a nice day.
Any reason why it is dumb?
Is it an agressive post? Yes it is, not that I think that is bad, but still... the person is venting. He dont need that.
Are video games an inferior medium (ATM)? Yes, they are. Anyone claiming otherwise is ... not really a gamer IMHO.
Is my own comment a bit jaded (where I think your issues is coming from)? Yes, but hey, such is the internet.
While it's true that trailers can lie, from what I've seen, Deadshot isn't in this movie. Will Smith is, starring as Will Smith. Which is pretty bad.Kenbo Slice said:
I NEVER said they are !inherently inferior! Do not put words in my mouth please. It is dishonest and insulting.
We are however 100 years too early to claim anything on the level of what the other art forms have ever achieved. Our finest is middling. It is that simple.
Want to see it easily? Compare the Witcher 3, IMHO the second best game ever made to its original work (so we have remediation, easier to compare) - the Witcher books.
Well... short answer is nope.
The difference in quality is ... quite huge. And it is not in the game's favor.
Not according to you.Charcharo said:
Charcharo said:
Before a tree fall robbed me of a lot of my collection, I had, at least, a literal ton of books. But yes, because I haven't read one series, I'm not well read. I knew I should have read the Witcher series, rather then the Divine Comedy, Grant's Memoirs, and Sagan.
I think I'll trust some analysis for the time being. I have been falling a bit behind in my reading, and I have quite a few sci-fi and popular science books to chew through before diving into a new series. Particularly one suggested to me by someone who claims I'm not a real gamer, and that I'm poorly read because I disagree with him.
Because it's a piss poor representation of beloved characters? Superman straight up kills a guy 2 minutes into the film and Batman spends the whole movie murdering. The editing was shit, the visuals were okay to piss-poor. The lighting was awful for a lot of scenes. The Justice League e-mail cameo was pants on head retarded. Eisenberg was awful. Also, Superman acts just like Batman now which takes away any dynamic they can have together. Only Batman gets to mope around, not Superman. Snyder is a hack. Goyer should be fired and banned from writing any comic book movies ever again. I really fucking hate that movie.Vanilla ISIS said:
I think I may have missed the passive part of that post...FileTrekker said:
So much this. I can't help but laugh when people defending this movie say it is too "adult and complex" for us normal people to understand since we're used to "kiddie movies" from Marvel. Being grimdark and humorless about everything is not adult, it is teenaged goth at best, and there is little complexity to these two murdering vigilantes that are upset that the other is a murdering vigilante so they try to murder each other. That is laughably bad without adding the fact that it is Batman and Superman that they turned into the murdering vigilantes. There is more adult motivations and complex storytelling in Civil War than there is in the collected works of Goyer and Snyder. Yes there are jokes. I'll let you in on a little secret that I figured out as an adult. We still like making jokes. Believe it or not, we even like having fun from time to time.Kenbo Slice said:
I know a guy who claims these films have actually made Superman an interesting character. I told him read some comics because Superman is actually a very interesting character. In some ways I find him more complex than Batman. People claim that Suicide Squad looks fun, but to me it really doesn't. It's just going to be edgy bullshit to sell merchandise at Hot Topic.mduncan50 said:
Yeah, as someone that is actually familiar with the characters I can't help but wonder what the average movie-goer thinks when seeing the trailer for that movie. I'm not personally sold on any of the characters, since they've again warped them all nearly beyond recognition, and completely oversexualized the women. I hold out hope, but if I were a betting man, my money wouldn't be on DC making a great film.Kenbo Slice said:
Every time I see that kind of defense used I think of the Lego Movie and Wyldstyle "This is real music, Emmet. Batman?s a true artist. Dark, brooding."mduncan50 said:
Depends on which version of the characters you're talking about.Kenbo Slice said:
My introduction to Batman was the 1989 Tim Burton movie so I've never had a problem with him killing.
In fact, it added to his character.
They actually go out of their way to show that Superman tries to save everyone this time (we don't even see him kill that black guy at the beginning, he moves too fast).
I also think that he has the right to mope around, he feels guilty because of the events in MoS so he's saving people left and right now.
When that guy blow himself up in the court, he takes it as a failure and goes away from people to think.
It's not what we're used to with Superman but it works for this universe.
As long as it remains consistent within the DCCU, it's fine with me.
Lex is OK, definitely more memorable than what's-his-face from Iron Man 2, what's-his-face from Thor 2 or what's his-face from Guardians of the Galaxy.
I admit, if there's one person I would fire, it would be Goyer because he's dragging this thing down a little bit but the rest of the people are doing a really good job.
COMaestro said:Yes, please keep any Civil War discussion in spoilers please. I'm not going to be able to see it until tomorrow evening and it makes it really hard to read the thread if I need to skip over large numbers of posts. Thank you.
OT: I've seen both MoS and BvS and would rate both of them somewhere in the range of 6-7 out of 10. They are okay movies, but they both have some missteps, BvS particularly. Missteps can be overlooked in the case where a movie is just fun or enjoyable as well. This is something the first Iron Man managed, as I felt the ending was rather weak but everything else they did in the film was pure gold to me, so I was able to overlook the weak ending.
BvS, however, while having some very strong elements that could have led up to a fantastic film failed to incorporate things into a coherent whole. Too much foreshadowing of things to come in future films rather than dealing with the events and characters of the current film. Poor execution and development of subplots and character motivation. And probably the biggest problem I had with the film was the entirely pointless reason for the fight between Superman and Batman.
Lex has Martha Kent kidnapped and held hostage somewhere, and she'll be killed in an hour (if I remember correctly) unless Superman kills Batman and brings his head to Lex. Yet the movie established that Superman could detect when Lois was in any danger and come to her aid in seconds. It was previously established that he can hear cries for help from the stratosphere. You mean to tell me he could not find his mom in a matter of minutes, disable the men holding her in seconds, and having rescued her go back for Luthor?
Even if he couldn't do that, why not try actually talking to the obviously prepared Batman from the safety of the air rather than land and walk towards him in a menacing fashion? Just a few words to the effect of, "Lex Luthor is holding my mother hostage. I need your help to save her," would have done most of the humanizing of him that Batman needed to see and would have been a much more believable thing for Superman to do.
No, they just wanted to rip off the biggest portions of The Dark Knight Returns and The Death of Superman, so logic and characterization goes out the window.
As a whole, the movie just felt lazily written. There were good moments. Affleck did a great job as Batman, Eisenberg had some moments of genius as Lex (though he totally annoyed me the rest of the time), and they really did touch on some great themes. They just didn't follow up on them to the end, making them fall flat or just feel shoehorned in. I wanted these films to be great, as I have no particular loyalty to DC or Marvel and find the fanboy wars to be some of the dumbest things possible, but it's just fact that Marvel is doing a better job with their Cinematic Universe than DC at this time.
He knew Lois was in danger because he was personally keeping an eye on her. Also, Luthor stated that if he attempted to locate his mother she would be executed
I think the term "grimdark" is being misapplied here. When I think grimdark I think Watchmen or V for Vendetta. MoS and BvS are just being a bit more serious about their universe and how these characters would be like in a realistic world. There's nothing wrong with the family friendly approach but it's far from the only way to portray superheroes and the comics have used different tones for decades. This was far from the darkest Superman has been and given we are talking about a guy who can only make sense of a random mugging by putting on a Halloween and beating people up, this version of Batman is not that far off.mduncan50 said:
Also, this Superman is like Batman in only a few superficial ways and murder is not how any of his killings can be described at all.
From Wikipedia:Agent_Z said:
Grimdark is a subgenre or a way to describe the tone, style or setting of speculative fiction (especially fantasy) that is, depending on the definition used, markedly dystopian or amoral, or particularly violent or realistic.
I think it is applied perfectly.
Wait, what?mduncan50 said:
Dystopian? Nup. Amoral? Not really - there's clearly defined protagonists and antagonists. Particuarly violent? No more than any other action movie. Realistic? There's two guys in capes, one woman dressed up like Xena, a giant cave troll, and a green sparkly rock mcguffin. Maybe 'realistic' by the standards of the superhero genre, but certainly not realistic.
Dystopian? Metropolis is continuously being destroyed, and Gotham is prototypical noir dystopia, it always has been. Amoral? Your "heroes" are killing people and trying to kill each other. Violence I would judge from the R-Rated cut, but no, not particularly bad in the theatrical, though still lots of killing. Realistic? Why is this the only time there is no DC fanboys screaming about how awesome this movie is because it's heroes done realistically.Hawki said:
Bottom line is the Nolan Batman films were grimdark, and were celebrated as such because it worked for that character and those movies. Now DC is trying to Nolanize all of their superhero films by making them grimdark as well, and it just doesn't work for characters or stories they are using.