So, apparently WW is pretty good.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Zhukov:

I just wish it wasn't doing that incredibly ugly blue-grey lighting thing. The other DC movies all did it too and it was a large part of why they all looked like drab, eyeball-repellent turds.

Disagree there.

There was a video done on this awhile ago, but the DC movies have so far used physical film rather than digital recording. There's a visual richness to the DC films that the Marvel films have lacked. Even BvS, for all its flaws, is goregous to look at.

Souplex:

GoW is Gears of War, not God of War.

Ooh, there's a gauntlet if I saw one. ;p

Silentpony:
Yeah, I don't believe it. Same people said Suicide Squad and Ghostbusters were good.

But Ghostbusters was good. :(

undeadsuitor:

But movies are escapism, not reminders of how shitty the real world is.

Yeah, no. Just no.

Movies can be escapism, but it's disingenuous to suggest that that's all they (or fiction) can offer. Plenty of films I've seen this year alone have dealt with the harsh realities of the world, and been stronger for it. Even films like MoS, which are primarily escapist, are made stronger by having some gravitas, ranging from consequence to how people would actually treat a godlike being. Even Marvel/Fox have occassionally dealt with real-life parallels (Iron Man 3, Logan) and been stronger for it. Compare and contrast this to Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and, well, yeah, it's fun, I guess, but that's all it is. 'Fun.' A popcorn movie. Not something that has lasting impact because the next MCU is going to feature the same types of characters fighting the same type of villain in the same type of formula. Like I said, 'fun,' but not something that's going to be in my top ten list at the end of the year, and possibly not even in a top twenty list. I'll defend genre fiction to the death, but if all a film has to offer is escapism, then I'm not giving it special treatment when better alternatives exist.

Hawki:

Zhukov:

I just wish it wasn't doing that incredibly ugly blue-grey lighting thing. The other DC movies all did it too and it was a large part of why they all looked like drab, eyeball-repellent turds.

Disagree there.

There was a video done on this awhile ago, but the DC movies have so far used physical film rather than digital recording. There's a visual richness to the DC films that the Marvel films have lacked. Even BvS, for all its flaws, is goregous to look at.

I don't give a damn what kind of film they use if they then go and cover that film in drab filters.

BvS was fucking ugly. There was a bare handful of pleasantly lit scenes. Everything else was hospital neon, nighttime, or overcast. Sends the eye skidding around the screen desperately searching for some colour. It's like the people in charge forgot that sunlight exists. It's the kind of aesthetic I'd use for a film about someone grappling with suicidal depression, not a superhero movie.

Hawki:

undeadsuitor:

But movies are escapism, not reminders of how shitty the real world is.

Yeah, no. Just no.

Movies can be escapism, but it's disingenuous to suggest that that's all they (or fiction) can offer. Plenty of films I've seen this year alone have dealt with the harsh realities of the world, and been stronger for it. Even films like MoS, which are primarily escapist, are made stronger by having some gravitas, ranging from consequence to how people would actually treat a godlike being. Even Marvel/Fox have occassionally dealt with real-life parallels (Iron Man 3, Logan) and been stronger for it. Compare and contrast this to Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and, well, yeah, it's fun, I guess, but that's all it is. 'Fun.' A popcorn movie. Not something that has lasting impact because the next MCU is going to feature the same types of characters fighting the same type of villain in the same type of formula. Like I said, 'fun,' but not something that's going to be in my top ten list at the end of the year, and possibly not even in a top twenty list. I'll defend genre fiction to the death, but if all a film has to offer is escapism, then I'm not giving it special treatment when better alternatives exist.

There's 'gravitas' and then theres sticking your head up your ass trying to be serious

A grown man telling his child son that he should have let his classmates die in front of him to protect his secret is Head-up-Ass stupid

A grown man literally committing suicide in front of his son because even attempting to not die might reveal his secret is Head-up-ass stupid

you can be serious, and have 'gravitas', without just being head-up-ass stupid and dense about everything

Man of Steel is so self-conscientiously obsessed with appearing 'adult', that it doesnt even make sense. half the plot is just people telling Clark that he is The Special. Not talking to him. Just kinda vaguely talking around him about how important he is.

But the other half of the movie is just Pa Kent listing out people that Clark should have let die so that nobody figures out he's The Special.

For....reasons. Drama, apparently. Gotta make those vague Snyder speeches while leaning on a tractor.

The movie isn't adult. It doesnt have weight or gravity. It barely has a message. For all the deal it made about Superman's S being the symbol of hope, its completely dry of it.

Zhukov:

BvS was fucking ugly. There was a bare handful of pleasantly lit scenes. Everything else was hospital neon, nighttime, or overcast. Sends the eye skidding around the screen desperately searching for some colour. It's like the people in charge forgot that sunlight exists. It's the kind of aesthetic I'd use for a film about someone grappling with suicidal depression, not a superhero movie.

So, all superhero movies should have the same aesthetic? That's a pretty depressing thought in itself.

Not that I really care about the genre, but while I can't give much praise to BvS, I still thought it looked beautiful. I find the MCU films far more garish aesthetically - there's either nothing interesting going on visually, or they take the Guardians route and saturate everything in colours.

undeadsuitor:

There's 'gravitas' and then theres sticking your head up your ass trying to be serious

A grown man telling his child son that he should have let his classmates die in front of him to protect his secret is Head-up-Ass stupid

A grown man literally committing suicide in front of his son because even attempting to not die might reveal his secret is Head-up-ass stupid

But the other half of the movie is just Pa Kent listing out people that Clark should have let die so that nobody figures out he's The Special.

You...do realize that Clark's arc in the film is basically proving Pa Kent wrong, right? That as well-founded as his fears are, at the end of the day, the human race isn't so far gone that they aren't worth saving, that not every member of said human race is going to look up to him in fear, or can change their minds when presented with evidence to the contrary (e.g. the colonel guy)?

undeadsuitor:

The movie isn't adult. It doesnt have weight or gravity. It barely has a message. For all the deal it made about Superman's S being the symbol of hope, its completely dry of it.

Disagree. On the personal level, as someone who saw MoS after losing their job and was feeling down by it, I did come out of the film feeling much happier. It's an example where escapism can have a tangible effect.

On the more analytical level, I disagree with the film being devoid of hope. Humanity fights back against the kryptonians despite the odds, Perry stays with his co-worker as the end nears rather than saving himself (human bonds remaining strong in the face of death), that Clark can be accepted at all, etc. Super Man has a habit of inspiring those around him once he puts the cape on. Even before it he's shown to have the desire to help people (the bus, the argument in the car), and in the former, 'inspires' the kid's mum on the bus and the kid himself.

I will say that despite all this, I don't consider MoS to be a "good" film, only average. But it's the interesting kind of average that's marred by stumbles (mainly in its editing and pacing) rather than the safe, formulaic average that the MCU (and many action movies) put out.

Hawki:

Zhukov:

BvS was fucking ugly. There was a bare handful of pleasantly lit scenes. Everything else was hospital neon, nighttime, or overcast. Sends the eye skidding around the screen desperately searching for some colour. It's like the people in charge forgot that sunlight exists. It's the kind of aesthetic I'd use for a film about someone grappling with suicidal depression, not a superhero movie.

So, all superhero movies should have the same aesthetic? That's a pretty depressing thought in itself.

Didn't say that. I said they should avoid that one particular ugly aesthetic.

Movies can be escapism, but it's disingenuous to suggest that that's all they (or fiction) can offer. Plenty of films I've seen this year alone have dealt with the harsh realities of the world, and been stronger for it. Even films like MoS, which are primarily escapist, are made stronger by having some gravitas, ranging from consequence to how people would actually treat a godlike being. Even Marvel/Fox have occassionally dealt with real-life parallels (Iron Man 3, Logan) and been stronger for it. Compare and contrast this to Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and, well, yeah, it's fun, I guess, but that's all it is. 'Fun.' A popcorn movie.

"Here's how the world would really react to a flying man with laser eyes" isn't gravitas. It's just taking the inherently goofy premise of a superhero and playing it with a joyless poker-face, which just doesn't work. It results in a movie about Superman that can't bring itself to say the word "superman". In the hands of a decent script writer it might be a deconstruction, but that's been done a thousand times before and it's pretty clear audiences aren't looking for a deconstruction of Superman.

Meanwhile Guardians 2 managed to include themes of negligent/abusive fatherhood while still starring a talking raccoon and generally being a jolly good time.

I'm pleased to have read through all of the comments yet posted and haven't found a single comment that reads:

*whining little boy's voice* "The only reason they like it is because it's about a gurrrrl!"

Given that the various DC movies are largely being directed by different directors I'm not the least bit surprised to hear that one of them is getting rave first reviews---seriously, if nothing else it's just a matter of time before they manage (if only by accident) to produce a genuinely good one!

One very telling theme in the Twitter comments comes from the female reviewers. Read that article and words like "empowering", "charming", and "inspiring" keep popping out. Men and boys may not fall in love with Wonder Woman but I wouldn't be surprised if it gains staggering numbers of fangirls of all ages and backgrounds.

I find myself recalling Movie Bob's first review of Disney's Malevicient where he wasn't particularly impressed but later followed up with another review where he admits that girls' and womens' reactions to the movie were so staggeringly different--and positive--that he had to admit that; "Gee, maybe it's a lot better than I first thought and not just because I wasn't the target audience."

That many posters are cynical and even hostile to any DC movie reviews being positive doesn't surprise me given how screwed up Warner Bro's has been when it comes to representing DC heroes. "NO JOKES!" was a stupid stand to take. As previously mentioned there is the fact that DC movies have generally not been as good as they could have been because they mess around with the basic characters--Pa Kent striving to undermine Clark from a very young age goes entirely against Superman's very long historical canon, for example.

I'm encouraged that Wonder Woman's first reviews are rave reviews. I only see one or two movies in theaters per year so I might see this one (in addition to Star Wars: The Last Jedi).

Basement Cat:
I'm pleased to have read through all of the comments yet posted and haven't found a single comment that reads:

*whining little boy's voice* "The only reason they like it is because it's about a gurrrrl!"

Given that the various DC movies are largely being directed by different directors I'm not the least bit surprised to hear that one of them is getting rave first reviews---seriously, if nothing else it's just a matter of time before they manage (if only by accident) to produce a genuinely good one!

One very telling theme in the Twitter comments comes from the female reviewers. Read that article and words like "empowering", "charming", and "inspiring" keep popping out. Men and boys may not fall in love with Wonder Woman but I wouldn't be surprised if it gains staggering numbers of fangirls of all ages and backgrounds.

I find myself recollecting Movie Bob's first review of Disney's Malevicient where he wasn't particularly impressed but later followed up with another review where he admits that girls' and womens' reactions to the movie were so staggeringly different--and positive--that he had to admit that; "Gee, maybe it's a lot better than I first thought and not just because I wasn't the target audience."

That many posters are cynical and even hostile to any DC movie reviews being positive doesn't surprise me given how screwed up Warner Bro's has been when it comes to representing DC heroes. "NO JOKES!" was a stupid stand to take. As previously mentioned there is the fact that DC movies have generally not been as good as they could have been because they mess around with the basic characters--Pa Kent striving to undermine Clark from a very young age goes entirely against Superman's very long historical canon, for example.

I'm encouraged that Wonder Woman's first reviews are rave reviews. I only see one or two movies in theaters per year so I might see this one (in addition to Star Wars: The Last Jedi).

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

Samtemdo8:

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

image

Seriously, though, (no pun intended) I agree that folks fluttering about in silly costumes beating up generic bad guys deserves the gravest and most somber respect.[1]

[1] I figured you were being sarcastic so I ran with it.

Basement Cat:

Samtemdo8:

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

image

Seriously, though, (no pun intended) I agree that folks fluttering about in silly costumes beating up generic bad guys deserves the gravest and most somber respect.[1]

No I am serious. Clearly you have not read any of my posts of my many debates here for years now.

[1] I figured you were being sarcastic so I ran with it.

Samtemdo8:

No I am serious. Clearly you have not read any of my posts of my many debates here for years now.

You were serious?

image

Samtemdo8:

Basement Cat:
I'm pleased to have read through all of the comments yet posted and haven't found a single comment that reads:

*whining little boy's voice* "The only reason they like it is because it's about a gurrrrl!"

Given that the various DC movies are largely being directed by different directors I'm not the least bit surprised to hear that one of them is getting rave first reviews---seriously, if nothing else it's just a matter of time before they manage (if only by accident) to produce a genuinely good one!

One very telling theme in the Twitter comments comes from the female reviewers. Read that article and words like "empowering", "charming", and "inspiring" keep popping out. Men and boys may not fall in love with Wonder Woman but I wouldn't be surprised if it gains staggering numbers of fangirls of all ages and backgrounds.

I find myself recollecting Movie Bob's first review of Disney's Malevicient where he wasn't particularly impressed but later followed up with another review where he admits that girls' and womens' reactions to the movie were so staggeringly different--and positive--that he had to admit that; "Gee, maybe it's a lot better than I first thought and not just because I wasn't the target audience."

That many posters are cynical and even hostile to any DC movie reviews being positive doesn't surprise me given how screwed up Warner Bro's has been when it comes to representing DC heroes. "NO JOKES!" was a stupid stand to take. As previously mentioned there is the fact that DC movies have generally not been as good as they could have been because they mess around with the basic characters--Pa Kent striving to undermine Clark from a very young age goes entirely against Superman's very long historical canon, for example.

I'm encouraged that Wonder Woman's first reviews are rave reviews. I only see one or two movies in theaters per year so I might see this one (in addition to Star Wars: The Last Jedi).

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

I disagree. Many heroes need some levity to help keep a central focus based on the weight of the situation.

Samtemdo8:

Agent_Z:
Do any of these reports say if this movie treats war in a respectful manner?

BAH, I wanna know if its treats its warfare as epic and glorious as possible!!!

Okay, I think you are setting your standards of battles way too high.

Also I agree with you on LOTR's battles, but 300? Nah, I find it way too over-the-top for my tastes.

Basement Cat:

Samtemdo8:

No I am serious. Clearly you have not read any of my posts of my many debates here for years now.

You were serious?

image

And I can't say anything against you because your a mod :P

But seriously, I just think that humor that comes off from Superhero movies these days are just corny and cringeworthy. I mean I have a sense of humor, but I have standards and stupid corny shlock like Guardians of the Galaxy just makes me facepalm.

Samtemdo8:

Basement Cat:

Samtemdo8:

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

image

Seriously, though, (no pun intended) I agree that folks fluttering about in silly costumes beating up generic bad guys deserves the gravest and most somber respect.[1]

No I am serious. Clearly you have not read any of my posts of my many debates here for years now.

Really? That's like having Spider-Man fight a bad guy and just talk like he's Batman instead of spouting quips.

[1] I figured you were being sarcastic so I ran with it.

Samtemdo8:

Basement Cat:

Samtemdo8:

No I am serious. Clearly you have not read any of my posts of my many debates here for years now.

You were serious?

image

And I can't say anything against you because your a mod :P

But seriously, I just think that humor that comes off from Superhero movies these days are just corny and cringeworthy. I mean I have a sense of humor, but I have standards and stupid corny shlock like Guardians of the Galaxy just makes me facepalm.

I know people have different tastes, but humor is supposed to be a form of levity for the heroes based on the burdens and makes them feel more grounded. Also Guardians rocked. If you didn't like it, that's fine, but I don't get when you mean by facepalm.

Natemans:

Samtemdo8:

Basement Cat:

You were serious?

image

And I can't say anything against you because your a mod :P

But seriously, I just think that humor that comes off from Superhero movies these days are just corny and cringeworthy. I mean I have a sense of humor, but I have standards and stupid corny shlock like Guardians of the Galaxy just makes me facepalm.

I know people have different tastes, but humor is supposed to be a form of levity for the heroes based on the burdens and makes them feel more grounded. Also Guardians rocked. If you didn't like it, that's fine, but I don't get when you mean by facepalm.

What I mean by facepalm is that I find the jokes just embarrising to watch.

Samtemdo8:

Silentpony:
Yeah, I don't believe it. Same people said Suicide Squad and Ghostbusters were good. At this point its healthier and easier to assume all DC movies are terrible until they can prove otherwise.

Quite a cynical as fuck statement now isn't it?

I know people that still likes Suicide Squad now.

Its not cynical. Its more like being cautionary based on a poor track record in a film franchise's quality.

If they like it, that's fine. People can like or dislike whatever they want. All opinions are subjective.

Samtemdo8:

Natemans:

Samtemdo8:

And I can't say anything against you because your a mod :P

But seriously, I just think that humor that comes off from Superhero movies these days are just corny and cringeworthy. I mean I have a sense of humor, but I have standards and stupid corny shlock like Guardians of the Galaxy just makes me facepalm.

I know people have different tastes, but humor is supposed to be a form of levity for the heroes based on the burdens and makes them feel more grounded. Also Guardians rocked. If you didn't like it, that's fine, but I don't get when you mean by facepalm.

What I mean by facepalm is that I find the jokes just embarrising to watch.

Really? I found the jokes to be kinda clever and really funny. They worked well with the tone and style the film was going for.

Samtemdo8:

And I can't say anything against you because your a mod :P

But seriously, I just think that humor that comes off from Superhero movies these days are just corny and cringeworthy. I mean I have a sense of humor, but I have standards and stupid corny shlock like Guardians of the Galaxy just makes me facepalm.

I grok what you're saying. I see it from a different perspective: There's humor and there's corny humor; it's all in how you use it.

Moreover humor can positively influence a movie's pacing. Shock and awe and whatnot can all too easily become numbingly dull without pauses and counter-points.

BTW--you walked right into that gif. I couldn't help myself--you were practically begging someone to post it! XD

Natemans:

Samtemdo8:

Agent_Z:
Do any of these reports say if this movie treats war in a respectful manner?

BAH, I wanna know if its treats its warfare as epic and glorious as possible!!!

Okay, I think you are setting your standards of battles way too high.

Also I agree with you on LOTR's battles, but 300? Nah, I find it way too over-the-top for my tastes.

Its supposed to be over the top, like Conan the Barbarian, which makes it all the more badass.

And I have other battles to show off:

Natemans:

Samtemdo8:

Natemans:

I know people have different tastes, but humor is supposed to be a form of levity for the heroes based on the burdens and makes them feel more grounded. Also Guardians rocked. If you didn't like it, that's fine, but I don't get when you mean by facepalm.

What I mean by facepalm is that I find the jokes just embarrising to watch.

Really? I found the jokes to be kinda clever and really funny. They worked well with the tone and style the film was going for.

Its not just Guardians of the Galaxy, just the overall tone and jokes of Marvel movies in general.

Samtemdo8:

undeadsuitor:

KissingSunlight:
[quote="Darth Rosenberg" post="18.950630.23975213"]
Tell me why you think that people wouldn't behave the way it was portrayed in those movies.

But movies are escapism, not reminders of how shitty the real world is.

I don't care how 'real' it is, I want to see Clark's dad love and support him. Not emotionally abuse him and tell him that he should have let his friends and classmates die to preserve his secret.

Or commit suicide in front of him to preserve his secret.

Or gaslight him by twisting his ideas around about how he's going to change the world

but shouldn't

Superman's parents are infuriatingly awful in MoS. I dont care if a real person would think that, it's just hard to watch.

Well the Escapism would be ruined anyway considering Superheroes do their thing in Modern day cities. Especially when you deal with non superhero characters.

I did not felt Escapism watching The Increadibles.

Who cares if the heroes do their thing in a modern city? Most of the Marvel heroes are in freakin' New York in the comics and hell, all of the DC films are shot and filmed in Chicago. (Side note: kinda sick of seeing Chicago in DC films. Minor nitpick, but go somewhere else to film for a city.)

Really? The Incredibles is like a computer animated film that is like if you mixed the Fantastic Four with Watchmen.

Zhukov:

"Here's how the world would really react to a flying man with laser eyes" isn't gravitas. It's just taking the inherently goofy premise of a superhero and playing it with a joyless poker-face, which just doesn't work.

It worked with the Dark Knight Trilogy.

Granted, that's not a 1:1 comparison (lack of laser eyes), but as a concept, it strikes me as being sound. Logan is another example.

Zhukov:

Meanwhile Guardians 2 managed to include themes of negligent/abusive fatherhood while still starring a talking raccoon and generally being a jolly good time.

That I'll grant you. I'd probably rate GotG 2 above MoS, but both still get stamps of "okay" rather than "good."

Basement Cat:
I'm pleased to have read through all of the comments yet posted and haven't found a single comment that reads:

*whining little boy's voice* "The only reason they like it is because it's about a gurrrrl!"

Don't worry. For anyone who doesn't like it, the reverse argument will be able to be made ("you only dislike it because the protagonist has tits!")

Basement Cat:

Given that the various DC movies are largely being directed by different directors I'm not the least bit surprised to hear that one of them is getting rave first reviews---seriously, if nothing else it's just a matter of time before they manage (if only by accident) to produce a genuinely good one!

Doesn't that hold true for any franchise with multiple directors? The MCU is a case in point for me - of the ten MCU films I've seen, I can only call 3 of them "good."

Basement Cat:

That many posters are cynical and even hostile to any DC movie reviews being positive doesn't surprise me given how screwed up Warner Bro's has been when it comes to representing DC heroes. "NO JOKES!" was a stupid stand to take.

Wasn't that a rumor? There were jokes in MoS and Suicide Squad.

Basement Cat:
I only see one or two movies in theaters per year

...the hell?

I mean, your time your money, not my place to tell you how to spend them, but I see more STAGE PLAYS per year than that. 0_0

Samtemdo8:

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

Oh, come off it.

"No jokes" is a terrible idea for any piece of fiction. A joke doesn't make a piece of fiction corny or cringy in itself. A work can be serious while having levity.

@Hawki

But I don't want everything to be turned into Deadpool either.

Hawki:

Basement Cat:

Given that the various DC movies are largely being directed by different directors I'm not the least bit surprised to hear that one of them is getting rave first reviews---seriously, if nothing else it's just a matter of time before they manage (if only by accident) to produce a genuinely good one!

Doesn't that hold true for any franchise with multiple directors? The MCU is a case in point for me - of the ten MCU films I've seen, I can only call 3 of them "good."

In this case we've four or so movies and people are determined to declare that no DC movie can ever be good because of its predecessors. That's silly, of course.

Hawki:

Basement Cat:

That many posters are cynical and even hostile to any DC movie reviews being positive doesn't surprise me given how screwed up Warner Bro's has been when it comes to representing DC heroes. "NO JOKES!" was a stupid stand to take.

Wasn't that a rumor? There were jokes in MoS and Suicide Squad.

More than rumor later on. I remember reading one article where it was baldly stated that much of the humor inserted into Suicide Squad was a result of late reshoots stemming from severe criticism at the dearth of humor in BvS.

Hawki:

Basement Cat:
I only see one or two movies in theaters per year

...the hell?

I mean, your time your money, not my place to tell you how to spend them, but I see more STAGE PLAYS per year than that. 0_0

Back in high school and college I worked as an usher at movie theaters and thus became accustomed to seeing movies for free and having free drinks and popcorn as a given right.

Every since I begrudge theaters my money. Entitled, even. :P

*sniffs*
"You want money from ME! Do you know how many messes I've cleaned up over the years? Rambunctious customers I've dealt with?!? HOW DARE YOU!!!"

...

Well, maybe I'm not that bad but the reflex is still there. <_<

Samtemdo8:
BAH, I wanna know if its treats its warfare as epic and glorious as possible!!!

Dude, it's set in WWI, not fucking Narnia.

Go look up some journals and letters from the soldiers who fought in WWI. Count the number of times they mention how epic and glorious it is after they've spent a few months staving off trench foot and enduring artillery bombardment.

Add to that the fact that it's a prequel to a film in which the main character had decided that Mankind wasn't worth helping. How do you think that's going to end?

Samtemdo8:
I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

Yes, we must respect the utter seriousness of a flying man in tight pants with laser eyes.

Humour is a very humanizing trait. Actually, I'd argue that it's one of the most humanizing traits. It forms a large part of informal interactions between people. It even has a place in dark and grim narratives because humour is a common coping mechanism.

Take out all humour and you end up with a film about two perpetually miserable idiots scowling at each other between punches.

Hawki:
It worked with the Dark Knight Trilogy.

Granted, that's not a 1:1 comparison (lack of laser eyes), but as a concept, it strikes me as being sound. Logan is another example.

Well, it worked for The Dark Knight. The other two thirds of that trilogy were crap. There's a reason you don't call it the "Batman Begins Trilogy".

Like I said, it can work as a deconstruction in competent hands. Which TDK had. See also, Logan.

Also, Batman is a different character with a completely different tone to Superman. Half of DCs movie problem is that they've been trying to treat every character like Batman because Batman is what worked for them in the past. "Just make The Dark Knight again, but this time with Superman. Also, stick Batman in everything that isn't Batman. Batman. Bat. Man."

Hopefully the people making Wonder Woman have finally figured out that that's a shitty idea.

Zhukov:

Dude, it's set in WWI, not fucking Narnia.

Go look up some journals and letters from the soldiers who fought in WWI. Count the number of times they mention how epic and glorious it is after they've spent a few months staving off trench foot and enduring artillery bombardment.

Add to that the fact that it's a prequel to a film in which the main character had decided that Mankind wasn't worth helping. How do you think that's going to end?

Hah, you can't trust soldiers' letters. They're all lies. History's a lie. History never told me that WWII was really a battle between the Allies and Hydra, and they had laser guns!

Zhukov:
Well, it worked for The Dark Knight. The other two thirds of that trilogy were crap. There's a reason you don't call it the "Batman Begins Trilogy".

It's called "The Dark Knight Trilogy" by virtue of the second film being the best, and it being the more common title (Dark Knight, Dark Knight rises). Also disagree with your assessment on the others. For me, it goes 2>1>3, with the first two being "good," the third being "average."

Zhukov:

Also, Batman is a different character with a completely different tone to Superman. Half of DCs movie problem is that they've been trying to treat every character like Batman because Batman is what worked for them in the past. "Just make The Dark Knight again, but this time with Superman. Also, stick Batman in everything that isn't Batman. Batman. Bat. Man."

I can't comment on the wider DC franchise, but I don't really see particular similarities between MoS and Batman. In as much that MoS is a bit more down to earth and grimmer, but that's it. Supes doesn't rely on stealth, and last I checked, Batman wasn't fighting an alien invasion. Similar in tone? Yeah, I guess. But the MCU has a universal tone as well and people seem fine with that.

Zhukov:

Hopefully the people making Wonder Woman have finally figured out that that's a shitty idea.

Hah, joke's on you! Apparently he turns up in the prologue.

Zhukov:

Samtemdo8:
BAH, I wanna know if its treats its warfare as epic and glorious as possible!!!

Dude, it's set in WWI, not fucking Narnia.

Go look up some journals and letters from the soldiers who fought in WWI. Count the number of times they mention how epic and glorious it is after they've spent a few months staving off trench foot and enduring artillery bombardment.

Add to that the fact that it's a prequel to a film in which the main character had decided that Mankind wasn't worth helping. How do you think that's going to end?

Samtemdo8:
I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

Yes, we must respect the utter seriousness of a flying man in tight pants with laser eyes.

Humour is a very humanizing trait. Actually, I'd argue that it's one of the most humanizing traits. It forms a large part of informal interactions between people. It even has a place in dark and grim narratives because humour is a common coping mechanism.

Take out all humour and you end up with a film about two perpetually miserable idiots scowling at each other between punches.

Hawki:
It worked with the Dark Knight Trilogy.

Granted, that's not a 1:1 comparison (lack of laser eyes), but as a concept, it strikes me as being sound. Logan is another example.

Well, it worked for The Dark Knight. The other two thirds of that trilogy were crap. There's a reason you don't call it the "Batman Begins Trilogy".

Like I said, it can work as a deconstruction in competent hands. Which TDK had. See also, Logan.

Also, Batman is a different character with a completely different tone to Superman. Half of DCs movie problem is that they've been trying to treat every character like Batman because Batman is what worked for them in the past. "Just make The Dark Knight again, but this time with Superman. Also, stick Batman in everything that isn't Batman. Batman. Bat. Man."

Hopefully the people making Wonder Woman have finally figured out that that's a shitty idea.

But with humour, you also run the risk of just being an embarrisment, to the point where its just shameful and annoying.

Basement Cat:

Samtemdo8:

I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

image

Seriously, though, (no pun intended) I agree that folks fluttering about in silly costumes beating up generic bad guys deserves the gravest and most somber respect.[1]

Superheroes is serious business!

[1] I figured you were being sarcastic so I ran with it.

It would be interesting to see how they handle Justice League if Superman comes back. Considering the issues Superman had with the way Batman handled things, how and he and Diana going to get along? Her lasso is the ultimate civil rights violation.

Samtemdo8:

Natemans:

Samtemdo8:

BAH, I wanna know if its treats its warfare as epic and glorious as possible!!!

Okay, I think you are setting your standards of battles way too high.

Also I agree with you on LOTR's battles, but 300? Nah, I find it way too over-the-top for my tastes.

Its supposed to be over the top, like Conan the Barbarian, which makes it all the more badass.

And I have other battles to show off:

But the fighting in 300 isn't entertaining imo. Its just too over-the-top to the point of being a bit too cartoonish in my taste. Especially the obnoxious slow-down speed-up thing.

Samtemdo8:

Natemans:

Samtemdo8:

What I mean by facepalm is that I find the jokes just embarrising to watch.

Really? I found the jokes to be kinda clever and really funny. They worked well with the tone and style the film was going for.

Its not just Guardians of the Galaxy, just the overall tone and jokes of Marvel movies in general.

Are you kidding me? Yes, they have jokes. Who cares? Its called adding levity and keeping the characters grounded in a situation. Hell, the Marvel movies do a great job of embracing the goofiness of the source and still do a good balance of story, characters and some lighthearted fun while also giving you an interesting world to look towards.

Samtemdo8:
@Hawki

But I don't want everything to be turned into Deadpool either.

Okay, that is a different style of humor all together. Deadpool's is more juvenile and sadistic as opposed to what Marvel does. I mean, if you want a Marvel movie coming close to that level of humor, maybe Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Samtemdo8:

Zhukov:

Samtemdo8:
BAH, I wanna know if its treats its warfare as epic and glorious as possible!!!

Dude, it's set in WWI, not fucking Narnia.

Go look up some journals and letters from the soldiers who fought in WWI. Count the number of times they mention how epic and glorious it is after they've spent a few months staving off trench foot and enduring artillery bombardment.

Add to that the fact that it's a prequel to a film in which the main character had decided that Mankind wasn't worth helping. How do you think that's going to end?

Samtemdo8:
I don't want Jokes in a Superhero movie because its corny, its cringy, and it only serve to take away any and all seriousness and care I have for the chararcaters and the story.

Yes, we must respect the utter seriousness of a flying man in tight pants with laser eyes.

Humour is a very humanizing trait. Actually, I'd argue that it's one of the most humanizing traits. It forms a large part of informal interactions between people. It even has a place in dark and grim narratives because humour is a common coping mechanism.

Take out all humour and you end up with a film about two perpetually miserable idiots scowling at each other between punches.

Hawki:
It worked with the Dark Knight Trilogy.

Granted, that's not a 1:1 comparison (lack of laser eyes), but as a concept, it strikes me as being sound. Logan is another example.

Well, it worked for The Dark Knight. The other two thirds of that trilogy were crap. There's a reason you don't call it the "Batman Begins Trilogy".

Like I said, it can work as a deconstruction in competent hands. Which TDK had. See also, Logan.

Also, Batman is a different character with a completely different tone to Superman. Half of DCs movie problem is that they've been trying to treat every character like Batman because Batman is what worked for them in the past. "Just make The Dark Knight again, but this time with Superman. Also, stick Batman in everything that isn't Batman. Batman. Bat. Man."

Hopefully the people making Wonder Woman have finally figured out that that's a shitty idea.

But with humour, you also run the risk of just being an embarrisment, to the point where its just shameful and annoying.

Yet Marvel does a good balance of humor as well as adding good storytelling and characters. Also the Dark Knight trilogy did have moments of humor and so did Richard Donner's Superman.

Samtemdo8:
[snip]

Also, while I'm at it, you've picked some really odd examples for "epic and glorious" warfare.

Kingdom of Heaven depicts war as dirty, messy, wasteful and largely unjustified. The first major action scene kicks off with a man being shot with a crossbow while he squats down to take a shit. A major character dies not in a glorious last stand or epic duel but from a lingering wound inflicted by an unnamed nobody. The character who is routinely portrayed as good, down-to-earth, affable and sensible dies off-screen in a futile and disastrous defeat brought about by incompetent leadership. Another sympathetic and sensible character throws up his hands, says "Fuck this, I'm out" and just quits. The battle in the scene you linked ends with men rolling about in the dust among the corpses trying to throttle and eye-gouge each other. It ends with all the bloodshed having been for absolutely nothing.

I can't help but think you weren't paying much attention while watching that movie.

Antz is a comedy. Y'know, with those terrible joke things everywhere. Even then the battle is depicted as a scary and crappy place to be.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here