|
I just wanted to say I'm absolutely loving stoked to see the only good guy in The Tudors become Superman.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 06:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
The_Rob posted:Edit: like I dunno are people really so cynical that superman can't be the most ernest motherfucker around? It's really important. Superman and Cap are two of the most earnest characters around. I'll never not watch them. I'm extremely tired of the try-hard faux-casual studious cynicism that permeates basically everything. It's just as condescending as old-school Supes can be patronizing, but personally I'm ready for the needle to tilt the other way. (See also: Star Trek Into Darkness) VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Jun 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 12:44
|
|
|
People forget that the 70s were cynical as all gently caress thanks to Vietnam and Watergate, and Superman was ridiculously good and earnest for audiences in 1978 too. That was kind of the whole point, because being cynical about everything is exhausting and sometimes people just want to forget all that bullshit and see a genuinely good, nice person to root for instead of watching lovely reflections of lovely real life in everything they watch for entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 13:02
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:People forget that the 70s were cynical as all gently caress thanks to Vietnam and Watergate, and Superman was ridiculously good and earnest for audiences in 1978 too. That was kind of the whole point, because being cynical about everything is exhausting and sometimes people just want to forget all that bullshit and see a genuinely good, nice person to root for instead of watching lovely reflections of lovely real life in everything they watch for entertainment. I have always found it supremely interesting that Batman was more popular than Superman with white middle-class kids while the balance shifted to Superman with urban minorities. Does somebody have more concrete numbers about that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 13:21
|
|
|
fspades posted:I have always found it supremely interesting that Batman was more popular than Superman with white middle-class kids while the balance shifted to Superman with urban minorities. Does somebody have more concrete numbers about that? I've never heard that (not saying you're wrong). I know anecdotally that NO ONE in my urban environment, growing up, liked Superman.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 13:45
|
|
|
I wouldn't find it at all surprising that privileged white kids preferred the liberal white capitalist power fantasy. edit: Also, Superman, at least in film, has always been earnest as gently caress. I guess the original's heart or Return's overt gritty cynicism might confuse some people or show as some kind of ironic detachment, but they are nothing if not earnest. Danger fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Jun 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 13:58
|
|
|
Danger posted:I wouldn't find it at all surprising that privileged white kids preferred the liberal white capitalist power fantasy. I thought Returns entire point was that gritty cynicism is pointless and you should embrace hope and wonder?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 14:04
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:I thought Returns entire point was that gritty cynicism is pointless and you should embrace hope and wonder? It's kind of hard to pick that message out of that mess, I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 14:34
|
|
|
api call girl posted:It's kind of hard to pick that message out of that mess, I don't know. I thought that was the whole point of Lois in that film. At the beginning she was cynical in regards to Superman, but by the end she has embraced his return and saw that the world did need him and what he represents.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
Darko posted:I've never heard that (not saying you're wrong). I know anecdotally that NO ONE in my urban environment, growing up, liked Superman. I remember reading it in some article which is why I'm asking for more proof. fake edit: And that article was this. real edit: well in the comments FILM CRIT HULK says it's from a friend who works in the DC marketing department. fspades fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Jun 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:I thought that was the whole point of Lois in that film. At the beginning she was cynical in regards to Superman, but by the end she has embraced his return and saw that the world did need him and what he represents. I honestly don't think that 1-2 is borne out or supported by anything else in the movie, excepting the shuttle/jet rescue. So, great, ok, if we have Superman we would have 100% less Challengers and Columbias.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 14:52
|
|
|
Danger posted:I wouldn't find it at all surprising that privileged white kids preferred the liberal white capitalist power fantasy. Haha, yes, Batman appeals to white kids because he represents their inherent desires to be 1% level oppressors. Clearly, you're actually the World's Greatest Social Justice Detective. As a kid I preferred Batman(and Iron Man even to Batman) because they were mostly regular guys with exceptional brains and creativity. I liked Superman just fine, too, but it's hard to imagine yourself as an alien from another planet with crazy powers. It's much easier to imagine you're a supergenius at 9.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 15:06
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:As a kid I preferred Batman(and Iron Man even to Batman) because they were mostly regular guys with exceptional brains and creativity. I liked Superman just fine, too, but it's hard to imagine yourself as an alien from another planet with crazy powers. It's much easier to imagine you're a supergenius at 9. When I was a kid I used to scout out abandoned roads to build my bat cave...after becoming a billionaire. Seemed like a surefire plan at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:Haha, yes, Batman appeals to white kids because he represents their inherent desires to be 1% level oppressors. Clearly, you're actually the World's Greatest Social Justice Detective. I don't mean that grade school kids imagine themselves as jackboots; but that Batman and (and also Iron Man, as you mention) would be more ideologically consistent with the landscape in which they are born and raised.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 15:28
|
|
|
fspades posted:I have always found it supremely interesting that Batman was more popular than Superman with white middle-class kids while the balance shifted to Superman with urban minorities. Does somebody have more concrete numbers about that? I'm an immigrant, a minority, well educated and yeah I guess middle class, and I love Superman. What he can represent and be and mean. I dislike Batman and consider him juvenile fantasy and a complete waste. Just one more to toss onto the pile. Take examples from some of Grant Morrison's Superman using his gifts to find cures for disease or advance the world, in some cases by representing or striving for something beyond just himself through his actions, while creating an adult life for himself in a new world, and compare to a unhinged billionaire who takes no responsibility for living an adult life beyond asking his corporation and resources to invest in tools so he can go around the world punching people in the face. Gatts fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jun 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
The Dark Knight movies are about Batman trying to take those tools and resources and responsibilities that he has and doing good things with them, and by and large failing. When Joker plays his no-win scenario game theory tricks, Batman and Dent and Gordon at various points in the movies FAIL those tests. Only the random sampling of people of Gotham, and even the lower level criminals, on the ferries pass the test by refusing to participate. That bit where Bats starts a merger with Lau's company in HK just to get a good look at his books to screw the mafia in Gotham City? That's funny poo poo. At the most pedestrian level of looking at the films, the Dark Knight movies are dark tragicomedies with some good catharsis at the end of each. They're the best takes on the Batman lone wolf wingnut fantasy we could possibly have had. And I LIKE the character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Superman isn't as popular with that class of people because their raised to believe that having a billion dollars and getting to gently caress supermodels is the height of success. Batman : Billionaire playboy from wealthy upbringing who has unimaginable wealth and uses it to train to become a master of his enviroment. Also, fucks supermodels. Superman : Immigrant that was raised on a farm that uses his abilities to inspire his enviroment to be better through example. That's why people think Batman has a greater appeal to juveniles from that background. Personally, I love Batman but Superman more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
I don't even think Batman fucks Supermodels. He just hangs around with them to sell Bruce Wayne's image but when it comes to actually having any sort of relationship it is "I must go away to punch the Joker. HARK, BATSIGNAL! Vigilante justice/the night is my mistress." Like he doesn't even seek out to build any sort of adult relationships. He's got a kind of father-son relationship going with his Robins I suppose, but even they reject him to find their own better ways. So yeah I guess. He's a fantasy for 9 year olds who think girls are icky but having lots of money and toys is the way to be. Did he earn his fortune or build his empire? No, that was his parents and he has other people managing the hard work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
Tony Stark has no qualms with being a billionaire playboy who fucks supermodels and fights evil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Gatts posted:I don't even think Batman fucks Supermodels. He just hangs around with them to sell Bruce Wayne's image but when it comes to actually having any sort of relationship it is "I must go away to punch the Joker. HARK, BATSIGNAL! Vigilante justice/the night is my mistress." Like he doesn't even seek out to build any sort of adult relationships. He's got a kind of father-son relationship going with his Robins I suppose, but even they reject him to find their own better ways. That's also a really good point in comparison to Superman and his films in which Superman, while performing otherworldly and sometimes silly feats, has very adult relationships and exchanges with Lois.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
So, according to RT... Man of Steel is officially WORSE than Superman Returns. I sincerely hope that this isn't the case and it's just RT's review aggregation being loving stupid again.(like it was with The Hobbit)
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
Gonz posted:Tony Stark has no qualms with being a billionaire playboy who fucks supermodels and fights evil. Yes but Tony is a bit more grown up than Bruce. I also like how Superman has relationships with other people. That is one of the reasons I loved the marriage between Superman and Lois. They are in an adult relationship and they worked great together. Also the fact that he had friends outside of the JLA. It showed that he was more than just Superman. I had a phase where I liked Superman, but now I really can not stand him. I prefer Superman due to just how his comic is full of hope and how people can be better, while Batman is just a guy who is still stuck at 8 when his parents died.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:22
|
|
|
Deakul posted:So, according to RT... Man of Steel is officially WORSE than Superman Returns. How was it stupid with The Hobbit? That movie has an average score of 6.6/10, and 65% of critics enjoyed it. That's dead on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
Wendell posted:How was it stupid with The Hobbit? That movie has an average score of 6.6/10, and 65% of critics enjoyed it. That's dead on. RT only works when it aligns with your beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:while Batman is just a guy who is still stuck at 8 when his parents died. Ding ding. Bruce is a twisted Peter Pan (even has his own relationship to his/the shadow) who never grew up and didn't have the necessary relationships to teach him how to be a normal healthy person. I'm not quite sure what Alfred did, if he had any influence on him raising him, but even he's depicted as a kind of sexless person whose only historical connection are former military buddies or the Robins. I'd suggest the best way to go about it would also be to show Alfred is more of a full fledged character with agency. People like to suggest Batman is the height of human ingenuity or cleverness or some poo poo but he's more like some kind of an other and at times barely qualifying as human.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Wendell posted:How was it stupid with The Hobbit? That movie has an average score of 6.6/10, and 65% of critics enjoyed it. That's dead on. Well, most of the reviews I read are really just the critics bashing the 48 FPS gimmick and as such that ends up reflecting on the movie itself in their eyes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:34
|
|
|
So then what new technological gimmick is influencing the Superman reviews?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
Wendell posted:So then what new technological gimmick is influencing the Superman reviews? The director's name most likely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
Wendell posted:So then what new technological gimmick is influencing the Superman reviews? I only explained my reasoning for The Hobbit. I'm just baffled how Man of Steel can possibly be worse than Superman Returns, which was a genuinely terrible film.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Hollis posted:Superman isn't as popular with that class of people because their raised to believe that having a billion dollars and getting to gently caress supermodels is the height of success. Batman is just inherently interesting. He has gadgets and vehicles, he has to train for his abilities, and he looks cool. I always liked his supernatural theatricality and found him fun to draw. When kids become adults, there's the psychological aspect of the character to appeal to them. He's a well-rounded character with a lot of storytelling potential. Superman isn't as popular with "that class of people" because Superman is seen as a hokey, one-note boy scout. When the story needs him to, he does some new super-thing to save the day, he can't die or be challenged, and his conflicts are often other-worldly and extraterrestrial compared to, for example, some crime boss that Batman would deal with. He's not as grounded and relatable, which is why he's so difficult to make appealing to people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Ding ding. Bruce is a twisted Peter Pan (even has his own relationship to his/the shadow) who never grew up and didn't have the necessary relationships to teach him how to be a normal healthy person. I'm not quite sure what Alfred did, if he had any influence on him raising him, but even he's depicted as a kind of sexless person whose only historical connection are former military buddies or the Robins. I'd suggest the best way to go about it would also be to show Alfred is more of a full fledged character with agency. People like to suggest Batman is the height of human ingenuity or cleverness or some poo poo but he's more like some kind of an other and at times barely qualifying as human. He's basically the height of introversion. Spend 100% of your time improving yourself as opposed to forming human relationships, and you will become awesome, but extremely imbalanced, and create different types of flaws. He's the height of human achievement but ignoring the social aspect which allowed humanity to evolve in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
Deakul posted:I only explained my reasoning for The Hobbit. Movies that rank around ~80 percent are typically good enough that nobody will say they're bad, but in many cases, don't reach hard enough to achieve anything more than "pretty good." Many great films can be found in the ~60-70 percent range, because striving for something more means that they also become more divisive, where people love or hate them. Especially when former expectations are concerned. It's easy to find films like that for me. For example, A.I. is one that I personally love, but you can easily see where it completely turned off 30% of critics (many of which, on RT, know less about film than your average GBS poster). Meanwhile, say, A Bug's Life is at 92% because no one will say it's particularly BAD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
Darko posted:He's basically the height of introversion. Spend 100% of your time improving yourself as opposed to forming human relationships, and you will become awesome, but extremely imbalanced, and create different types of flaws. He's the height of human achievement but ignoring the social aspect which allowed humanity to evolve in the first place. Those trade-offs make him interesting and give him an arc to tell stories with, while Superman has typically been presented as someone who doesn't change, leaving his superpowers as the star of the show. It's one reason I'm nervous to hear that Man of Steel is so action-packed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Ding ding. Bruce is a twisted Peter Pan (even has his own relationship to his/the shadow) who never grew up and didn't have the necessary relationships to teach him how to be a normal healthy person. I'm not quite sure what Alfred did, if he had any influence on him raising him, but even he's depicted as a kind of sexless person whose only historical connection are former military buddies or the Robins. I'd suggest the best way to go about it would also be to show Alfred is more of a full fledged character with agency. People like to suggest Batman is the height of human ingenuity or cleverness or some poo poo but he's more like some kind of an other and at times barely qualifying as human. Lois Lane: Clark said you were just a figment of somebody's imagination, like Peter Pan. Superman: Clark? Who's that, your boyfriend? Lois Lane: Clark!? Oh, Clark. No, he's nothing, he's just, uh... Superman: Peter Pan, huh? Peter Pan flew with children, Lois. In a fairytale.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
How many in this thread have already seen Man of Steel? What's the general consensus--is it the movie of the year Warner Bros. is acting like it is?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
Toady posted:How many in this thread have already seen Man of Steel? What's the general consensus--is it the movie of the year Warner Bros. is acting like it is? No, not really. It's a drat good summer action movie though, and the best of the big franchise movies to have come out this summer. It's better than Iron Man 3 and Star Trek by a country mile. (and I liked those films, mostly) It has a scope and scale that not even Nolan's Bat-films can equal. It feels like a Superman movie, even though they are going for a slightly more naturalistic approach. I say that instead of realistic, because nothing realistic happens in the movie, but it is trying to be more of "What if Superman existed in OUR world, not the world of comics" I can see this film causing a ruckus with the way it sort of plays fast and loose with the Superman canon. I honestly didn't care because Superman has never been a huge favorite of mine, but I can see fans getting bent out of shape by some of the choices of the writers and filmmakers. Here are some of the big ones I noticed. Spoilers Ahoy, so if you don't want to know, really don't highlight this. Kal-El is the first natural birth on Krypton in centuries, after they turn to a Matrix-like birthing "genesis" where children are born to specific tasks. The best example of this is Zod, born to be a warrior to protect Krypton's best interests. Lois Lane is aware of Clark's dual identity through a major majority of the film, having tracked him down after following his tracks all around the world. It's an interesting take on Lois, sort of bypassing the strangeness of a world class reporter being fooled by glasses. Superman has very little regard for the huge damnage him and Zod cause in the huge climax. Just tons of buildings get hosed up so bad, and I am sure people died left and right, and it's not really something he seems to notice. Perhaps because this is his first tango with a supervillain in Metropolis, but drat. It also shows that, in the case of those who oppose him, he has no qualms killing. Now, he's not Batman, so that's not the biggest deal, but I know that I've personally never seen Superman kill bad guys on purpose. It was a bit jarring.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
I don't care if it plays with the canon, which needed a shake-up anyway. If it's at least as good as Iron Man 3, then it sounds like mission accomplished with regards to re-establishing Superman as a popular franchise, so that's encouraging.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Toady posted:Those trade-offs make him interesting and give him an arc to tell stories with, while Superman has typically been presented as someone who doesn't change, leaving his superpowers as the star of the show. It's one reason I'm nervous to hear that Man of Steel is so action-packed. This. Superman was basically invincible and the stories were boring, in all incarnations. I am generalizing but Superman very rarely ever felt like a complete character. It has nothing to do with bizarre power fantasy nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Toady posted:How many in this thread have already seen Man of Steel? What's the general consensus--is it the movie of the year Warner Bros. is acting like it is? I'll go over my thoughts again. It's not the movie of the year. It's good not great. It suffers from frantic and jerky pacing. It worked better in Batman Begins where the flashbacks are long enough for you to really get the idea of who he is. I felt some things could've been fleshed out more. I just remember saying to myself, "That's all they could get out of 2.5 hrs?" In Batman Begins you know exactly who Bruce Wayne is, what he wants to do, and you see his whole transition to Batman. Man of Steel tries to do exactly that and falls short. Some examples of stuff: 1. The suit is revealed while Jor-El and Clark are talking. Neither mention the suit, and Clark never asks what it is or why he should wear it. 2. Pa Kent's death is kind of lame. Anyone in that same scenario with Clark's powers would've saved him. They could've come up with a better way for him to die. 3. Lois tracks him down in a montage. You are never told how long this takes, so it feels really weird. Could be a week or it could be a year. One sentence would've solved that. You hear the same montage almost in it's entirety in the trailers. Yes, it's that quick. All in all it's a good start, and I really want to see a sequel and I still recommend everyone see it in theaters for the action alone. 8/10.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:This. Superman was basically invincible and the stories were boring, in all incarnations. I am generalizing but Superman very rarely ever felt like a complete character. Unlike batman who is the smartest ninja detective millionaire in the world, also he is James Bond and he can defeat anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 18:07
|
|
