|
Snyder is probably the best comic book movie director working right now. If you set aside scripts for his movies and just focus on how things are shot, look, set up, the visual aspect of his movies, I'd put 300, Watchmen, Man of Steel and Batman v Superman up against any other comic book movie and they'd come out looking better. The only other movies that have as strong a visual style and feel like comic books as much as Snyder's movies are Raimi's Spider-Man movies.
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
LesterGroans posted:It's not hard to understand why people who liked the previous two movies in this series would blame the largest thing that changed for why this third entry sucks. To be honest I keep forgetting there's anyone on Earth that liked the first two movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
sponges posted:It's almost like Whedon has literally never made a good movie in his life and he was brought in as a last ditch effort. Kinda harsh, man. Whedon is good at writing childrens' movies. Blazing Ownager posted:To be honest I keep forgetting there's anyone on Earth that liked the first two movies. IDK seems to me like "Snyder fans" are living in your head rent free if you think this thread is like our doom fortress :v
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:Snyder is probably the best comic book movie director working right now. If you set aside scripts for his movies and just focus on how things are shot, look, set up, the visual aspect of his movies, I'd put 300, Watchmen, Man of Steel and Batman v Superman up against any other comic book movie and they'd come out looking better. The only other movies that have as strong a visual style and feel like comic books as much as Snyder's movies are Raimi's Spider-Man movies. Oh I'll give you that. I don't hate Snyder: I liked Watchmen a lot, for example. That man belongs directing films written by other people that he has no control of other than visually. He'd be great at that. But I think his story ideas, while trying to sound smart, are literally dumber than Paul WS Anderson, but they do look pretty. Like I just can't watch BvsS given not one loving thing about the story makes any sense whatsoever even if you are trying not to think about it. I'll take Justice League's simple "I NEED THE THING TO DO THE THING, I AM EVIL" simple over rambling clever speeches that have no point for no reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
Saw JL tonight and Jesus, what a mess. Especially when compared to Thor: Ragnarok which came out only a week or 2 earlier. Say what you want about Marvel movies in general but Ragnarok at least tried something different and interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Duey posted:Saw JL tonight and Jesus, what a mess. Especially when compared to Thor: Ragnarok which came out only a week or 2 earlier. Say what you want about Marvel movies in general but Ragnarok at least tried something different and interesting. Oh I liked JL in the same way that frankly Mike on RLM liked it, as a giant cheeseball mess. I disagreed with him on Thor though, Thor was a blast and was so, so, SO much more competently directed, produced, acted.. well everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Oh I'll give you that. I don't hate Snyder: I liked Watchmen a lot, for example. I'm gonna be honest here, I never got the complain that BvS is hard to understand. At this point I've seen the movie enough times that it's like obvious to me, but I saw it opening night in a theater in Milan with Italian subtitles below everything (because as funny as watching the Italian dub would be, that just wasn't gonna happen the first time) and I understood it just fine. there are a few scenes that I don't like much and it's not as good as Man of Steel (which is the gold standard of modern superhero movies) but I feel like the people who say they don't understand it are just being willfully obtuse. At least the people who just don't like the portrayal of Superman and Batman are engaging with the movie somewhat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Like I just can't watch BvsS given not one loving thing about the story makes any sense whatsoever even if you are trying not to think about it. I'll take Justice League's simple "I NEED THE THING TO DO THE THING, I AM EVIL" simple over rambling clever speeches that have no point for no reason. That much is clear. DC Murderverse posted:I'm gonna be honest here, I never got the complain that BvS is hard to understand. At this point I've seen the movie enough times that it's like obvious to me, but I saw it opening night in a theater in Milan with Italian subtitles below everything (because as funny as watching the Italian dub would be, that just wasn't gonna happen the first time) and I understood it just fine. there are a few scenes that I don't like much and it's not as good as Man of Steel (which is the gold standard of modern superhero movies) but I feel like the people who say they don't understand it are just being willfully obtuse. At least the people who just don't like the portrayal of Superman and Batman are engaging with the movie somewhat. I can't think of one thing in it that's remotely confusing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Oh I'll give you that. I don't hate Snyder: I liked Watchmen a lot, for example. Can you give some examples of Snyder films trying to sound smart but actually being dumb?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:I'm gonna be honest here, I never got the complain that BvS is hard to understand. At this point I've seen the movie enough times that it's like obvious to me, but I saw it opening night in a theater in Milan with Italian subtitles below everything (because as funny as watching the Italian dub would be, that just wasn't gonna happen the first time) and I understood it just fine. there are a few scenes that I don't like much and it's not as good as Man of Steel (which is the gold standard of modern superhero movies) but I feel like the people who say they don't understand it are just being willfully obtuse. At least the people who just don't like the portrayal of Superman and Batman are engaging with the movie somewhat. The film has a million and a half plot threads. I love it to death but if a person calls it a mess of ideas, I can agree with them. On top of that, you have to re-introduce Batman into the mix all while people are getting used to the new Superman. Add in Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor. But it was ambitious and the Ultimate Cut connected the plot threads together better to make a more coherent viewing. It should have been the film we saw in theaters. The biggest gripe, and admittedly it's a personal one because in the context of these films' it's explain and appropriate, I do wish Clark talked a lot more. Snyder believes that actions speak louder than words and he hires a great actor who can convey his state of being on his face really well, but Henry Cavill is a heck of a charismatic actor. Giving him more lines would have been a good way to for the general audience to connect with his character better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:I feel like the people who say they don't understand it are just being willfully obtuse. Lex Luthor's motivation was never clear. He wanted the two to fight, for reasons. And stuff. He also just had all this info for no reason, like who Superman's mother was or about Batman and all that crap, but I'll hand wave that. But here's the big "yeah this is stupid as gently caress" stuff off the VERY top of my head and there IS more: 1: Trying to frame Superman by shooting and burning people. Uhhhh, what? 2: Getting a guy really angry at Superman so he, uh, blows up Congress 3: .. despite the fact that not a single person actually blames or would blame Superman for that, so.. 4: .. he continues his quest to see Superman die for REASONS and trying to make Batman do it .. 5: Somehow gets Superman's mother so Superman goes and acts like a dick to Batman instead of just explaining it 6: Titular Versus fight last 5 minutes 7: MARRRRRRTHA 8: Throw the spear away! I did this so we could go get it later! 9: Superman can't possibly pass the spear to a new ally like Wonder Woman to use it because.. uh.. because.. 10: Did they really turn Doomsday into a generic CGI Troll? 11: Did they really waste the Superman death for no Goddamn reason at this point? The characters WERE hosed up. Superman acted like a depressed dick all the time and Batman was down with running over the heads of criminals with his car in ways that'd make the Punisher go "that was hosed up," and I won't even get started on the Jolly Ranchers and Jars of Piss or the whole extended reveals that Eisenberg was talking to aliens.. for.. uh reasons.. given he hates aliens and Godlike aliens.. yet seemed to want to call aliens that call themselves Gods here to uh, fight the God he doesn't like because uh, he doesn't like Gods and Superman is a God and uh.... the gently caress was he doing again? Saying nothing of just stupid, not plot breaking choices like the hilarious emailed hero scene, the way Wonder Woman get sprinkled into the movie despite everyone knowing what was coming, the way Batman was running around branding people for reasons.. again odd loving decisions attempting to rip off Dark Knight with NONE of the context of the fight or situation or understanding what was INTENTIONAL parody. ED: Killing a nearly uncredited Jimmy Olsen is loving hilarious too ED: Seriously for all those going 'Oh the plot was wonderfully simple' please for the love of God, play by play Luthor's motivation. I dare you. It's impossible. Or Batman's for that matter. Superman's seems to be looking unhappy saving people until finally brought in to save his mother instead of, you know, just saving her. Blazing Ownager fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Lex Luthor's motivation was never clear. He wanted the two to fight, for reasons. And stuff. He also just had all this info for no reason, like who Superman's mother was or about Batman and all that crap, but I'll hand wave that. But here's the big "yeah this is stupid as gently caress" stuff off the VERY top of my head and there IS more: Holy gently caress you have a fundamental misunderstanding of BvS.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
Age of Ultron was the only Marvel film that I have felt was almost unwatchably bad. Avengers 1 feels worse with every rewatch, but I enjoyed it at the time (despite the bad filmmaking) mainly because I enjoyed the first big teamup. Now, post Avenger's 1, we've had a lot more interplay between characters, making Avengers 1 far less special, so that magic is gone in rewatches and all that is left is the bad filmmaking. Age of Ultron was boring and when I left the film, I immediately didn't like it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
I'd say this is why posting while high is technically against the rules but it seems your trouble started even before you gave your keyboard hell tonight
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:It's telling that no one even attempts to defend Whedon's stuff on his own terms. As it stands, Justice League is like someone duct-taping cutouts from a lovely yearbook onto the Book of Revelations as illustrated by Frank Quitely. All that smartass stuff you might have liked in high school or junior high looks awkward to the point of insulting next to an actual artist trying to do their thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
sponges posted:Holy gently caress you have a fundamental misunderstanding of BvS. I feel like I'm talking to one of those people who claims to perfectly understand a Lynch film and then either rattle on some bullshit they made up in their own head as the understanding, or just be saying it for cred. Do explain, professor. What was the character motivation (we'll limit it to that) behind Batman, Superman, and Lex Luthor in Batman vs Superman from beginning to end? I badly want to know. Help me get into the mind of Zack Snyder, may I brave such madness and return sane.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:Lex Luthor's motivation was never clear. He wanted the two to fight, for reasons. And stuff. He also just had all this info for no reason, like who Superman's mother was or about Batman and all that crap, but I'll hand wave that. But here's the big "yeah this is stupid as gently caress" stuff off the VERY top of my head and there IS more: Lex: He's a rich kid who only got negative attention from his dad (beatings, etc) and there was no one to save him so he distrusts the idea of an all-powerful, all-benevolent being who just wants to save people. He wants to get rid of Superman because he thinks that anyone with that much power will eventually abuse it, so he puts a few plans in motion to do this, one to destroy him physically (Doomsday), and the others to destroy him in the eyes of the public (wanting him to kill Batman, setting him up in Africa/DC). Batman: He's been fighting crime for 20+ years to little/no effect, seen his sidekick murdered by a crazy person, and on top of that, now there's an all-powerful being from some other planet who totally wrecked the city of Metropolis that everyone loves, but Batman has no trust that someone with that much power won't end up turning evil, so he thinks he needs to destroy Superman before he turns because when someone that powerful turns evil, he could rule the entire world. The two of them are two sides of the same coin: traditional powers (rich white dudes who are powerful business/criminal justice figures) who, when confronted with a power far beyond their beliefs and scope, react with fear, because they believe that any being with that much power will eventually crush the world beneath him, and because they don't actually know him, they believe that as an alien, he has no connection to earth and wouldn't think twice about taking over with an iron fist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:ED: Seriously for all those going 'Oh the plot was wonderfully simple' please for the love of God, play by play Luthor's motivation. I dare you. It's impossible. Or Batman's for that matter. Superman's seems to be looking unhappy saving people until finally brought in to save his mother instead of, you know, just saving her. Luthor resents Superman as a "savior of humanity" because nobody was there to save him from his abusive father. Batman is paranoid because he saw his parents get murdered when he was a child and is eager to see the worst in people. It ain't that complicated. The Superman not looking happy thing is just such a bizarre complaint. He's saving incredibly distraught people from horrifying situations like floods and burning buildings, if he had a big smile on his face he'd look like a loving psychopath.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Lex Luthor's motivation His father beat him and had God-like power over him, while being incredibly religious. God never came to save Lex from being punched by his dad so he thinks God either cannot exist or is evil. Superman is akin to God and thus an affront to Lex Luthor's entire identity and ideology. The world believes Superman to be all good and all powerful so Lex Luthor seeks to ruin this forever. Either he is all good, and dies, or he is all powerful, and is not all good. Doomsday is his monument to his father and his idealized version of Superman, an all powerful being that is not good, that seeks raw death and destruction and will show humanity the error of believing in a man who could fly. Batman is an aging vigilante psycho with control problems who has lost his way. He sees Superman as a symbol of everything wrong and evil in the world, a great force that could destroy anything. He has given up on fighting crime and making a difference that way, and instead sees this as his one chance to save the world. To truly save the world. To reveal Superman for the monster he is and kill him, no matter what. The point of this is that Batman is wrong, Superman is not a monster but a person, and killing him will not save anyone. Batman has to come to grips with the fact that he is wrong, that what he was doing was wrong, and that in the end he has failed Superman but he will not fail him again. It is a story of redemption as one man is dragged to his darkest pits by his own inadequacy and failure and then finds the strength to rise again and be a hero once more. Superman wants to save people but is not sure he can because of his own human error. His choices have consequences that he has to contend with and accept responsibility for. Part of his problem with Batman is that Batman doesn't accept the consequences of his actions, and only serves to make things worse for the poor and downtrodden. He tries to make a difference as a reporter but is told to just tell the news, and as Superman any action he takes is an inherently political one in a landscape that is rapidly hostile towards him. He tries again and again to live up to the ideal of Superman that others, including his father, have seen in him while he is not sure he has the moral strength to uphold it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
I like Thor Ragnarok to a point, but I think it's an indication that Marvel really does not know what to do with Thor. The first movie had just the right amount of action and comedy. With Thor 2, it's like there were two executives at Marvel Studios, one telling them to make Thor more comedic and the other telling them to make it darker, and they both got what they want. The story had Jane's life being threatened and Thor's mother dying, but also a lot of moments that were outright comedy like the portal fight or most scenes of Thor on Earth. With Ragnarok, it was like two different movies. Everything on Asgard was pretty grim, with soldiers being slaughtered and civilians forced to become refugees in their homelands before leaving it completely. The part at the gladiator planet was all cool action and funny character moments. I haven't mentioned how the Avengers movies seems to sideline the character. I thought getting Thor to Earth would be a bigger part of Avengers, while most of his important scene (that ties to the Thanos plot) was cut from Age of Ultron. The weird thing with Ragnarok is how both the darker and comedic aspects seem to work but they just seem weird when they're part of the same movie. Maybe Taika Waititi is given the wrong series to work with, he'd be more at home with GOTG while James Gunn can go off and make a Star Wars or DC movie or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Superman is just having to grapple with the negative ripples of his positive actions. His dream dad's story about horses and hero cake is a pretty good summation: we try to do good for the people we love, even though there's a possibility that there are some negative outcomes to it. Superman is playing with that on a global level, so even when he goes and saves people (like from an invading Zod who wants to destroy Metropolis out of spite), there is collateral damage, and there are people who, because they're affected by that collateral damage, think that the net result is not worth the price they personally had to pay (as shown by Jimmy Smits).
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I feel like I'm talking to one of those people who claims to perfectly understand a Lynch film and then either rattle on some bullshit they made up in their own head as the understanding, or just be saying it for cred. ...you don't understand David Lynch movies? I'm not joking, what are you talking about? They're odd at times but they're not incomprehensible. Christ man, come on. I mean it seriously what the hell. Jason X is not that complicated a narrative
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I feel like I'm talking to one of those people who claims to perfectly understand a Lynch film and then either rattle on some bullshit they made up in their own head as the understanding, or just be saying it for cred. For one thing, you've never seen a Lynch film in your life.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:Lex: He's a rich kid who only got negative attention from his dad (beatings, etc) and there was no one to save him so he distrusts the idea of an all-powerful, all-benevolent being who just wants to save people. He wants to get rid of Superman because he thinks that anyone with that much power will eventually abuse it, so he puts a few plans in motion to do this, one to destroy him physically (Doomsday), and the others to destroy him in the eyes of the public (wanting him to kill Batman, setting him up in Africa/DC). So, your explanation is that he wants to get rid of Superman so that this alien God does not abuse their power. He does this by trying to frame Superman, with bullets and gasoline. Uh huh. Then he tries to frame him by blowing up a bomb that is immediately identified as a bomb. UHhhh huh. Then he tried to get him to kill the crazy vigilante that is running around branding people to be murdered in prison and is disliked? Uhhhhhhhhhhhh huuuhhhhhh. ANd then he creates a creature has has NO fail safe or way to control to get rid of the all powerful God alien, that will destroy everything instead. UHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh huhhhhhhhhhhhh. And to top if all off, his motiviation of distrusting the Gods, is to get onboard an alien ship and then call them up on the video phone and ask them to come to Earth. UHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Status: No way in loving hell does this make sense. DC Murderverse posted:Batman: He's been fighting crime for 20+ years to little/no effect, seen his sidekick murdered by a crazy person, and on top of that, now there's an all-powerful being from some other planet who totally wrecked the city of Metropolis that everyone loves, but Batman has no trust that someone with that much power won't end up turning evil, so he thinks he needs to destroy Superman before he turns because when someone that powerful turns evil, he could rule the entire world. Batman, world's greatest detective, is handled evidence of the plot that the guy he saved was going on some anti-Superman crusade. He's also capable of finding out easily that, you know, the bodies Superman was blamed for were.. gasoline. (Plus it's a stupid frame job since Superman actually killed one for real). So instead of following any of this up and going "who is doing this?" he immediately goes "SUPERMAN MIGHT BE 1% BAD SO I MUST KILL HIM." He then does this by murdering a poo poo load of private security people who were doing their jobs for Lex Corp and stealing Kryptonite... which may or may not have been a plan?? So then he goes into rage mode to kill Superman because.. uh.. Superman knocked down his building and wrecked his car I guess and he doesn't like him very much. Never once stops to check into who was loving with the suicide bomber's checks or if there's anything more to do this because as well know, Batman isn't good with investigation, he's good at punching things only. Status: Batman is a Goddamn idiot or this sucks. DC Murderverse posted:The two of them are two sides of the same coin: traditional powers (rich white dudes who are powerful business/criminal justice figures) who, when confronted with a power far beyond their beliefs and scope, react with fear, because they believe that any being with that much power will eventually crush the world beneath him, and because they don't actually know him, they believe that as an alien, he has no connection to earth and wouldn't think twice about taking over with an iron fist. Did you accidentally read the Dark Knight instead of watching BvsS? Because while it ripped off imagery this is not at ALL what happened. If you are reading all of this into "Lex runs around like a chicken with his head cut off while angry Batman wants to kill Superman because reasons" and that's saying NOTHING of the MASSIVE plot gaps as to why Lex just KNOWS everything and you have a recipe for a lovely, lovely plot that does not actually make sense. You are reading too much into it. PS: Jolly ranchers and mugs of piss ED: I bet I could edit BvsS into a completely coherent 45 minute short film and not lose a single plot point. That's not good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
The incomprehensible plots of David Lynch films, such as "deformed man is treated badly", "guy is anxious about having a baby", and "failed actress dreams about being beautiful and successful".
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:23
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:The incomprehensible plots of David Lynch films, such as "deformed man is treated badly", "guy is anxious about having a baby", and "failed actress dreams about being beautiful and successful". Don't forget Twin Brothers abuse the fact that they look identical and one of them is psychotic and you don't know which one it is exactly
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
Burkion posted:...you don't understand David Lynch movies? Like Seriously Blazing Ownager you tried to use a David Lynch film as an example of incomprehensibility in a movie forum? You're going have to try harder than that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Don't forget Dead Ringers is Cronenberg
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
sponges posted:Like Seriously Blazing Ownager you tried to use a David Lynch film as an example of incomprehensibility in a movie forum? You're going to try harder than that. If you think there's any logical way to explain Muholland Drive you're an idiot. It was designed to not actually ever fit together on purpose. A lot of it was not literal but people sure do want to try. And as I just pointed out not a single thing about BvsS ACTUALLY makes sense. You can explain the grand ideas they wanted to convey, it doesn't mean they conveyed them. It's this kind of attitude that makes CineD the laughing stock of even TVIV, to be honest Mechafunkzilla posted:Dead Ringers is Cronenberg See, Cronenberg is strange as gently caress but you can actually explain them pretty easily.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Dead Ringers is Cronenberg poo poo I keep getting that mixed up My point stands Somewhere
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:See, Cronenberg is strange as gently caress but you can actually explain them pretty easily. Okay, give me a quick, neat synopsis of Naked Lunch. Or Videodrome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Okay, give me a quick, neat synopsis of Naked Lunch. Or Videodrome. Cocaine
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I don't actually know what I'm talking about. Understood.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Burkion posted:poo poo I keep getting that mixed up I should say that it's ridiculous that we're having to basically bring up directors known for surrealism to discuss the reasons that loving Lex Luthor wanted Batman to punch Superman. This is not a Goddamn complicated premise
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:If you think there's any logical way to explain Muholland Drive you're an idiot. It was designed to not actually ever fit together on purpose. A lot of it was not literal but people sure do want to try. Dopedy simps like you are why I enjoy CD and HATE TVIV
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
*Main villain monologues his motivations for five minutes in front of a defeated protagonist* "I have NO idea what his motivations are!! This makes NO sense!" *Secondary villain spouts ultra right-wing reactionary rhetoric that'd make Dick Cheney jealous to his butler* "Why in the hell is he doing these things? This makes NO sense!" You can't get more obvious than that. The rest of the film explores them. Honestly, I applaud you folk putting effort into this discussion but this exact type of person comes around every now and then and regurgitates the same tired old poo poo and no amount of thesis-level effort posts will explain things to them because they're doing this in bad faith. They don't actually give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
sponges posted:Dopedy simps like you are why I enjoy CD and HATE TVIV Go ahead, please see my earlier post. I want to know why Luthor did any of those things other than you reading whatever press release synopsis WB poo poo out as to why he did anything he did. Mechafunkzilla posted:Understood. I haven't seen either in like 5 or 6 years but even in movies filled with surreal imagery and unnatural characters, I never sat there going "Why the gently caress are you doing anything you are doing?" as much as I did with Lex Luthor. Seriously. Explain why he's out there CALLING MORE ALIEN GODS when he hates alien Gods as his motivation. The gently caress is that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:*Main villain monologues his motivations for five minutes in front of a defeated protagonist* Because his monologues were all trying to hard to be clever with his rants against Gods and devils it makes no sense why he would be contacting more of them and creating more of them. Nothing about it made sense. It was a bad character. It's pretty much most everybody that agrees. If this is the last hive of BvsS supporters I kinda get it, but you HAVE to know "this made sense" is like, overwhelmingly the minority opinion outside of this subforum, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I should say that it's ridiculous that we're having to basically bring up directors known for surrealism to discuss the reasons that loving Lex Luthor wanted Batman to punch Superman. An abused child hating himself and feeling destructive towards a world that feels unsafe isn't some new, incomprehensible idea. Here's Sandor Ferenczi writing about it in 1929. Blazing Ownager posted:Seriously. Explain why he's out there CALLING MORE ALIEN GODS when he hates alien Gods as his motivation. The gently caress is that. He wants the devil to exist because it validates his worldview that the universe is an evil place. Mechafunkzilla fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:39
|
|