Comic Book Movie Megathread Returns

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Comic Book Movie Megathread Returns

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

TDKR isn't a lovely film, but it is the sloppiest work Nolan's done. I agree with Darko that it's overstuffed and suffers as a result. TDK has the same problem, it's just not as prevalent.

# ¿ Feb 8, 2013 14:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 06:11

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

massive spider posted:

The sham is that the revolution is genuine and that theres NOT a ticking time bomb underneath it remember?

Dude, this post sums it up really well.

Yuppie Scum posted:

Its all for Bruce, not the outside world. Why do you think he put Bruce paralyzed in a prison with a TV in front of him? He's not playing it for the world, he's playing it for Bruce. Its just a revenge plot. The bonus is the destruction of Gotham per R'as' initial goal, but a corrupted version. R'as wanted Gotham destroyed so that order would return. R'as's wish was actually already fulfilled by the Joker vis-a-vis the Dent act.

# ¿ Feb 8, 2013 17:15

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

massive spider posted:

Again to the buisnessman earlier Bane is quick to clarify his status as an emphasis- neccesarry evil. This is Bane behind closed doors to people he's about to kill.

Because Bane has no illusions that he's a good guy, he knows what he's doing is some heinous poo poo, but he also believes it's required- to both satisfy Talia's need for revenge and to fufill the "legacy" of the LoS.

quote:

Before the 8th person quotes it again yes I know Bane explains his plan in excruciating detail, I'm asking whether a) Its consistent with how he's portrayed throughout the movie, not just on paper and b) whether its thematically an interesting and powerful plan.

If you're interested in talking about Bane's overall portrayal and themes, maybe you should quit nitpicking individual statements that you are taking out of context (or just flat out misunderstanding).

# ¿ Feb 8, 2013 18:24

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

massive spider posted:

Is the revolution a source of (false)hope or terror? Bane describes it as both in dialog but we don't see much from the perspective of the gotham citizen so its not really clear at all what it achieves. Please don't say "well bane says..." I'm asking what the movie does to SHOW the success, or failure on Gotham of Banes campaign of spreading something-or-other.

There are tons of scenes where they show people's reactions. There's a montage of people looting, partying. There's the moment the little kid steals the apple. The film spends a ton of time showing what effects it has on the protagonists as well, which is way more important to the story than what happens to random people.

But more importantly, whatever Bane's revolution does to the people isn't important to him. His whole spiel in the stadium is a load of poo poo and he acknowledges that. The effects of the city lockdown/breakdown of civilization are interesting thematically, but Bane doesn't give a gently caress about that.

quote:

Ras Al Ghuls plan was for Gotham to destroy itself through an apparent slum uprising thus shocking the western world out of complacency. How does Banes plan of a faux revolution + atomic explosion fulfill Ras Al Ghuls wishes? If the answer is, "it doesn't because Bane is crazy and dumb" doesn't that neuter his status as a competent villain a little? As does the revelation at the end that despite what we may have gathered about him having watched him the whole film the rug is pulled out and we don't actually know gently caress all about him?

Bane's primary motivation (which is shown very clearly) is his loyalty to Talia. Frankly, I don't know how much of the LoS stuff he truly cared about. If you go by the film, I'd say he cares much less about it than he does punishing Bruce on behalf of Talia.
As for Bane not being a competent villian, he managed to cut off and control a whole city. He's obviously competent. The reveal at the end makes it clear this is all done because of his love for Talia. You might not like the implications of that, but it's not "pulling the rug out from under" you, it's redefining the character through a twist. Movies do that all the time.

quote:

Bane is by contrast...a cypher... He's murky.

Ambiguity is not a flaw.

# ¿ Feb 8, 2013 19:19

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Is that really official? It's literally the old trilogy costume, down to the texture on the suit. Seems way more likely that's a fan poster.

EDIT: Welp, that is an official image. Really bizarre they literally copied the old movie costume.

Crackbone fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Feb 25, 2013

# ¿ Feb 25, 2013 14:28

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Benne posted:

Assuming this is true, how exactly do they plan on retconning the end of TDKR?

What's there to retcon? He's still alive, he goes "oh poo poo, guess I need to put on the suit again".

# ¿ Mar 4, 2013 21:57

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

ZackHoagie posted:

He gave away his job, dude.

So? If they want Bale back do you think anybody at WB gives a gently caress about how they do it? It's not like they even have to bring in some resurrection goofiness. Planet in danger, Bruce Wayne wants to help, done.

# ¿ Mar 4, 2013 22:04

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

I thought the issue was Berry had given an interview where she complained about the lack of roles for African-American women and basically said "I'm reduced to being in this stupid superhero movie", which pissed off a lot of nerds who take their spandex-flicks seriously.

# ¿ Mar 5, 2013 16:47

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

The Born Approx. posted:

Why do nerds get such hard ons for awful looking fake costumes

I don't think any of the three look particularly bad. The Batman costume has a nice Arkham Asylum/City paramilitary vibe without going full-tilt realism, and it doesn't quite look like a rubber suit.

I do hope any Batman movie in the future keeps the two piece cowl from TDK, the unmovable neck really does stick out like a sore thumb now.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2013 13:53

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

McSpanky posted:

I actually agree with you about that look, but the I HATE EVERYTHING THAT SHOWS A MILLIMETER OF CLEAVAGE/BOOTY WE MUST PROTECT FEMININE VIRTUE routine makes you sound like exactly the hypersensitive ubernerds that bleats the loudest about sexism around the corner of every page of every comic ever printed that doesn't have a woman either dressed like Xena or a Navy SEAL, while not nearly as much attention is given to those little white bubbles on the other side of the panel with the funny scribbles in them. We get it, there's male gaze in an industry long dominated by men and which prospers... or these days, barely scrapes by... on the dollars of (man)children. Be that as it may, more change would and has been wrought in much more substantial ways by addressing the words on the page than the hem lines of the costumes.

I realize this seems like a huge goalpost shift, but not as much as you'd think. Costume changes and character changes often go hand in hand, and guess which ones people cared more about? Actually, that's a trick question, read on: In the sixties, DC tried both depowering Wonder Woman and making her a martial arts-enabled super spy, while also changing her costume to a striped catsuit-like ensemble, latching on to the popularity of 60s mod action heroines like Emma Peel in the Avengers TV series. The biggest backlash was from feminists of the era, who saw her depowering as a literal loss of her feminine power and her new costume as a symbolic loss of her feminine identity as a woman comfortable in her sexuality and not afraid to enjoy her beauty on her own terms. DC made the change precise to appeal to feminists, thinking they were changing her to emulate popular female role models of the time, but it grievously backfired and was quickly reversed. A similar change a couple of years ago was met with similarly negative results, including a rather unfavorable review from no less than Gloria Steinem herself, and was again quietly abandoned.

Your righteous rage may not be as heroic as it seems at first pass.

So sexism, male gaze, objectification of women is a serious problem, but it's not a big deal because WW was a spy once? The fact that the WW spy concept bombed doesn't mean what you think it means. I have no idea what the quality of the material was, so I can't comment on that, but ANY change from the sexist status quo generally hurts the industry because of fanwank. Case in point: they gave Wonder woman pants in the new 52 and the outcry was apparently so huge they reverted back to a bikini. Just because (some) comic fans are misogynists doesn't mean it's healthy or acceptable to cater to them.

Crackbone fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Mar 25, 2013

# ¿ Mar 25, 2013 22:59

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Alhazred posted:

It's completely possible to draw a nude badass woman. Here's an example: http://i.imgur.com/vIkYSwe.jpg
It's just this weird thing Americans have that you can't have nudity with your superheroes which is the complete opposite of what I grew up with it:http://i.imgur.com/Ynj7xCM.jpg
I think superhero comics would benefit from allowing some nudity, at least that would be more honest than what we have now.

Marvel/DC in general still have a problem with drawing every female in contrived cheesecake poses (see: Hawkeye Initiative). Letting them show tits is really not a positive step in current context.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2013 23:26

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

McSpanky posted:

Would this be a bad time to invoke the recent Catwoman reboot?

Is that where the infamous condom full of "diamonds" picture comes from?

# ¿ Mar 25, 2013 23:34

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

PriorMarcus posted:

What the gently caress is this?

# ¿ Mar 26, 2013 01:31

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

DNS posted:

I think of WW's bare legs like Superman's red underpants, a crucial part of their costuming because of what it says about the characters. Superman never feels weird about wearing his drawers on the outside of his baby blue nylon bodysuit, because he's Superman and nobody's gonna tell him he looks like a gaywad. He just sticks out his chin, puts his hands on his hips and stands next to you and makes you feel kind of uncomfortable because he's a huge buff guy in longjohns and a cape, and you can't do anything about it. Similarly, nobody's gonna tell Wonder Woman that she's showing too much thigh while she's saving the world and kicking rear end 365 days a year and displaying unlimited reserves of strength, compassion and intelligence.

First, I'd say tradition doesn't excuse objectification of women. My mother's family used the slang name for Brazil nuts for decades but that doesn't mean she should be okay with it.

The issue of not "getting" a character or doing a poor redesign for bad reasons, sure I get that. But that happens all the time. When the new 52 came out they redesigned all the characters to some extent, and plenty of those redesigns were poor. But what's problematic is only the female characters are reverting back to their old skin-flick designs (WW, Power girl), while the men aren't. Similarly, the male characters in skimpy outfits generally get more cloth over the years - Robin and Aquaman come to mind, and there has been little fuss about it.

Crackbone fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Mar 27, 2013

# ¿ Mar 27, 2013 13:00

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

jivjov posted:

Does anyone with more business acumen than me have any insight into this ridiculous ticketing dispute Disney and AMC (and the other theater chains) are having over Iron Man 3? Someone somewhere in the process is dragging their feet and losing dozens of pre-sold ticket sales. How hard is it to physically sit these people down in a conference room and talk this thing out?

It's not a ridiculous dispute. Disney wants an additional 15% of the ticket sales revenue on IM3, and chains rightfully assume if they agree it will give other studios leverage to renegotiate on their split as well.

It's not like the theater business is booming, and studios are asking for an even bigger cut of the pie.

# ¿ Apr 24, 2013 19:35

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

bobkatt013 posted:

Looking back its not shocking

Is this a polite way of saying she's hosed everybody else she knows?

# ¿ Apr 26, 2013 16:33

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Officer Farva posted:

I really don't know how much of it has to do with racism, and how much it has to do with just being hardcore nerds. Does anybody remember when they cast Daniel Craig as Bond, and the shitstorm that came from it because he was blonde? And there was a lot of bitching about Jackman being too tall, and Danzig should have been cast because he just looked SO MUCH like Wolverine. Nerds don't give a poo poo about acting abilities, they give a poo poo about how much the actor looks like what's on the page or in their heads. Because nerds are awful people that would ruin everything if they were in charge.

It's institutional racism. Look at popular culture - the overwhelming majority of it has white characters. Why? Because that's the default choice for most authors/creators, whether it's because they are white or they're told that their characters need to be white for mass appeal, or they were created during periods when racism was more overt.

As a result, you have a HUGE swath of iconic literary characters (in this case, comic book characters) that are white. It's a self-perpetuating cycle wherein the only way to actively fight it is to recast movie representations of those characters in another race. Most of the time it doesn't make a lick of difference as to what race a character is. The times it does, sure, stick with their race. But that's rare.

So even if fans who get angry about race-swapping are doing it for non-racist reasons, they're supporting racism whether they know it or not.

And honestly, some characters could be far more interesting in a different race. Making Captain America African-American, for example, could have some really interesting thematic implications. Yes, I know they did this already in the comics, I don't want to argue about whether or not that particular implementation was good. Comic writing is bad in general so a single example can't be used to generalize if race-swapping is a good idea.

# ¿ May 14, 2013 15:21

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Gatts posted:

Making Steve Rogers an immigrant who gained citizenship to fight and lead in WWII would be cool. Though if he was involved in WWII era it'd be a cool statement if Captain America was accepted by American society as a torchbearer for racial relations being black in the Marvel Universe...but at that time I imagine white people wouldn't have taken to him as universally. Which still could lead to some good stories. We at least got the Truth series.On the other hand for someone like Spider-man it is fitting if it is Miles Morales who gets the powers and becomes a hero.

When DC rebooted their universe they had a great shot at going "Hm. If we were to create our heroes today maybe we can use modern, progressive sensibilities." and might have in the case of Batwoman and Alan Scott (as crappy as some might have been handled) being gay but I don't really know how else they moved things forward.

Marvel deserves a tiny bit of credit by trying to do some of what I talked about in their Ultimate Universe. Nick Fury and Miles Morales really being the only major race changes though.

DC didn't really "reboot" their universe in any real capacity. It was a publicity stunt without any substantive thought about anything other than costumes.

# ¿ May 14, 2013 15:58

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Even in Iron Man, there's not a ton of character growth, but it's still there - Stark realizes his weapons are being used to kill innocent people, and decides it's his responsibility to fix that.

Iron Man 2 started off by hinting that maybe his decision to become a one-man army wasn't the right one, and as mentioned the whole "sins of the father" thing. But nope, his Dad's a saint, the villian is just a loving rear end in a top hat, and it turns out being a one man army was exactly the right choice! Oh, and on top of which Pepper melts into a puddle of Barbie goo at the end because trying do this "man stuff" like running a company is hard.

# ¿ May 16, 2013 13:14

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

bushisms.txt posted:

I hope Bendis writes for the Shield show. It's straight up Powers in Marvel clothes.

Is that ever going to be made? They've been talking about it for years.

# ¿ May 16, 2013 21:25

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

TheJoker138 posted:

To whoever said Marvel would never think about recasting Stark on the last page, Feige has said point blank that he doesn't think any of these characters are tied to a specific actor. I'm sure they'll hang onto RDJ as long as they can, but when he's done expect them to make Iron Man 4 or whatever with some new guy. It's going to happen.

Also, in other shocking news, water is wet.

# ¿ May 21, 2013 00:50

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Rhyno posted:

They also want Tron to be Star Wars.

They already hosed that up with Tron Legacy.

# ¿ May 30, 2013 20:52

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

PlushCow posted:

That looks like a stuntman to me but Captain America's new suit does look good, a much better progression and modernizing of his original one. Is it from comic books? Never really cared for the Avengers one but I hope with all these on the set leaks they just go ahead and release a full on picture of Chris Evans in the suit for Entertainment Weekly or something.

It's a comic book costume. The Avengers one was just really badly done. You could definitely pull off a decent interpretation of his classic costume but Avengers failed miserably.

# ¿ Jun 18, 2013 21:29

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Devour posted:

I don't think Vin would sign up to play a purely CGI character, doesn't seem like his style.

Iron giant.

# ¿ Jul 20, 2013 11:59

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

It's weird ASM decided to do a completely faithful Spidey costume but deviated so hard from the others. I get Spiderman's costume is an uniquely amazing piece of design, but there's almost nothing from the villains they kept.

# ¿ Dec 3, 2013 14:34

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Hewlett posted:

Leaked footage of Paul Rudd in the Ant-Man suit prototype:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMrswhnMZQo

Is this the new Rickroll or something?

# ¿ Dec 20, 2013 20:22

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Maxwell Lord posted:

The major point is, a bunch of artists and writers and editors aren't getting the idea that Lobo was a joke character.

He's supposed to be a joke on all the uber-badass characters of the late 80s and 90s.

Lobo classic was a riff on all the hyper-violent tough guys in the 80s.

Lobo new sure seems like a riff on all angsty, effeminate lady-man heroes that Japan gave us in the 00's.

Maybe it's not the editors that are missing the joke?

Crackbone fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Jan 1, 2014

# ¿ Jan 1, 2014 16:14

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

TheJoker138 posted:

I was really hoping that they'd just make a lawyer show with Jennifer Walters and Matt Murdock where they never once mention her career as She Hulk or his career as Daredevil. She would be a 6 foot tall green woman, yes, but no one would ever make a big deal about it.

So you want a normal lawyer show with a 6 foot tall green woman that nobody mentions or explains?

How exquisitely stupid.

# ¿ Jan 4, 2014 21:24

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

DC comics can't make Wonder Woman relevant or popular after decades of trying, so I'm not sure why anybody thinks the movie makers should give a gently caress about her comic versions.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2014 01:13

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

teagone posted:

"We can't make the most iconic female comic book hero work on film, so let's just throw her complete legacy out the window because it's poo poo and fuse it with the legacy of Superman. It's not like she has any fans who would give a poo poo or anything if we did that."

They can't make her work in comics. The most interesting thing they did to her in the past 20 years was give her pants. Which they reverted when the pervy shitlord crowd complained that they couldn't imagine her labia well enough.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2014 01:37

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Federal law requires a bad car analogy be made now.

# ¿ Jan 12, 2014 17:07

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Elfface posted:

I think Zombies are going through something of a revival right now, no pun intended, and The Walking Dead helped a lot with that.

Zombies have been over saturated as gently caress in popular media well before Walking Dead.

# ¿ Feb 13, 2014 12:41

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Sumo posted:

Okay, everybody look strong and tough - except you Zoe, arc your back and stick that rear end out!

God dammit, Movie Industry.

# ¿ Feb 21, 2014 01:35

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Dark_Tzitzimine posted:

http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/19/batman-v-superman-plot-details-reveal-just-what-caped-crusader-will-be-up-to-4654008/

Rumors about Batman Superman are getting crazier and crazier

This is the biggest pile of fanwank ever.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2014 21:05

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

Death By The Blues posted:

Early Reviews seem to put Cap 2 as one of the best Marvel movies so far. Not hard to do, but all the early positive signs seemed to have pointed in that direction.

Early reviews and buzz always put (newest movie X) as the best so far.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2014 12:59

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

jivjov posted:

So...completely unlike every single MCU film to date? All of which I vividly remember seeing? Seriously...sweeping condemnations about how bland/forgettable/pedestrian/whatever your word of choice is about the entirety of the MCU is getting really loving old.

Holy poo poo will people keep your opinions to yourselves I clearly remember seeing those movies!!!!!

All the MCU movies have been pretty paint-by-number affairs that don't do anything remarkable in terms of story, theme, or visuals. Their biggest accomplishments have been staying true to the source material, which works great for summer-blockbuster fare but doesn't often leave a lasting impression.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2014 02:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 06:11

Crackbone: May 23, 2003; Vlaada is my co-pilot.

McSpanky posted:

This was inevitable. Marvel clearly doesn't want visionaries to produce cinema, they want shift managers for the reel factory.

Can you blame them? They found a formula that prints money.

# ¿ May 24, 2014 00:29

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Comic Book Movie Megathread Returns