|
Baron Bifford posted:All he's saying there is that he wants his privacy and independence. He doesn't condemn government surveillance programs in general. I know not getting symbolism is your gimmick, but you might be taking this too far.
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 16, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Superman observing without commenting a gay wedding in 2015 will touch zero nerves. I What loving universe do you live in? There are people right now boycotting soup because of an ad with two dads. Soup.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 12:13
|
|
|
This is Bifford's entire gimmick. The Dredd thread turned into pages of "well, that's not satirical/political because *reasons*" If you hold real still, you'll fool his eyesight.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Seriously, stop talking to Baron Bifford. His entire gimmick is "but that's not political/allegorical/symbolic"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:The examples you give are both sexual subtexts, and Baron's essay is mandated as being about sexual subtext. Does my Happy Madison essay need to be about sexual subtext too? You could look at post colonialism and cultural appropriation in Blended.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
There is a lot going on in Click, it's a good choice. Pick something you're interested in rather than trying to find the most terrible movie you can to fulfill some weird game of ironic one-upsmanship.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
This is the best loving forum.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
Mark Millar veered into self parody a long time ago.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
What does "Grokked" actually mean?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:And he's far better for it. Nemesis is a masterpiece like an outsider art piece, a document from an alternate history where he went Actually Insane and kept writing comics. That felt like him going "Don't you loving get it? Power fantasies are just licenses to be assholes. Seriously, please get this."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I really like Nemesis simply because in combination with being a comic, it's an invitation to watch Mark Millar write it. Like a good comedy film where it's like you're there watching the actors themselves have fun. I don't think I've had a similar comic experience. It's not 'good' but that's really not, for me, how comics have to be. I'm pretentious as poo poo though. I look forward to it. Do you have your take on "The Raid 2" handy? That was a cool read.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I am not singling you out. I want everyone to contribute their favourite symbol from the film. I loving love Dredd's opening. I love how it's the standard action movie opening, some low level goons doing some stuff, and Dredd kills them. But it's Dredd that creates the situation. His very presence escalates and exacerbates the issue. Instead of him buying some beer and having to foil a robbery, they were driving while high, and then Dredd show's up. It's a simple reversal of how the scene usually plays. To cap it off, he's brought in by the chief, who, instead of yelling "you wrecked half the city, you goddamn loose cannon" she just gives him another assignment. The 80s action heroes played by Stallone, Arnie, Bosworth and so on have become the norm. It's bloody brilliant.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:She had her chance... to surrender. As did Dredd. Almost like there's some kind of deliberate parallel made between the characters.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
This is amazing commitment to a gimmick.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 10:41
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:They drove under the influence of drugs, then they did not pull over when they saw Dredd approaching. They then plowed recklessly through traffic, killing civilians. Whoosh. I hate to do such a low content post, but it feels more and more like you're either not trying to get it, or trying not to get it. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 11:28 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
Blisster posted:drat, he's already gone? What am I gonna do with this big list of the similarities between Dredd and Ma-Ma? Tell them to me. I have a list of my own, but I'm sure there's a bunch I've missed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Drifter posted:BvS IS the establishing movie for Batman, which is more than fine. Also, we don't need an establishing movie for Batman, because he's loving Batman. We know who he is. Especially now, with three movies in the past ten years. quote:just to establish the character of Superman. quote:TDKR was a self contained reboot that already drew off of the history and a working knowledge of the characters
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
The greatest trick Marvel has pulled is this stupid idea that you need a whole movie to set up a character. Many movies set up more than one character, and have them do stuff. It is possible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:What Marvel did was to show that using multiple main characters to set up other movies This isn't what they did. They used individual movies to set up the group movie. Avengers didn't introduce any new characters or solo characters.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:People criticizing Batman v Superman as jumping the gun aren't acting like you can't poooossibly have a movie without another movie to set it up, but rather the idea that DC is treating this movie as TWO FRANCHISES FINALLY MEET when they've only really established one of them cinematically. I mean sure, everyone knows who Batman is, they could've just opened with this, but they're marketing it like it's been built up to, which it hasn't. quote:especially when the entire point of that film is copying their formula. What?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:The difference between Batman stories without Robin and Batman stories with Robin is also pretty huge, no matter how short the time frame between them. Hell, the difference between Batman stories without Robin and other Batman stories without Robin can be vast as well. So, aside from the times when he did have stories without the Avengers, like, the 20 years preceding the Avengers, he's never had stories without the Avengers.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:A nightmare/hallucination scene seems like a weird thing to release out of context, but hey, I don't work in WB's marketing department. It's more memorable than another teaser of a hero punching anonymous goons or a big monster emerging.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Have you seen Batman toys? There are Batsuits for everything. Underwater, desert, helicopter, space etc. There was even a suit for hacking computers. Batman toys are gloriously loving stupid. I'm pretty sure they hit peak stupid right after Batman Returns.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Nah the metaphor is dead on. The Tiger Tanks were far superior in their craftsmanship and longevity, but took longer to make and more effort. The Tiger tanks are awesome because of how a lot of mil-tech nerds talk about them. As if they were ridiculous super weapons with no flaws. They were heavy as gently caress, especially the King Tiger, and more of them broke down or just ran out of fuel than were destroyed, because all that armour weighs stuff. The King Tiger is still the heaviest tank ever built. Even now, which is loving ridiculous. But yeah, they were absurdly heavily armed and armoured and were designed without any regard for Germany's logistical situation. It's a good analogy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
Now you've reminded me of how much I want to rewatch Buckaroo.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
PG-13, for Intense Sequences of Violence and Action Throughout, and some sensuality. Sensuality SENSUALITY I guess now we know what happens next in that tunnel.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:His Lex feels like someone doing a bad Heath Ledger Joker impression. Have you seen the Dark Knight recently?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 11:27
|
|
|
It is kind of an odd trailer, It seems to show substantial sequences more or less in order, rather than jumping around. It's nice. It tries to preserve the pacing the scene will likely have in the film.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 11:36
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:He may be referring to how the Justice League cartoon never really did a great job in Season 1 of establishing why Superman would need anyone's help, and they regularly used nonsensical tricks to get him out of the picture. He'd get captured and put in like a electric torture rack or something that shocked him every time he moved to get out. Usually it involved electricity. I think they figured kryptonite was lame and they couldn't overuse it but their ideas weren't really any better. Or telling smaller scale stories where it was like "Why would you bother Superman with this poo poo?"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
broken clock opsec posted:That's probably like, the exact opposite of the character in the Nolan flicks. It really isn't. Batman continues justifies why he's the only one who can be trusted with all this and why he should be allowed to run around with a hi-tech arsenal of weapons.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 09:24
|
|
|
wyoming posted:Yeah, three loving movies of Batman acting like a spoiled manbaby and people still don't get it. His big character moment isn't the heroic sacrifice, it's a) learning to live and b) accepting that other people can also do things. He's got a martyr complex a mile wide.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 09:43
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Batman has empathy, can't you see him hugging and comforting the girl he saves as the city crashes and burns around him? Can't you see him screaming in anger and pain as the buildings tumble? I can pretty much guarantee he's not thinking about dipping stock prices during that destruction. His pissed off at the alien for hurting people, loving up a city, and upset that other people are getting hurt. Those are his people getting hurt and killed. That can suggest empathy, but not necessarily.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:If he literally had no empathy, he wouldn't care even for "his own people" (whatever you mean by that). His people. His employees. His social group. His adopted work family. People he is directly responsible for. Kurzon posted:If he literally had no empathy, he wouldn't care even for "his own people" (whatever you mean by that). Kurzon posted:If Batman was a psychopath in the scientific sense of the term, he wouldn't have given a poo poo about his parents' death and thus would not have become Batman. There are all flavours of crazy. That he isn't one doesn't mean he isn't another. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Xeremides posted:If he didn't experience empathy, or had a reduced ability to experience empathy, I don't think he'd be Batman. This is a guy who feels emotion so strongly that a single event has defined his entire life. He isn't trying to stop his parents from being murdered. He's trying to stop it from ever happening to someone else. This is a man who goes out of his way night after night to protect and save people, both directly and indirectly, quote:and he did it because he elected to not trust law enforcement to do it. quote:If someone can misconstrue that to mean Batman is being entirely selfish in his one-man war against crime, I think that says more about that person than a make believe character. quote:He's absolutely a crazy person, but his insanity has less to do with his inability, or a retarded ability, to empathize with others and more to do with his obsession and singular focus on the concept of justice. quote:Batman is crazy, and has a constant fear that his crazy will make him something like The Joker, and tries his best to maintain that line, while believe he can redeem people that have crossed it. The Joker is the opposite, on the other side of that line ,basically. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Drifter posted:God, everything you've said is like a first year english/philosophy student trying to BS their way through their first midterm report. quote:THE MIDDLE EAST is an extremely violent and corrupt place. THE CIA/NSA exist there because the government has violated its contract with the people it professes to serve/CEASED TO EXIST. THE CIA/NSA DONATES AID and many other programs dedicated to help the lower-income elements, and to also restore the UNSTABLE COUNTRY. quote:He's a tragic hero, not an anti-one. It's like you guys are thinking Batman and Punisher are the same character in different outfits. His no-kill rule is a leash he put on himself to keep justifying it to himself. The Punisher is honest about what he is. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Yes, everyone knows how the CIA&NSA are simply native to the Middle East. Growing up there and reacting to the ills of the area from the perspective of a native son, not an outsider. Considering Wayne is a billionaire, living in a massive mansion barely in the city limits, or in a penthouse hundreds of metres above it, and the criminals of Gotham are primarily poor, this isn't the slam dunk you think it is. If you need a 1:1 analogue, because inference is hard, look at the terrible, lovely justifications for heavy handed policing in the US. Or the fact that those agencies operate, frequently illegally, against US citizens. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Martman posted:I disagree. Random chance got Batman's parents killed, but beyond that (and being lucky to be super wealthy) I think the real fantasy of Batman is that he chooses to make himself into Batman. Lots of people have terrible things happen to them but Bruce Wayne decides to turn that experience into something good. The drive to become Batman, to master himself physically and pour resources into the task, comes directly from the death his parents. Otherwise, he would have been decent, probably altruistic man. The random murder directly leads to him becoming Batman. It's important that it's a random murder. It's also important that, prior to the accident, the joker is a nobody. He's not a super-soldier or a genius scientist. He's just some dude. Then he falls into acid and is turned into something terrible. Gyges posted:Wayne is indeed a richass fucker from the isolated enclaves of power. That's still oceans apart from the CIA, NSA, or any Western, let alone American, intelligence agency operating in the Middle East. If you want to make a lovely comparison between Batman and the Intelligence apparatus go for something like the CIA in Canada or perhaps Mexico. I didn't bring those agencies up. I used them because someone else did, as if their actual existence as terrible, oversight free entities somehow made Batman's existence as a terrible, oversight free entity beyond reproach. Xeremides posted:1) You didn't fix poo poo. You're forgetting how corrupt the police department was when Batman first hit the scene. You're forgetting how much power the various mafia families had in the city prior to him donning the costume. A big part of Gotham's story is regarding cops being on the take, cops being untrustworthy, cops being unwilling to make the necessary moves because they want to go home to their families at night rather than end up at the bottom of the river. Then you have dirty politicians, dirty judges, the justice system being broken, etc. All huge incentives for Batman to say, "Alright, gently caress you guys. I'll do it." And then what happens? He does his vigilante thing, befriends Gordon, who then goes on to clean up the GCPD, and suddenly Batman and law enforcement are on the same side most of the time. Amazing. quote:2) You're not mistrusting "someone". You're mistrusting the motivations of a comic book character, who's motivations have been firmly established for over half a century. If you can't believe that Batman isn't a sociopath who feels nothing for people, that says to me that you're either an idiot, or projecting your sociopathic tendencies onto a comic book character. quote:4) The Joker isn't Batman. The Joker is what Batman could become if Batman didn't have his crazy self-imposed rules. That's the entire point. The Joker wants Batman to break his own rules, to commit murder, and to give in to his psychosis. If they were the same, there'd be no conflict. And no, this isn't the goddamn Matrix. There is no equation balancing itself out. Even the guy who loving loves Batman and, more recently facism, Frank Miller, positions the Joker as an existential response. He has that theory put forward in story by a character who is a big dumb liberal idiot(tm), but the text of the story has the Joker go dormant once Batman retires, and has him awaken the very day Batman comes back. They justify each other and, while they hate each other, they also understand each other's drive. The Joker calls Batman his playmate, and means it. He's at least honest about their relationship. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Dec 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
That's why their relationship is one of the best in popular fiction. They validate each other's existence.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Cormac McCarthy is an interesting writer to bring up. So much of his stuff is loving brilliant, but would need a very particular actor to understand how to deliver it. All of the Judge's amazing monologues could easily sound like a bad Steven Seagal movie if the actor didn't understand what he was doing. I want you to imagine Bryan Bosworth delivering the "it makes no difference what men think of war" speech.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 16, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
Jimmy will be back when they need someone to turn into a gorilla or marry a gorilla
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 18:12
|
|