Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«169 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Guy A. Person
May 23, 2003



It’s crazy how many people engage with movies like “yea Snyder has an amazing eye for detail, his cinematography is excellent, his action scenes are epic, the costumes and sets are beautiful, he casts things perfectly, but unfortunately the story is dumb and doesn’t make sense so worst movies/director ever”

Even if I agreed with the “dumb story” thing, like wtf, don’t the visuals and action count for something in a big super hero blockbuster? It’s like the perfect movie for some people would be a person in a bare room reading a script with zero plot holes to nitpick. “Well I have to really give it to them, everything made sense, I’m forced to give this a perfect cinemasins score”

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The MSJ
May 17, 2010



Just copy and paste CineD posts about Snyder movies while pretending the other replies don't exist.

Schwarzwald
Jul 27, 2004

Don't Blink


Guy A. Person posted:

It’s like the perfect movie for some people would be a person in a bare room reading a script with zero plot holes to nitpick. “Well I have to really give it to them, everything made sense, I’m forced to give this a perfect cinemasins score”

[insert MCU joke here]

Violator
May 15, 2003



Guy A. Person posted:

Even if I agreed with the “dumb story” thing, like wtf, don’t the visuals and action count for something in a big super hero blockbuster?

Yeah, you never hear the old "just turn your brain off and enjoy it" for Snyder movies.

Detective No. 27
Jun 7, 2006



MCU movies are basically numb to any sort of emotions. A major character will die and they're back to quipping within two minutes. No wonder Pa Kent's death riles people up so much.

SuperMechagodzilla
Jun 9, 2007

NEWT REBORN


GoldenGun posted:

I don’t even know how to start to engage with this stuff.

The basic tactic is to take a given post and delete the parts where they aren’t actually writing about the movie.

In the example you posted, the guy uses a couple hundred words to say only that “the script is incoherent and makes no sense”. Otherwise, he claims, he has no other complaints whatsoever.

So, we can break that down further:

It’s incredibly unlikely that this guy actually read the script. Full stop. So what is he referring to?

It’s unlikely that he’s referring to the dialogue because, for all the memes about “do you bleed?” and “save Martha”, we’ve never seen any complaints that these lines are incoherent. Also, the narrative makes sense, because you have to be really not paying attention to miss all the characters’ motivations: the general arc of Superman dying for our sins, Wayne becoming a believer, etc.

Most likely, then, he’s just referring to the plot - i.e. Luthor’s various plots designed to turn humanity against Superman. There isn’t much exposition explaining that his overall goal is to create an anti-Superman version of the Justice League (aka The Legion of Doom, aka The Avengers), using the genetically-engineered Doomsday-squid to prove that aliens are untrustworthy. So the guy’s complaint is sort-of understandable - but you really shouldn’t need such exposition to follow the events.

SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 15:58 on May 23, 2020

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017



While that's a fun idea I dunno if that really seems to be his coherent plan so much as throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks, the whole Steppenwolf bit is him using blood magic to commune with Satan and all. Though the Justice League trailers part complete with logos would make a lot of sense if he's considering them potential recruits.

That also does make a fun mental image of a Legion of Doom lineup specifically riffing on the Avengers. Solomon Grundy is usually the Hulk equivalent.

Equeen
Oct 29, 2011

Pole dance~


Violator posted:

Yeah, you never hear the old "just turn your brain off and enjoy it" for Snyder movies.

Because Snyder's DC movies want you to mentally engage with them lmao. I don't mind this in a "heh, you're too dumb to understand them " way, I mean just pay slightest bit attention to what's being shown to you.

ghostwritingduck
Aug 26, 2004

"I hope you like waking up at 6 a.m. and having your favorite things destroyed. P.S. Forgive me because I'm cuter than that $50 wire I just ate."


Detective No. 27 posted:

MCU movies are basically numb to any sort of emotions. A major character will die and they're back to quipping within two minutes. No wonder Pa Kent's death riles people up so much.

Pa Kent's death would have worked much better if they had used a younger actor for Clark during that scene.

SuperMechagodzilla
Jun 9, 2007

NEWT REBORN


Ghost Leviathan posted:

While that's a fun idea I dunno if that really seems to be his coherent plan so much as throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks, the whole Steppenwolf bit is him using blood magic to commune with Satan and all. Though the Justice League trailers part complete with logos would make a lot of sense if he's considering them potential recruits.

That also does make a fun mental image of a Legion of Doom lineup specifically riffing on the Avengers. Solomon Grundy is usually the Hulk equivalent.

Lex communicates with Steppenwolf after his initial plan fails.

Lex’s tactics are, as you say, just to set up a series of “unwinnable” situations where Superman will hopefully end up insane, reviled, and/or dead. But Lex‘s underlying reason for destroying Superman is so that he can do exactly what Waller and Wayne do in the sequels: put together his own League/Squad of obedient costumed vigilantes to cement his world dominance.

Basically, it’s exactly what Ozymandias does in Watchmen by unleashing the S.Q.U.I.D..

Another way to look at it: what if Thanos was genetically engineered by Tony Stark in order to create demand for his services? (And isn’t that kind-of the subtext in Avengers 2?)

Blood Boils
Dec 27, 2006

Its not an S, on my planet it means QUIPS


Hair Elf

ghostwritingduck posted:

Pa Kent's death would have worked much better if they had used a younger actor for Clark during that scene.

OR

Henry Cavill should have played Clark at all ages; teenager, child, newborn baby

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017



SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Lex communicates with Steppenwolf after his initial plan fails.

Lex’s tactics are, as you say, just to set up a series of “unwinnable” situations where Superman will hopefully end up insane, reviled, and/or dead. But Lex‘s underlying reason for destroying Superman is so that he can do exactly what Waller and Wayne do in the sequels: put together his own League/Squad of obedient costumed vigilantes to cement his world dominance.

Basically, it’s exactly what Ozymandias does in Watchmen by unleashing the S.Q.U.I.D..

Another way to look at it: what if Thanos was genetically engineered by Tony Stark in order to create demand for his services? (And isn’t that kind-of the subtext in Avengers 2?)

I think Lex engineering a catastrophe to turn people against Superman and/or make himself look like the hero and then turn people against Superman is something he's been pulling long before Watchmen, though it would be about time DC took some ideas from that other than edgy antiheroes.

Still find it funny that Thanos originally made his debut fighting Iron Man and it finally came full circle. And that's kind of the subtext in every Iron Man movie and most comic stories, and in general that Stark's 'heroics' are like 90% cleaning up his own mess.

Also I just realised I'm kind of describing Norman Osborn's Thunderbolts. (and Osborn is basically the Marvel counterpart to Lex Luthor who also happens to be the Joker) That's another idea the MCU should steal and probably would end up mediocre in execution.

KVeezy3
Aug 18, 2005



Srice posted:

Yea to be honest if it's a community where folks can't believe that someone genuinely likes a particular director/movie, that they must be a contrarian because they can't even perceive of someone liking it?
...

They can't perceive that people like it because they don't want to. As others have noted, there are actually vile directors and dreadful comic book films that do not bring out the level of vitriol that Snyder does, which can be expressed in two categories:

Objectively, via the films' intelligibility
  • The films are not comprehensible, as there are too many plot holes, inscrutable character motivations, etc. (Snyder as the idiot figure who keeps stumbling into creative control of massive comic book film properties)
  • The films are comprehensible, but are fascist, sexist, racist (Snyder as the devious figure who is corrupting wholesome comic book films)
Subjectively, via the personal
  • People do not actually like his films (They are only pretending)
  • People do actually like his films (But they are morally bankrupt, effectively non-people)

How do these contradictory beliefs coalesce? Because the point is to render the extant enjoyment of his films invalid, as they see that enjoyment as being both owed and denied to them. Hence why they, despite presenting themselves as having no stake, hope that Snyder's Justice League will be a historic failure, and are even willing to sit through a 4 hour cut of Justice League to prove it. There is a compulsion to see this enjoyment that is denied to them eliminated, once and for all.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004



Ghost Leviathan posted:

I think Lex engineering a catastrophe to turn people against Superman and/or make himself look like the hero and then turn people against Superman is something he's been pulling long before Watchmen, though it would be about time DC took some ideas from that other than edgy antiheroes.

Still find it funny that Thanos originally made his debut fighting Iron Man and it finally came full circle. And that's kind of the subtext in every Iron Man movie and most comic stories, and in general that Stark's 'heroics' are like 90% cleaning up his own mess.

Also I just realised I'm kind of describing Norman Osborn's Thunderbolts. (and Osborn is basically the Marvel counterpart to Lex Luthor who also happens to be the Joker) That's another idea the MCU should steal and probably would end up mediocre in execution.

You guys have pretty much gone to discussing Birthright (which MoS pulled from with its actual Kryptonian attack in Metropolis) where Lex engineered a fake Kryptonian attack in Metropolis so he could save everyone and so Clark would look bad.

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017



Darko posted:

You guys have pretty much gone to discussing Birthright (which MoS pulled from with its actual Kryptonian attack in Metropolis) where Lex engineered a fake Kryptonian attack in Metropolis so he could save everyone and so Clark would look bad.

I'm not sure if I'd vaguely heard of that or was just correctly assuming it's something Lex has tried to pull at some point.

Also I'm going to be pondering the makeup of the Lexvengers probably all night now. So tempting to include Captain Nazi.

DC Murderverse
Nov 10, 2016

"Tell that to Zod's snapped neck!"



I’ve seen multiple people now say that MOS is one of the worst movies they’ve ever seen and it baffles me every time. I’ve long since accepted that there are people who don’t like it and even people who are actively angry about it, but how few movies have you seen to where that is the worst one?

RBA Starblade
Apr 27, 2008

Going Home.


ElNarez posted:

the correct answer, which is the least satisfying answer, is "don't"; you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place, plus you already won! the snyder cut is real, and it's going to be good, because his last two Superman movies were good

Well, one was

Darko
Dec 23, 2004



DC Murderverse posted:

I’ve seen multiple people now say that MOS is one of the worst movies they’ve ever seen and it baffles me every time. I’ve long since accepted that there are people who don’t like it and even people who are actively angry about it, but how few movies have you seen to where that is the worst one?

As I sit here watching The Howling 3: the Marsupials, I've quickly learned that people who say worst movie ever for something not Birdemic level just don't know how to explain why they personally don't like things.

Guy A. Person
May 23, 2003



Can’t prove someone online is a degenerate idiot for liking a movie just by saying “this was the 15th worst movie released in 2013” or whatever

Roth
Jul 9, 2016


Even among big mainstream movies there's far worse garbage than Man of Steel or Batman v Superman.

I wish I could take back watching The Emoji Movie

Brother Entropy
Dec 27, 2009



far more than like, music or tv shows or video games, popular movie culture seems so much quicker to declare anything they don't like 'worst [x] ever'

i blame those prequel reviews that everyone but me has watched

SuperMechagodzilla
Jun 9, 2007

NEWT REBORN


DC Murderverse posted:

I’ve seen multiple people now say that MOS is one of the worst movies they’ve ever seen and it baffles me every time. I’ve long since accepted that there are people who don’t like it and even people who are actively angry about it, but how few movies have you seen to where that is the worst one?

Well, as noted previously, you have to begin by isolating what (if anything) they’re talking about.

Man Of Steel is one of the most terrifying films ever made, in terms of its sheer psychological impact. It made thousands of nerds legitimately afraid of Superman. Like, the horror mockbuster with a psychotic, murderous Kryptonian was way more comforting because they could ascribe some kind of pathology to him.

Man Of Steel is fundamentally a good person and, simultaneously, his very existence says things like that it’s physically impossible for an incarnate God to care about everyone on a personal level. Jesus loves you in a political sense, but he’s not your mom. The film expresses this kind of stuff very forcefully.

Moreover, the concept of a political God leads to the conclusion that God takes sides. If the meek shall inherit the Earth, what about those who aren’t meek - like Spiderman’s surrogate dad Tony Stark? He’s a nice guy, giving to charity and so-on. Can’t we a just get along?

Since nerds are bad at politics, almost by definition, the usual conclusion is that Man Of Steel is scary by accident. So if you gauge a film’s quality by how unsurprising it is, you’re certainly out of luck.

Miching Mallecho
May 24, 2010





I never understood how the Avengers destroyed Manhattan and nerds are cool with it.

Grendels Dad
Mar 5, 2011

Popular culture has passed you by.

Miching Mallecho posted:

I never understood how the Avengers destroyed Manhattan and nerds are cool with it.

Well, to be fair they did fight alien invaders that Tony Stark Did Not Create.

However, Tony Stark did have a hand in founding the institution that screwed blue collar workers out of their contracts when it came to cleaning up the mess, leading to the creation of a super-villain or six. And THAT is still not considered a problem, he's just this benevolent kinda dad!

Darko
Dec 23, 2004



Miching Mallecho posted:

I never understood how the Avengers destroyed Manhattan and nerds are cool with it.

Not a single person was shown to really die on screen. Mayyyyybe in an offhand explosion or something. The heroes saved all the people so the fantasy holds without implication.

The world engine showed people, on screen, lifted up into the air and then smashed down on the ground. It was shown very similarly to the alien destruction of civilians in Spielberg's War of the Worlds - it was intense on a visceral level and is somewhat scary to think about.

People don't go into superhero movies wanting to feel those feelings. They want one person to die on screen to feel a little bad about, but all other death offscreen and everyone joking and laughing at the end with everything ending up alright. They basically sign up to see a Disney animated movie, but not animated - and not Hunchback either - more like Aladdin, and got one of the good Godzilla movies instead.

garycoleisgod
Sep 27, 2004
Boo

The negative reaction to Man of Steel shocked me at the time and to this day I'm still not sure people who hate the film saw the same one as me, like as a practical joke they shipped two different versions to cinemas and never actually told anyone.

I wasn't super interested in seeing a Superman movie, but a couple weeks after it came out me and some mates were bored so we watched it one weekend. I was with it all the way but I fully 100% came on board during the sequence were Supes fights the squid terraformer thing while Perry stays with Jenny. I was like, that's loving Superman right there. Bonus points because while the gravity slamming destruction thing was happening I thought "How can Superman possibly stop this?!!" which is an amazing thought considering I was watching a big budget studio superhero film about the most famously overpowered superhero. I had to give the movie props for making me doubt something that was never really in doubt. As if Superman would lose. But for a second I wondered, and got really engaged. I don't feel that way watching other superhero films, even the Nolan bat films I never thought there was a chance bats would take the L.

Then I went on the internet, and particularly the thread here and people were losing their minds over it. Half were like me and loved it, half seemed to think they had watched a film version of Alan Moore's Miracleman by how they were saying Superman was killing everyone. Seeing that reaction blew my mind.

Grendels Dad
Mar 5, 2011

Popular culture has passed you by.

The World Engine part of MoS's climax always reminded me of the earlier parts of Independence Day where the aliens get to wreck poo poo. People had no problem dealing with that, named characters dying in blazes of laser-y fire and dogs in danger and so on. But it's OK because in the second half of the movie the world and more specifically the USA get to fight back. In MoS it's mostly down to Superman (even though there are people helping him in various ways) and people apparently couldn't deal with that kind of imagery without the appropriate amount of rah-rah to make up for it.

Laughing Zealot
Oct 10, 2012



Grendels Dad posted:

The World Engine part of MoS's climax always reminded me of the earlier parts of Independence Day where the aliens get to wreck poo poo. People had no problem dealing with that, named characters dying in blazes of laser-y fire and dogs in danger and so on. But it's OK because in the second half of the movie the world and more specifically the USA get to fight back. In MoS it's mostly down to Superman (even though there are people helping him in various ways) and people apparently couldn't deal with that kind of imagery without the appropriate amount of rah-rah to make up for it.

Since I happened to watch ID like an hour ago I have to comment that the destruction in it is 150% spectacle that barely stops for a second. It's like less then 5 minutes from the end of the firewave to the first star warsy dogfight. Death in that film is barely a thing.

McSpanky
Jan 16, 2005






I think that's what really drives people insane about Snyder, he gives you the heroism but not the fantasy, which is really funny to say about movies featuring laser-shooting aliens and Greek demigods and etc. But he's clearly not interested in propping up the same kind of antiseptic bloodless escapism that most cape movies offer. In his films the dead aren't hidden behind long shots or reaction cuts, you're forced to come to terms with the extraordinary consequences of extraordinary power. People in his films don't quip their way out of death and tragedy, they feel it and react to it and are changed by it.

Snyder makes superhero films that take place in a post-9/11 world, not chronologically but emotionally. And some people just can't handle that.

Tuxedo Catfish
Mar 17, 2007

You've got guts! Come to my village, I'll buy you lunch.


Grendels Dad posted:

The World Engine part of MoS's climax always reminded me of the earlier parts of Independence Day where the aliens get to wreck poo poo. People had no problem dealing with that, named characters dying in blazes of laser-y fire and dogs in danger and so on. But it's OK because in the second half of the movie the world and more specifically the USA get to fight back. In MoS it's mostly down to Superman (even though there are people helping him in various ways) and people apparently couldn't deal with that kind of imagery without the appropriate amount of rah-rah to make up for it.

Independence Day kind of revels in "bad" or stupid people getting owned by the aliens, which might go some length towards explaining it.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004



Tuxedo Catfish posted:

Independence Day kind of revels in "bad" or stupid people getting owned by the aliens, which might go some length towards explaining it.

Correct, the "right" people die.

Jurassic Park is a good example - an extra dies, the lawyer, who was almost an invisible character, dies, then Nedry, who was an antagonist, Arnold, who doesnt' do much, dies to establish a threat, then Muldoon who the audience kind of likes but truly expects to die due to being the hunter dies. This keeps our heroes in enough danger where they *might* be in trouble, but the audience feels good after because nobody they didn't expect to die, dies.

Contrast a little with The Lost World, which took a slightly meaner tone (while being almost Gremlins 2 level self aware), which had Eddie Carr, the most selfless, hard working protagonist in any of the movies, die the worst of anyone. The immediate reactions were that it was too "mean" from a lot of people (while I was wondering who he would let die after that point). Oh yeah, and the great white hunter lived.

Then Jurassic Park 3 kills, like 3 people in the first 20 minutes that you don't care anything about and then one antagonist later or something, i can't even remember - it was just badly paced.

And we all know about 4's giant complaint with the assistant (but that movie had a lot of other problems that only added to that).

Most summer blockbusters in general are really, really careful about how they kill civilians and sympathetic characters. If it's someone very sympathetic, they stick them at the beginning so that you get all positive in the other two thirds, and it's normally not graphic, but in a giant explosion or slightly off screen or something. Civilians don't normally die in the climax, they die mostly offscreen early to solidify the villain. You'll get a heroic sacrifice at the end from the least sympathetic protagonist/someone you expect to die. Etc.

I grew up on original blockbuster Jaws, so I'm good with the villain establishing itself by killing a teenager in an extended sympathetic scene, then a dog, then a kid, bloodily, slightly out of focus, then someone offscreen, then a helpful dude, bloodily, before the least sympathetic of the protagonists dies in the climax.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours


Tuxedo Catfish posted:

Independence Day kind of revels in "bad" or stupid people getting owned by the aliens, which might go some length towards explaining it.

This REALLY stands out on a rewatch.

wyoming
Jun 7, 2010

Like a television
tuned to a dead channel.


I still remember the complaints from the Man of Steel thread being that Superman let the entire city be destroyed and then made out with Lois in the ashes of the dead.

sponges
Sep 14, 2011



wyoming posted:

I still remember the complaints from the Man of Steel thread being that Superman let the entire city be destroyed and then made out with Lois in the ashes of the dead.

I like MoS and I still find that a little jarring

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
ASK ME ABOUT MY SELF-PUBLISHED WARHAMMER FANFICTION AND MY KNIFE COLLECTION


Darko posted:

Not a single person was shown to really die on screen. Mayyyyybe in an offhand explosion or something. The heroes saved all the people so the fantasy holds without implication.

The world engine showed people, on screen, lifted up into the air and then smashed down on the ground. It was shown very similarly to the alien destruction of civilians in Spielberg's War of the Worlds - it was intense on a visceral level and is somewhat scary to think about.

People don't go into superhero movies wanting to feel those feelings. They want one person to die on screen to feel a little bad about, but all other death offscreen and everyone joking and laughing at the end with everything ending up alright. They basically sign up to see a Disney animated movie, but not animated - and not Hunchback either - more like Aladdin, and got one of the good Godzilla movies instead.

I remember during one argument here i went through the battle of new york scene by scene and, even in scenes with massive explosions, not a single bystander dies. They're always clear of the blast zone. Even in the one case where they aren't (when the chariot things strafe an overpass) an explosion goes off right over a bystander and, if you watch closer, they move out of the explosion under their own power. The scene contrives itself to have literally zero on screen casualties, even by implication. We don't even get the usual scenes of tanks, planes and helicopters getting blown up to show how much we need the heroes.

Age of Ultron did something similar during the Hulk's rampage, where he'd smash a car's drivers side, but then the driver would get out on the other side. It tied itself in knots to do this.

Guy A. Person
May 23, 2003



I dunno I feel like a life-affirming kiss between two people who survived a life or death situation is a pretty well worn trope and I never really understood the massive blow back from it.

Detective No. 27
Jun 7, 2006



The potshot at the Avengers NY death toll in the newspaper in BvS was a beautiful detail.

Mr. Apollo
Nov 8, 2000



I remember reading an article that was talking about the press conference for the recently announced Spider-Man: Homecoming movie. Someone asked if they were going have Uncle Ben die in the Battle of New York. Some Marvel exec replied that they weren’t going to discuss any hypothetical deaths resulting from the Battle.

teagone
Jun 10, 2003

That was pretty intense, huh?

sponges posted:

I like MoS and I still find that a little jarring

If I had a chance to kiss Henry Cavill Superman after he saved me from an imploding black hole, I'd probably do it no matter the scenario/circumstance.

[edit]

Detective No. 27 posted:

The potshot at the Avengers NY death toll in the newspaper in BvS was a beautiful detail.

"Dozens" lmao. Ahh, that's great.

teagone fucked around with this message at 04:05 on May 24, 2020

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

well why not
Feb 9, 2009



You don’t out right see it but it’s pretty clear people are dying by the building load in MOS and the intro of BvS. As I’ve said before, Metropolis gets microwaved like a spoon and it’s not just Wayne enterprises that’s falling apart.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«169 »